Tag: Lisbon

Labour, what is it good for?

Hello folks, for those who’re unaware at the time of writing this here in the UK Boris is Prime Minister, his Conservative party is in power and Her Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition is lead by Sir Keir Starmer and his Labour Party.

It’s a lovely phrase isn’t it, “Her Majesty’s Loyal #Opposition” because of course before Tony #Blair effectively legalised #Treason¹ in the UK by repealing Section 1 of the Treason Act 1795 (and for what it’s worth Section 3 of the Treason Felony Act 1848) attempting to bring down the crown and by extension the government appointed by the crown was an act of treason. By expressly emphasising the “Loyal” the opposition party in the UK Parliament can effectively challenge the government. Ideally they do so by acting as a party of conscience or by playing the role of Devils Advocate.

So far so good, but here’s the thing. The dateline is December 2020, the location is of course The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Biden take note) and the country is still apparently in the midst of an epidemic. The government has instigated lock down after lock down and now with the end in sight have called what is another lock down in all but name by a disingenuous system of “Tiers”. It’s the 1st of December and there’s to be a vote in Parliament if the government wins the UK is tied to “Tiers” if they’re voted down another solution has to be found.

People are starving, businesses are collapsing, the economy is in tatters and the government is insisting on more of the same. This is the time for Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition to act. At no time in living memory has the UK been faced with such a threat, pandemic on one side, government policy on the other a third way is needed. #Starmer’s reaction is to refuse to act. The #Labour Party will abstain.

The single most important vote in living memory and Labour do nothing:

  • Nothing to add to the debate
  • No ideas of their own
  • No morality or ethics
  • Opportunism at it’s very worst
  • No compassion for the poor or the workers
  • No compassion for the sick
  • Nothing

If lock down fails (as it probably will) Labour’s position will be, “We didn’t vote for it”
If it doesn’t fail their position will be, “We didn’t obstruct it”

COWARDLY OPORTUNISTS

The Dormouse states for the record that he believes the Lock Down to be wrong in principle, unlawful contrary to all legal precedent and ultimately self defeating. He also believes that #Boris and chief henchman Mr #Gove are behaving like spoilt two year olds who don’t want to be proved wrong. Imbecilic even. But at least they’re trying, they are doing something.

Tonight 53 brave #Conservative MPS voted against their own party and with a few Labour rebels and supporters did what Labour as a party should be doing, providing balance, conscience and holding the government to account.

The Labour MPs who defied Starmer’s instructions voted against the government last night are:

Apsana #Begum (Poplar and Limehouse)
Richard #Burgon (Leeds East)
Mary Kelly #Foy (City of Durham)
Andrew #Gwynne (Denton and Reddish)
Mike #Hill (Hartlepool)
Kevan #Jones (North Durham)
Emma #Lewell-Buck (South Shields)
Ian #Mearns (Gateshead)
Grahame #Morris (Easington)
Kate #Osborne (Jarrow)
Bell #Ribeiro-Addy (Streatham)
John #Spellar (Warley)
Graham #Stringer (Blackley and Broughton)
Zarah #Sultana (Coventry South)
Derek #Twigg (Halton)

The Dormouse hopes that folks remember this abject dereliction of duty is remembered at the time of the next election.


¹ And why did Blair legalise Treason? The truth is he’s not saying and no one knows. The best guess is that there’s an argument that any UK citizen who signed or counselled, aided and abetted etc the signing of the #Maastricht and #Lisbon Treaties for the UK (and probably the earlier ones as well) committed Treason Blair was simply looking to himself in case he got caught out.

If anyone knows the real reason give us a shout and we’ll print it here.

British Police just who do they serve?

Over the summer we’ve seen UK #police forces (services!) facilitate rioting by #racist mobs. We’ve even seen the various forces grovelling on their knees or running away from the self same mobs. Later we’ve seen peaceful protesters beaten to the ground for merely challenging the national lock-downs.

This has lead to a certain degree of navel gazing. Who makes up todays police forces, who commands and directs them, who sets policy and who on earth tells them that it’s OK to drag a middle aged woman of a chair and apparently punch her to the ground?

Attacked from behind by one of London’s finest and then shoulder barged (or punched) to the ground. Compare and contrast to the image below.

An absolute disgrace from start to finish but to date no announcement of the officer being arrested for assault, placed under investigation for discipline matters or even an apology.

Police grovelling to a violent BLM mob
This lot fights back, best we get on our knees.

OK so it’s a big question and the answer is to long for a single blog post so what we’ll do today is just get the ball rolling and see what it is our police officers actually promise to do when they sign on the dotted line.

The current oath

’I………………..of………………..do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human #rights and according equal #respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will, to the best of my skill and knowledge, discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.’”

Police Reform Act 2002

The 1996 oath

I, … … … … of … … … … do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve Our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the office of constable, without favour or affection, malice or ill will; and that I will to the best of my power cause the peace to be kept and preserved, and prevent all offences against the persons and properties of Her Majesty’s subjects; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.

Police Act 1996 Which just happens to be the same as the historical one.

The 1964 oath

Police Act 1964

The 1964/96 oaths are straightforward enough, must treat everyone fairly, mustn’t play favourites, don’t pick on folks, do the best job they can and of course acknowledge that they are serving “Our Sovereign Lady the Queen”. Great, long live Queen Liz the absolute fountainhead head of law and justice in the UK.

And then we come to the 2002 version. The first thing to note is that Queen Liz, ‘gor bless her is no longer “Sovereign”, she’s still a Queen but she’s no longer the top dog. Niether are we in Britain no longer her subjects. A little worrying is that there’s no mention of who actually is sovereign nor is there any mention of who UK citizens are subject to. As it happens we know that this change came about as a result of the Treaty of #Maastricht 1992 and in preparation for the #EU constitution, later the Treaty of #Lisbon 2007. It had been assumed by a series of pro-EU governments that the UK would at become fully subject to EU law. It will be interesting to see if the words “Sovereign” and “Her Majesty’s subjects” return to the oath in 2021.

What else can we take away from the 2002 oath. At first glance it looks very much to be a rerun of the earlier oaths converted to “Woke-speak”. This in itself is no big deal, we all have to move with the times. There are though two very worrying elements to this new oath (not including Liz’s demotion).

The first is this, “upholding fundamental human rights” nonsense and then this “according equal respect to all people”. The sound good don’t they but here’s the thing:

“Upholding Fundamental Human Rights”

Consider the above and ask yourself just what are “fundamental human rights”? Focus for a moment on the “fundamental”. Where are these fundamental rights defined, who enforces them, who defines them? Does such a collection even exist? No.

All unanswered. Our modern day plods are swearing to uphold something that is both undefined and non-existent.

“According equal respect to all people”

That’s great to see, at last the victims of crime will be afforded the same respect given to Billy the Burglar and Robby the Robber.

Not what it means? Well here’s the thing, not all people are deserving of equal respect. Being treated fairly in accordance with law? Of course, absolutely. But equal respect? Gods no! Respect is earned.

So our modern day plods are also required to “respect” offenders and those who harm society.

No wonder modern plod doesn’t know his arse from his elbow.