Silent Majority Speaks
Rescuing Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected Dictatorship
|
Spin,
not face-to-face confrontations with the voters, is the Government's
chosen method of communication. Ordinary people are dangerous. Ordinary
people might ask a question which throws a politician 'off message';
the Cabinet member might reveal himself or herself to be a human being
like us, and not a programmed android. Worse still, he or she might
tell the truth.
Ann Leslie - Daily Mail, September 16, 2004
Blair wants to leave his
mark on history - looks more like a stain to me.
Peter Thorndyke, Diss,
Norfolk - Daily Mail, May 23, 2005
I know I'm me - why do I
need an ID card?
"Sorry, officers, I
don't have an ID card. I never applied for one. It seemed a bit steep
at 300 quid. I do have my free passport, my driving licence and my
London freedom travel pass, each with my photograph. I have my NHS
medical card, with its lengthy number, given me at birth, my RAF
service book with my Armed Forces number, and a chit authorising me to
wear a few gongs -including a General Service Medal with Malaya bar,
for fighting communist terrorists on behalf of my country, or so they
told me.
"I've also got various credit
cards and store cards, all with my signature on the back, generally
good for buying the everyday requrements for life as well as the odd
luxury. If you decide to arrest me, I suppose I'll have to be
photographed and given another number, besides my PINs.
"I'm afraid I haven't got a
pension book; it was taken away."
"By thieves, sir?"
"No ... well, not exactly. By the
Government. By the way, may I see your warrant cards please, gentlemen?"
Oh dear, they've disappeared. E.
Harry Gumer, Romford, ESSEX - Daily Mail, June 1, 2005
NO means NO
When does NO mean MAYBE?
When it's not the answer the EU wants. With the courageous French
NON resounding in their ears, shabby, undemocratic self-interested
leaders of Europe propose ignoring the part of their precious
constitution that requires ratification by all members and
continuing without one of the biggest founder members to
prevent derailing the gravy train.
As in Ireland,
they refuse to accept any NO votes, ignoring the will of the people,
and re-stage votes until they can engineer the 'correct' answer. Sadly,
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw dances to their tune like a puppet on a
string. With tactics such as these, how can anyone really believe the
EU has our interests at heart. Letter from Steve Penny, Kingsnorth, Kent - Daily
Mail, June1, 2005
Surely
the French result makes the £1million the EU recently spent on a
treaty signing ceremony seem a trifle premature and extravagant. Letter from Keith Wiseman, Bury, Lancs. - Daily Mail,
June1, 2005
|
Britain has
traditionally been one of the biggest net contributors to the EU
because we do not get as much money back from Brussels in farm and
regional subsidies as our rivals.
According to
Treasury figures, between 1995-2002, Britain's average contribution
taking the rebate into account, was £2.6billion, or £43.55
per head of population.
The French -
the biggest recipient of farm subsidies - contributed £1billion a
year or £16.08 per head of their population.
|
|
Tony
Blair should know that respect comes by example - from the
top. If a country's leader has no respect for the rule of
international law and no respect for the truth, how can
he expect anyone to have respect. Letter
from P.J.Atkinson, Ashford, Kent - Daily Mail, January 12,
2006
The
Chancellor's single greatest act of vandalism in almost
nine years in office has been his wanton destruction of
Britain's private retirement industry. By slapping a massive
tax on pension funds, now worth
£7.3billion a year, he has helped to turn
the best private retirement industry in Europe into a basket-case
in perpetual crisis. Together with the adoption of European
accounting rules - which make it much riskier to operate
a company pension scheme - hundreds of firms have shut their
final salary plans to new employees and slashed benefits
to existing staff. From
Allister Heath: "I've seen the future and its grey"
in THE SPECTATOR - April 15, 2006
Nine
years ago the British people were sold a fantasy of clean
and competent government of principle and honesty. Its shiny
wrappings stripped away, the product now reveals its true
nature: Personal greed, arrogance, incompetence, shamelessness,
rash warmongering and an inability to accept - as is clear
to almost everyone else - that it is time to go. Editorial
- The Mail on Sunday, May 28, 2006
|
June
16 , 2006 (1133 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 2500 US - 113 UK - >60,000? civilians - 25 media
They
flee but go back on holiday
Foreign
villains roam our streets
Killers
and other serious criminals are claiming asylum, then vanishing
Special
investigation by SUE REID - Daily Mail, June 24, 2006
Additonal
reporting: Rebecca Camber and Luke Salkeld
Illegal
immigrants implicated in serious crimes are being freed on Britain's
streets - then disappear without trace, a Daily Mail investigation
reveals. The development pile fresh embarrassment on the Home
Office.
The
department's lax immigration rules allow illegal migrants 'temporary
admission' to Britain if they claim to be asylum seekers. The
policy means hundreds of foreign criminals, including terrorists
and murderers, are side-stepping deportation and the justice system.
The
Mail tracked the movements of five illegal immigrants - from Afghanistan,
Vietnam, China and Iraq - who have slipped into Britain in the
past six months. They include a self-confessed Taliban war-lord,
two suspected murderers and a money launderer. The men were sent
to immigration removal centres are being picked up by the police
on suspicion of illegally entering Britain or committing crimes
here. Each immediately claimed asylum. They were granted 'temporary
admission' to stay in Britain before being sent to Government-run
asylum hostels and houses.
Yet
the five have vanished from the addresses in Plymouth, Bristol
and London.
The
Mail's investigation followed a tip-off from immigration officials
who warned foreign criminals are routinely abusing the asylum
system to get 'temporary admission'. One told the MAIL: "The
removal centres are so full of illegal migrants that the Home
Office and the immigration service want to free up places. So
when an immigrant, even one who is suspected of dangerous criminal
activity here or in his home country, claims asylum, he is treated
as a possible refugee and let go with few or no questions asked.
Often they then disappear which means they escape deportation
and avoid the attention of the police. I have seen case after
case where temporary admission to Britain has been given to illegal
immigrants from Africa, South America, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan,
China and Vietnam whatever their criminal records."
Last
night the Home Office confirmed 'temporary admission' is still
being granted to asylum seekers. A report this wee by the Prison
Service said up to one in five suspected illegal immigrants caught
at British airports were set free because of the ruling. The service
said the new arrivals were asked to report back but often absconded
to join the growing illegal immigrant population - nearly 600,000
at a conservative estimate.
Circumstances
of individual cases are considered by an immigration officer before
temporary admission is granted, a Home Office spokesman said.
Admission is not allowed if the immigrant is a security risk,
a threat to society or likely to disappear, he added.
However,
this investigation found the opposite appears to be true. Significantly,
the Home Office was unable to say how many immigrants had been
given temporary admission and then vanished.
They
flee but go back on holiday
By
James Slack - Home Affairs Editor - Daily Mail, June 24,
2006
Asylum
seekers who go on holiday to the country they are supposed
to be fleeing are being allowed to return to Britain and
make a fresh claim. The revelation takes the Government's
asylum policy to a new level of farce.
Under
official rules, the tens of thousands seeking refugee
status in Britain each year are entitled to to ask the
Home office for their passport back so they can leave
the country. Officials cannot refuse the request if the
passport is a lawful travel document. Once their holiday
is over, the applicant can return to Britain and lodge
a new asylum bid.
Incredibly,
the fact they have taken a break in the country where
they claim to face persecution, torture or even death
is not a bar to them starting the process over again.
They are not even classed as being failed asylum seekers,
because by asking for their passport back the original
claim is technically 'withdrawn'. Officials, bound by
the 1951 European Convention on Human Rights, have to
consider the new claim.
While
this takes place, the asylum seeker is entitled to housing
and benefits at taxpayers' expense. The authorities have
no idea how many people seeking asylum have left the country
for a break.
Critics
of the policy said any person returning from a holiday
overseas should be put straight back on the plane at the
airport. Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: "This
would be laughable if it wasn't so serious. It
beggars belief that an asylum applicant can return to
their home country on holiday and then come back and claim
asylum again. It is astounding that the Government has
no idea now many people are doing this. If these people
were really at risk from their own governments they presumably
would not dare to go home. On this basis the British people
might reasonably conclude that they are being taken for
a ride and out laws designed to protect people genuinely
in fear of their lives are being abused."
Sir
Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, said returning
home on holiday should automatically rule out any further
asylum claim. He added: "We are allowing these people
to make fools of us. If a country is too dangerous to
return to, it is too dangerous for a holiday."
The
incredible policy was revealed following a Daily Mail
Freedom of Information request. We asked how many asylum
seekers had had their claims turned down because they
had gone home on holiday. The answer came back as none,
because of the rules stating they were simply withdrawn
and could be lodged again.
The
Home Office said: "Asylum applications are automatically
withdrawn as soon as the applicant's passport is returned
to them at their request for travel. In the case of appellants,
their appeal is deemed abandoned upon embarkation from
the UK. Therefore asylum claims are not refused on this
basis, but treated as withdrawn and any outstanding appeal
treated as abandoned. Should they return to the UK and
attempt to make another asylum claim, we would have to
consider that claim. The fact they returned to their country
of origin after making the first claim will be taken into
consideration in assessing the new claim, and will potentially
seriously affect their credibility, but won't of itself
necessarily mean that the claim will fail."
At
least 6,000 failed asylum seekers who should be deported
are being allowed to stay in Britain so they can have
a second go at winning refugee status. They are staying
her for so long, they can legitimately claim their circumstances
back home have changed dramatically since first being
rejected.
Failed
refugees given £3000 bribes to go home are also
returning to Britain. At least nine have already done
so. Ministers have spent £6million on the initiative
- part of a desparate attempt to clear the backlog of
285,000 failed asylum seekers - sending 2,000 people home.
|
If you have
suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the
pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
|
