Britannist

As we know, Labour is a europhile and internationalist party - as are the Liberal Dims. Both of those parties put the EU and international organisations before British institutions and UK sovereignty.

TannyD

I think I maybe onto something, the combination of 3 maybe 4 major things excluding the world market issue. The money Brown is giving away to China and India, flood issues, credit crunch among other things. Is it a coincidence that it is happening all together?

__________________
TannyD, like Sunny D only better!!

http://www.nationstates.net/01838/pa...n=mutantfreaks:

http://gloucesterr.myminicity.com

http://www.answerbag.com

RabidTommy

Same people pushing the global warming agenda that are behind the New World Order also:

The Club of Rome: the environmental elite [Rockefeller's CFR] think tank

It's all so obvious now- and the greater public are not aware. As Britons we should focus on the three primary conditions that permit this awful conspiracy to gestate: the shelter of secrecy and the pillaries of big government and unsound monetary system.

Thankfully the first two pillars of strength to this conspiracy can be seen to falter at the moment.

The endemic corruption within the political system is the first clue, The bloated bureaucracy and the amount of tax money spent on the EU another. The centralised model of government must also be attacked- it's destroying the interface between local and national politics. Small government equates to low or absent taxation and the result is prosperity and wealth for the people.

The second, unsound monetary system. With recession ever more likely- now is the time to spread the message: Reckless disaster capitalism is unsustainable. We need to seize the reign of the money to work for the people not the private banking elite. Imagine a country where the money is regulated for the benefit of society, controlled by democracy distributed in what would preferably be interest free banking. Fiat money can work, colonial scrip for example, or the economic system in Guernsey.

The collapse of the US economy would have come sooner if Iraq wasn't invaded, the petrodollar hegemony would have faltered and Iraq would be way better off trading it's oil in Euros, of which Saddam started doing in 2000. This is why they also want to invade Iran, as Iran is about to open it's own oil exchange mechanism and has already started trading it's oil in Euros.

When the dollar is no longer backed by oil it will fall. How psychopathic the response of the people in power will be regarding it's collapse has yet to be demonstrated, but this is just the beginning. But you can bet for sure that the current nuclear rhetoric is relevant to this crisis we face.

Everything neatly ties together in such a way that can no longer be ignored by the greater public; we must realise the root problems and mobilise
change for the our future, our children's future and the future of our grand children! A better world for tomorrow instead, long term benefits as opposed to short term greed.

We should hold marches in March, advocating a change in monetary policy, an end to the petrodollar war, trade and commerce with other countries but no entangling alliances like the UN, NATO or the EU- and of course sensible immigration policies so that Britain may actually be identifiable in the future.

The UN especially makes us all guilty- look at the crippling sanctions, it's disgusting.

We're on the precipice of losing everything. {/crazy rant}

Ea of Dune

I've just watched that End game video. It certainly raises some very interesting questions.
Even if only 10% of that was true, it raises enough issues to start seriously questioning our government and some of it's business buddies motivations.

Ea of dune

22ANDUK

The Conservatives are internationalist too, and have done more than the other two parties combined. Look at Thatcher's Britain in the 80s - ever closer European Union as well as becoming the '51st State' of Reagan's America!

Globalisation isn't unnatural. As technology, science and communications improve and advance the world gets smaller. Look at how the tribes of England united to form regions such as Wessex and Anglia, then merge into England, then Britain and then the Empire etc.

Managed globalisation is the way forward. One where people accept a smaller world, but one that sees the boundaries of science, communication and the environment fade, but existing political/nation-state structures remain.

Roland

22AndUK

I'd have to disagree with you about Thatcher. It's only in hind sight and knowing what I know now do I realize she fought off what is going on now and protected this country from it. And thats coming from a man that once spook out loud that Thatcher destroyed this country. I now realize she was trying to put it right.

A lot of what she did sounded terrible. But the diffrence between a strong leader and some one trying to appear to be a strong leader is this.

A strong leader makes decisions that appear bad and tirns out to be right.

Some one trying to appear to be a strong leader makes decisions that obtain your confidence and trust then turns out to be wrong.

Thatchers special relationship with Regan was basically saying to the rest of the world 'don't even think about it'. Tony Blair on the other hand was trying to show the country he could be just as strong as thatcher.

Regan was a conservative he believed government was the problem not the solution. Again to my own mis education I saw him as a fascist.

Bush is a neo-con. Ron paul was saying in an interview that the neo-cons we're originaly from the hard left of the democrats and from what i can tell he is correct.

Fascisms home is the hard left wing of the political spectrum not the right wing. The left wing always acused it of being a right wing agenda. So wile we've been blindly keeping our guard up from the right we've not noticed the wolf in sheep's clothing coming in and making it's self comfortable from the left.

Britannist

How about no 'globalisation' at all?

Ea of Dune

I see nothing wrong with global trade, free travel of people from friendly countries to visit your own country for pleasure or business, free movement of goods, helping out poorer neighbours. But this does not mean National sovereignty should be eroded to a one size fits all. It doesn't work.
The best thing about the so called "free world" is the ability to cross borders and visit new places with their own cultures. Not some horrid mish mash thats been forced on us, that see's traditions and culture stamped under foot for money and mounting tension. The Taliban do that blowing up Buddist statues, and Labour does that with it's self loathing in the UK.
I want England to be England, just as I like France for being France. Borders have a purpose, they allow people to choose how they wish to live and govern themselves. Forcing another countries law on people is wrong and does not work 100%. We have seen that from 3,000 years of history.

That's my 2p worth.

Ea of dune

Roland

I have got exactly the same opinion. People leave their home lands to seek a better life not to walk into the same life.

It's all a global socialist movement which runs on big ideals wile destroying every thing that was sacred or gets in it's way. The socialist movements through out history have done this over and over again.

Every time it comes to a bitter end and then rears it's ugly head in a slightly different manor claiming to be a new concept of government, thinking it knows where it went wrong last time and starts again.

Britannist

Not the membership of the party - only the europhile impostors who should be expelled from the Conservative Party.