web analytics

THE WAR ON PATIO HEATERS…

By ATWadmin On January 30th, 2008 at 11:06 pm

patio%20heater.jpgDid you see that the patio heaters warming drinkers and diners on the pavements of northern Europe are also warming the planet’s climate and should be banned, according to a European Parliament report that could be adopted on Thursday. Environmentalists argue that heaters not only pump heat directly into the atmosphere but also climate-damaging CO2, while owners of pubs and bars say they need them to help retain customers driven outside by smoking bans.

"Patio heaters are scandalous because they are burning fossil fuels in the open sky, so producing vast quantities of CO2 with very little heat benefit," said European parliamentarian Fiona Hall, who wrote the report criticizing the pace of energy reforms in Europe. "We urge the Commission to set a timetable for completely taking off the market some appliances that are intrinsically inefficient, such as patio heaters," she added.

Chip, chip, chip – the environmentalists erode our liberties and all in the name of saving Gaia. Better we freeze outside than offend the earth mother?

A BLANK CHEQUE LEADS TO BANKRUPTCY

By ATWadmin On January 27th, 2008 at 11:27 am

Would you sign a blank cheque and send it to me? What if I promised to be reasonable about the amount I decided to take from your bank account? No? Oh well, I think you lot are pretty sensible, since signing blank cheques is a very bad idea. But most of our politicians at Westminster are about to sign the biggest blank cheque in the history of the United Kingdom and they will do it with some relish!

You see MPs are being asked to vote on the revised EU treaty without key information about the powers it will create. The paper, from the office of the president of the EU, reveals that matters such as the possibility of a European army and the powers of an EU president will not be determined until after the revived constitution has been pushed through. Other issues include how the proposed EU diplomatic service will work, the powers of the new EU foreign minister and whether the European police office, Europol, will be able to expand its activities.  Neil O’Brien, director of Open Europe, the think tank that obtained the document, claims that MPs are being asked to “sign a blank cheque”.

Neil is right. But they WILL sign it because they like the idea of sorting out all those "minor technicalities" such as a European Army AFTER the constitution treaty has been imposed upon us. Once again we see that it is the political elite in this country, and in most other European capitals, that are the scum of the earth, selling out the Nation State in the most deceitful way imaginable.

THE NEW ANNONA…

By ATWadmin On January 23rd, 2008 at 6:17 pm

annona.jpgIn the days of the Roman Empire, all those peoples conquered were required to pay the Annona – a tax necessary to sustain the victorious military and help fund the massive bureaucracy behind it. 

The great global warming swindle grows greater by the day as the European Union – that vile diktat that our verminious political class worship – declares that EVERY citizen in the EU will cough up an extra £110 per year to "fight" global warming. This, dear reader, is the new Annona.

barrosemitap_203b.jpgI listened  to the utterly hateful European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso announce this "historic" plan to make Europe "the first economy for the low-carbon age".

Naturally the BBC has provided two sides to this story – with environmentalists screeching that this is not going far enough. That is what fair and balanced means in Euroland – you can put forward every point of view that you want so long as it is pro-Statism, pro-more taxation and wrapped in the smug piety of greenism.

I reject the new Annona – but notice the lack of any real mainstream political protest here in the UK, so proving that ALL our mainstream politicians are part of the enemy within.  

The political class, using the pretence of "global warming" are out to extort taxes from us until the pips squeak, and all the while they do this cheered by the MSM, our planet’s amazing climate will continue to change as it always has done.   

Got ‘Global Warming’?

By ATWadmin On January 22nd, 2008 at 3:54 am

No small wonder that Gordon Brown is adamant about denying the Brits his previously promised referendum on the new EU Constitution Treaty of Lisbon.

Brussels demands thousands more wind turbines across the UK

Britain will be forced to build thousands more wind turbines in the countryside under a Brussels edict to be announced tomorrow.
Energy experts say new EU climate change targets mean the UK will have to generate 40 per cent of its electricity from green sources within 12 years.
In order to meet that target, the number of wind turbines on the land would have to rise fourfold. Thousands more would be needed at sea.
The move would be one of the greatest engineering projects in years – and dramatically change the skyline of Britain and its coastal waters.
But critics say onshore turbines are an expensive blot on the landscape that often fail to generate enough power to justify their existence.
The Government concedes that the shift away from coal and gas will cost up to £6billion [US$23.23 billion] a year. Most of that burden will be passed to consumers.

As the costs of most government mandates are.

The move is part of the EU’s commitment to generating 20 per cent of Europe’s energy from renewable sources by 2020.
Under the plans – approved by Tony Blair – every member state will be told its contribution to the “green energy revolution” tomorrow. Britain currently has one of the worst records for renewable energy in Europe.
Years of cheap gas mean that nine out of ten homes use gas central heating, while hydroelectric and wind power produces just 2 per cent of electricity.
Tomorrow, the petulant bitch known as the European Union Brussels is expected to demand that 15 per cent of Britain’s energy, including heating, transport fuel and electricity, comes from renewable sources by 2020. Because it would cost too much to convert homes and vehicles to green energy, the bulk of the target will have to be met by electricity companies.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs estimates that 40 per cent of electricity will have to be renewable within 12 years.
If it fails to meet the targets – described by civil servants as “difficult” – Europe will impose daily fines on the UK.
[…]
Read it all at The Daily Mail

I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age. — Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic

Also at JWF

On The Good Ship Lollipop

By ATWadmin On January 21st, 2008 at 4:33 am

Oh, a storm is threatening
My very life today
If I dont get some shelter
Oh yeah, I’m gonna fade away

EU treaty ‘will shift power to Europe’


The EU Reform Treaty backed by Gordon Brown paves the way for “a massive and fundamental” shift of power to Europe, a senior Labour MP charged by Parliament with assessing its impact will tell the Commons today.

The comments from Michael Connarty, the pro-European chairman of the all-party European Scrutiny Committee, will mark an explosive start to five weeks of Parliamentary debate on the Treaty – and stoke the growing clamour for a referendum.

Tonight – with Gordon Brown absent from the Commons – rebel Labour MPs hope to stage a substantial rebellion with between 20 and 30 said to be ready to vote for a cross-party amendment demanding a national vote.

The Tories, who support a referendum, last night accused Mr Brown, who is on the last leg of a tour of the Far East, of “running scared” over the vital issue of Europe by making sure he is out of the country when the ratification process gets under way.

Directly contradicting the Prime Minister, who claims he has protected British sovereignty by negotiating “red lines” into the text, Mr Connarty argues these will do little to halt the gradual transfer of power from national parliaments and courts to Europe.

“The Reform Treaty and the red lines are just a postponement of what will be one system for all of Europe,” he told The Daily Telegraph last night.

Mr Connarty backs the new Treaty because he wants a stronger Europe but said he had decided to speak out because the British and other governments had not told the people of Europe the truth.

On criminal law, immigration and border controls, the Treaty had set up mechanisms for national vetoes to be steadily eroded and authority transferred from British ministers and UK courts to Europe.

It set the European Parliament on course to gain powers at the expense of Westminster as authority shifted from national capitals to the European centre.

The new Treaty, also known as the Lisbon Treaty, has to be ratified by national parliaments or in referendums in all 27 EU countries to come into effect.

It will scrap dozens of national vetoes, create a new full-time EU President and foreign affairs supremo, and give the EU a legal personality allowing it to sign international treaties.

Mr Brown argues that Labour’s promise to hold a referendum on the abandoned Constitutional Treaty in Labour’s last election manifesto does not apply to its successor because it is less far reaching.

That argument is further undermined today by a report from the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee which says that in foreign policy there is little or no difference between the two Treaties.

We conclude that there is no material difference between the provisions on foreign affairs in the Constitutional Treaty which the Government made subject to approval in a referendum and those in the Lisbon Treaty on which a referendum is being denied.

The Labour-dominated committee accuses the Government of seeking to downplay the importance of large parts of the Treaty such as the new post of EU High Representative for foreign affairs and security, who will be served by a new EU diplomatic External Action Service.

Pro-referendum campaigners revealed plans yesterday to stage local referendums, giving half a million people in marginal constituencies a chance to have their say. Organisers of the “I Want a Referendum” campaign say it will be the biggest vote of its kind since the 1975 Referendum on keeping Britain in the Common Market.

While the Government majority is not under threat in tonight’s vote, Labour whips were said to be increasingly concerned last night about cross party alliances forming between MPs discontented with the Treaty for a range of different reasons.

The Tories who have vowed to oppose the Treaty are expected to table amendments to the ratification Bill in the House of Lords later in the ratification process.

Left-wing Labour MPs, urged on by the unions, are also planning to put down their own amendments demanding that the UK’s opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights be removed.

If the Tories back such amendments – as a way to kill the Treaty – then Mr Brown’s faces real problems.

[…]

There’s much, much more at The Telegraph

See also Trouble In Gordon Brown’s Paradise

Also at JWF

Gimme Shelter lyrics, Jagger/Richards

WHEN IS A CONSTITUTION NOT A CONSTITUTION?

By ATWadmin On January 20th, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Simple – when our political masters decide it is more convenient for them to call it a treaty.

So it is no surprise to read today that parts of the Lisbon Treaty, signed by Gordon Brown last month, are no different from the abandoned EU Constitution, a report by MPs has said. The Commons Foreign Affairs Committee said foreign policy in the treaty was the same as in the constitution, on which Labour promised a referendum. It also accused the government of publicly downplaying the importance of some new EU institutions and roles. Ministers argue no referendum is needed as the treaty is not constitutional.

The REASON that they argue this is so they can subvert the will of the British people, who will reject the constitution if it is put to them. This is all about our lying politicians betraying our national soveriegnty and running away from the people. It strikes me that this is fundamentally undemocratic which begs the question, if our government behaves undemocratically over the most important issues that affect our country, what exactly is it that rules over us? Whether one is pro-EU or anti-EU, does it not seem reasonable that the government is held to its solemn  promise to allow the people to speak on this specific issue?  

BRUSSELS IS WORTH A MASS….

By ATWadmin On January 19th, 2008 at 10:11 am

Let’s go back in time.

In order to secure the French throne, Henry of Navarre renounced his Protestant faith and converted to Roman Catholicism in 1593 cynically adding that "Paris is worth a mass." He ascended to the French throne a year later in 1594.

029tonyblairDM_228x146.jpgStep forward in time to 2008. Tony Blair has recently renounced his Protestant faith and converted to Roman Catholicism. Is he triangulating to become the First President of Europe when this role comes into being in 2009? Is Brussels worth a mass?S

Writing in the Daily Telegraph. Charles Moore makes a very plausible case for the Blair presidency.

Initiated Under Blair, the British net contribution to the EU will rise from €2.8 billion to €5.5 billion by 2014. Blair complained that 40% of the European budget went on the Common Agricultural Policy. He then accepted this should INCREASE to 44%.  Whatever could have made Blair so weak-willed when it came to defending British interests with the EU?

Under the thing we are not allowed to call the European Constitution, which the Commons will begin acrimoniously debating next week, a President of the European Council will be created in 2009. He will hold the post for two and a half years (renewable once), and he will have "strategic direction" of the European Union. He will be appointed by the council, ie by the heads of government, under the French presidency in the second half of this year.

 

It is reported that the Lefties do not much want Mr Blair. In Italy, Romano Prodi disapproves of him because he supported Silvio Berlusconi. In Spain, the Socialist government dislikes him so much that the defence minister unguardedly called him "un gilipollas integral", which is too rude to translate.

But the Germans seem friendly, and the French even more so (though a machiavellian rumour says that perfide Sarko is only pretending). A recent poll in Le Figaro reported that 80 per cent of Frenchmen would like Mr Blair in their government, let alone that of the EU. Enraging the Socialists to whom he is nominally allied, Mr Blair recently addressed the annual conference of Mr Sarkozy’s party. By a happy chance, Tony and Cherie were in the same hotel in Egypt as Sarko and his lovely girlfriend/fiancée/possibly bride, Carla Bruni, and the four had dinner together.

 

The beauty of all this is that, as so often, Mr Blair’s personal ambition sits neatly with his stated beliefs. Throughout his career, he has been as pro-European as a mainstream British politician can safely be. He is particularly Francophile – remember his immediate welcome for President Chirac in Canary Wharf when he became Prime Minister, his St Malo defence treaty, his eloquent speech, in French, to the National Assembly.

 

He is so good at timing. Even his decision to become a Roman Catholic, though perfectly sincere, comes at the right moment. It would have been a negative while he was Prime Minister. If he wants a top post in continental Europe, it becomes an advantage. Brussels is worth a Mass.

 

I believe Charles is 100% right. Blair is a triangulator par excellence. I believe he years to become the First President of Europe – the neo Holy Roman Emperor. Look upon his face my friends, and despair.

Trouble In Gordon Brown’s Paradise

By ATWadmin On January 19th, 2008 at 1:37 am

Could a no confidence vote be on the near horizon?

EU treaty won’t work, says Labour MP


The new EU constitution treaty “won’t work”, the government is warned today, as ministers prepare for a bitter Commons showdown over the controversial document.

Gisela Stuart, one of the “wise men” that drew up the original EU Constitution, said the Lisbon treaty lacked the necessary legitimacy to work across Europe.

The Labour MP has signed an amendment to the Bill, which returns to the floor of the Commons on Monday, calling for a referendum on the treaty.

Stuart believes the UK’s Europe minister should be a cabinet-level post, akin to a deputy prime minister, and should be directly accountable to the Westminster parliament.

She also wants an assurance that any future changes to qualified majority voting (QMV) in the European parliament would be subject to primary legislation in the House of Commons.

In an interview with Guardian Unlimited, Stuart said: “I think this document pushes to the limits the areas I think I could just about agree with, but I would need further safeguards, so these are the limits and I think that’s what this debate is going to be about.”

Stuart said the revised document gave the European Union a “toolbox” of powers that would allow it to “interfere in virtually every aspect of our lives”.

“There is no longer a question of saying, there are certain things that the union can’t touch. Actually the union can touch everything.”

Pressed on her objection to the treaty, Stuart said: “I don’t think this is going to work.

Asked why, she added: “Because of a lack of legitimacy in the eyes of large swaths of people across Europe … The crunch will be the environment. If you look at the golden opportunity to tax the little people into oblivion acceleration of climate change, at the moment on the environment we are in a comfort zone of thinking all we need to do is take our bottles to the skip, recycle our newspapers; if you are really daring you say we should put tax on plastic carrier bags. And we think that’s enough.

Well the penny is going to drop that it’s not going to be enough, and you will need to make a decision on whether you tax or ration carbon emissions. Of course no one country can sensibly do this on its own, so this will be a classic case of where you need the EU to do this. And the EU will start to ask its citizens to stop doing something they have always comfortably done before. There will be some fairly hard demands.

“People accept hard demands if that’s a deal from their own government. But when politicians across Europe start saying, as they have always done, ‘it is not us’ – it’s always been the politician’s way of getting out of uncomfortable positions – at that point, it doesn’t have that kind of legitimacy.” Describing the Lisbon treaty as the same as the failed EU constitution “in substance”, Stuart said: “I’ve been struggling to find analogies of how you compare this. It’s like a cookery recipe: all the same ingredients, but you’ve just rearranged them differently. Or [former French president] Giscard d’Estaing came up with a wonderful phrase: he said, ‘it’s the same letter; just in a different envelope‘.

Stepping up pressure on Gordon Brown to call a referendum, Stuart said: “My view is whether you call it a constitution or whether you call it a treaty, in essence it is something pretty significant, and it’s a matter of trust now for the political parties to honour their promise.

“The British people should be given a say, as they were promised by all the major political parties in the 2005 election.

“I certainly will find it difficult to vote for the treaty on Monday unless there is a commitment to have a referendum.”

How ’bout dem apples?!? Like Gordon Brown, Gisela Stuart is a member of the Labour Party and she’s just thrown down the gauntlet.

Warning of the potential for Europe creep, Stuart said: “I give you one example. Ten years ago everyone said health was [the competence of] national member states. Absolutely no doubt about it. You then started to get court cases where people from one European country were going to another European country for dental treatment. The question was, was that part of the internal market? One of the key things of the European Union.

“So we have the first court decision, the European Court of Justice, that says, ‘yes, it is part of the internal market’. And then over a number of years you get more and more decisions because cases come up, until last year when someone in England goes over to France to jump waiting lists and the courts say ‘well yes, you can do that, but you need prior permission and all kinds of caveats’ – but the principle is established.

“You then at the same time over those 10 years have things like CJD [and] bird flu, so people say, ‘well of course, bird flu and CJD don’t recognise national boundaries, so public health must be an EU competence.’ So we make public health an EU competence; we make health service delivery a court judgment … so what’s the next thing?

“A European commission draws up a proposals for an EU health directive, which it did before Christmas, then decides to withdraw it to consult more. It doesn’t say we’ll put it back on the table, and as we in the UK are the only ones to have a totally taxpayer-funded [health] system we will have particular problems. But this just illustrates that there is nothing where the EU doesn’t have means – whether it’s court judgments; whether it’s internal market; free movement of labour – the way it makes laws. In every way it now has means, and once it has taken away a UK competence, there is no way you can ever go back.

Stuart called for a strengthening of the prime minister’s assurances over QMV.

The prime minister committed himself to saying, ‘no more extension of qualified majority voting or any further powers unless this house agrees to it.‘ Well, I would like that tightened up,” Stuart said. “First of all, the only area where that could happen is in defence and foreign policy, because everything else already has gone to QMV.

But I would want primary legislation, so it’s not just one vote the government can whip through with their majority, but [instead] it would actually have to be a bill and go through the House, and go through [all] the stages.

“The second thing is the way the House itself operates has to change – very, very significantly.”

Asked how she would vote in a referendum, Stuart said: “I don’t know yet. There are a number of things I would want to hear from our ministers, and assurances in terms of their interpretation, and it will be extremely finely balanced which way I will go.

My argument is that all the deals struck in Brussels need to be answered at the dispatch box. Create a proper Europe minister, take the Europe minister out of the Foreign Office, but make that person accountable for those negotiations. And that’s almost a deputy prime minister post.

I want them to come to the dispatch box every two weeks and say ‘those are the deals we have struck’. I think you would find that that person would probably be responsible for negotiating something like 50% of our legislation, and that would merit a cabinet post.”

Via The Guardian

José Manuel Barroso was unavailable for comment.


And hoping to avoid Nigel Farage

See also Reality Confronts European Union.

Also at JWF

Reality Confronts European Union

By ATWadmin On January 18th, 2008 at 4:28 am

The al-Goracle cult, otherwise known as the Religion of Environmentalism, has many devotees within the corridors of the European Commission and European Parliament.

That is, until a known eeeeevil – reality – jumped up and bit ’em on the ass.

eu_climate.jpg

EU Members Lobby against ‘Harmful’ Climate Plan

European countries and businesses have criticized a climate change action plan that COMINTERN the European Commission is scheduled to unveil next week. Their concerns about competition and carbon trading could undermine the EU’s commitment to confront climate change.

As the European Commission puts the finishing touches on a sweeping climate change policy package to be unveiled on Jan. 23, politicians and business leaders from the EU’s richest member states are lobbying to revamp draft policies that they believe could harm them in Europe and abroad.

Among the critics of the bill are France, which wants to protect its nuclear investments, Germany, which is worried about its renewable energy sector, and major European auto and steelmakers, who are concerned that Europe could lose its competitive edge.

But the Commission says it will not be bullied into diluting the climate change package. To back down, Commission President José Manuel Barroso told Reuters, would be an international embarrassment after the EU worked to promote itself as the international leader in addressing climate change. “We knew from the very beginning that transforming Europe into a low-carbon economy is not an easy task,” said Barroso. “But this is the moment to be serious, responsible and coherent with our commitment.”

In other words, Barroso believes that saving face is more important than the economic health and well-being of European Union member states. Nice to see that the consummate tax tick has his priorities straight.

Barroso was responding to complaints that include a letter from French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in which Sarkozy objected to a policy that would raise the share of energy that Europe derives from renewable sources from 8.5 percent currently to 20 percent by 2020. He said the policy “unnecessarily penalizes the prospects of growth.” France wants to have its huge nuclear energy program counted in the mandatory contribution it will be asked to make toward the EU goal, but atomic power, which produces toxic waste, is not considered a form of renewable energy.

Germany and Spain are protesting another proposed policy. Ministers in Berlin and Madrid sent a letter this week to the Commission criticizing a system [that] would encourage companies in Europe to trade renewable energy across borders. They are worried that an EU-wide system would undermine their existing national systems. “This will put a very successful development of renewables at risk, which is not acceptable to our governments,” read the letter in part. It was the second time this week that German officials criticized the forthcoming policies, after Bavarian politicians condemned (more…) a proposal to cap the amount of carbon dioxide that new automobiles produce per kilometer they are driven.

In an interview with the German magazine Capital published Tuesday, the EU environment commissioner, Stavros Dimas, denied that a new renewable energy trading system would infringe upon existing “feed-in” systems in Germany and Spain. “Don’t worry,” said Dimas. “We will ensure that Germany can keep its system without restrictions in (the) future and … we will construct it in such a way that it doesn’t hinder national promotion systems in Germany and other countries — that’s a promise.”

A politician making a promise. ROTFLMAO .

Private sector leaders also criticized the forthcoming policy package, saying strict limits on greenhouse gas emissions will hit major industrial polluters unfairly and encourage them to relocate outside of Europe. BusinessEurope, a lobby group that represents most of the Continent’s largest companies, said it had learned that the Commission will require industrial polluters to cut emissions to 21 percent below 2005 carbon emission levels by 2020.

EU officials explained that 2005 was chosen because it is the first year in which data includes the impact of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme; BusinessEurope says it is unfair because it does not take into account efforts to reduce emissions that companies made between 1990 and 2005. In a letter to Commission President Barroso, the group also objected to broader plans to strengthen the continent’s carbon trading scheme.

Many of the permits that a company must hold to emit carbon are currently distributed for free, but the Commission is proposing to auction those permits to the highest bidder by 2020. To offset the impact that might have on the competitiveness of a European business, the Commission is considering a carbon tariff (more…) on imports from outside the EU that were not produced within a carbon trading market. Still, BusinessEurope calls the prospect of an auction-based trading scheme “extremely worrying.”

The lobbying in Brussels this week is in sharp contrast to the proud tones in which European leaders announced last March their joint agreement to cut carbon dioxide emissions to 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and make major investments in renewable energy and biofuels. As the Commission drafts policies that will make those goals a reality, Europe’s richer countries are frustrated that they will be asked to bear the brunt of the collective goal.

EU officials told Reuters this week that the Commission wants to allow the EU’s poorest member states to actually increase their emissions, by up to 20 percent above 2005 levels. That would help poor states like Romania and Bulgaria grow their economies – but could spell trouble for the strong European countries charged with making up the difference.

Via der Spiegel Online

See also Moonbats and Economics.

Also at JWF.

More Liberties Stolen, Another Traitor For Jack Ketch

By ATWadmin On January 17th, 2008 at 12:43 pm

hangmans-noose.jpgTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, BARONESS SCOTLAND QC, will soon confirm her place in the dock at the Great Treason Trials of 2020. We read that she will meet next week, with EU justice ministers, to agree procedures for Britons to be extradited directly to foreign prisons if already convicted in absentia. According to the Daily Telegraph, human rights and civil liberties campaigners fear the new EU rules breach a fundamental principle of British justice: that defendants must have their day in court to defend themselves.

Well quite. The business of selling your country to a foreign power cannot be hindered by mere ancient liberties and venerated custom. And let’s be clear, this is all about rendering us an occupied province of the European state. Our system of justice is unique. The common law, that statement of our customs and beliefs, is supreme. Under it British Subjects may do whatsoever they like that is not specifically proscribed. It guarantees our liberties and holds even Crown and Parliament in check, which are both subordinate to it.

The Continental system, the Napoleonic Code, holds that the state is in charge and that citizens may only do what is specifically allowed. It is the complete antithesis of our system of law. 

Clearly, the can be no reconciliation between the common law and the Napoleonic Code, yet the European state cannot operate with conflicting justice systems; our quisling politicians long ago conspired with our enemies, therefore, to destroy our common law along with our liberties. The Blair government’s repeated attacks against our right to trial by jury, our right to a fair trial, the double jeopardy rule, our the right to silence and on the presumption of innocence each sprang from the requirement to wholly dismantle our common law system of justice, one of our greatest gifts to the world.

Of course, Baroness Scotland’s actions are illegal. It is wholly treasonous to procure, or allow to be procured, the imposition of any foreign power in the Realm. So next week she will break the law, spit on the British Constitution and implicate herself. Let her name be posted with all the others.