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
|
May 31, 2005 (761 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,657 US - 89 UK - >6,164?
Iraqi - >17,300 civilians - 25 media
June 17, 2005 (779 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,716 US - 89 UK -
>6,164? Iraqi - >17,300? civilians - 25 media
June 26, 2005 (788 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,737 US - 89 UK -
>6,164? Iraqi - >17,300? civilians - 25 media
July 6, 2005 (798 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,751 US - 90 UK -
>6,164? Iraqi - >17,300? civilians - 25 media
August 24, 2005 (847 days since
war ended)
Death Toll: 1,869 US - 93 UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
September
29, 2005 (883 days since war ended)
Death Toll: 1,928 US - 96 UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
October
11, 2005 (895 days since war ended)
Death Toll: 1,956 US - 96UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
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.
|
Labour
bent the truth on college places
By
Sarah Harris - Education Correspondent, Daily Mail, October 11,
2005
A
Minister was forced to apologise yesterday for twisting the facts
on university admissions to justify 'social engineering'. Higher
Education Minister Bill Rammell admitted distorting academic research
so it appeared to support the Government's agenda to hand more
college places to poorer students.
Last
month, Mr Rammell unveiled plans for universities to hold back
some of their places until after A-level results are published.
He justified the move by drawing on research which he claimed
showed that wealthier students were gaining an unfair advantage
because their teachers wrongly predicted they would get higher
grades.
In
a Department for Education and Skills press release dated September
9, Mr Rammel insisted the 'existing system is least fair to the
poorest students'. This is because only 45% of predicted grades
are accurate. But astonishingly, the study undertaken by Oxford
University academics for the University and Colleges Admissions
Service showed exactly the opposite was true.
Students
from poorer backgrounds were least likely to have accurate grades
predicted only because their teachers exaggerated their achievements.
Predictions were most accurate in independent and grammar schools.
Last
night, opposition MPs demanded a statement to Parliament on the
'gross misrepresentation' of the study. Tory education spokesman
David Cameron said: "At best, if this was a genuine mistake,
Mr Rammel should be picked up on his shoddy management of important
policy announcements. However, if he did indeed try to mislead
the public to suit the Government's agenda, then it is totally
unacceptable and wrong."
Liberal
Democrat education spokesman Ed Davey added: "This gross
misrepresentation of the survey's findings demands a statement
in Parliament. The whole consultation on university admissions
will have to be redone - anything short of that will not restore
people's confidence and trust in the department."
Dr
Geoff Hayward, a lecturer in educational studies at Oxford University,
who led the research for Ucas, said he was annoyed by the DfES
presentation of his research. He said: "The evidence we produced
does not support the strong contention that those from less well-off
backgrounds are being disadvantaged by the current system. It
is just not true."
Mr
Rammell said yesterday: "I have never sought to deliberately
mislead anyone. One sentence in the original DfES press release
is incorrect. This was a genuine mistake, which I regret and apologise
for."
Last
week, Mr Rammell caused a row by admitting the Government's 'social
engineering' plans for the first time. He said: "If social
engineering means putting right existing unfairness within the
system, then I plead guilty."
If you have
suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the
pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
|
