Monday 19 December 2011

ENGLAND NEEDS A VACLAV HAVEL

THE PARALLEL UNIVERSE OF WESTMINSTER ‘DEMOCRACY’

Being an MP is not compulsory; one can therefore presume an aspirant MP finds the post personally desirable – unless, of course, they claim altruism of a high order, and a drive to serve; serving being their only reward. Some may claim – it is not evident.

The candidate uses speeches, personal and indirect canvassing, and leafleting (flyers) to try to persuade the voter to gift them a seat in Westminster – it is a clear quid-pro-quo; the aspirant, directly or indirectly, offers some advantage to the voter, in exchange for their perceived advantage in the Westminster seat.

Up to this point, though undetectable deception is already a possibility on both sides,
the contract being made, is between two individuals, and the usual need for assessment – each of the other – applies, if deceit is to be minimised.

ENTER: PARTY POLITICS and the party MACHINE.

Immediately the aspirant MP splits into two – never again to be without duplicity.
The individual candidate ‘goes under’ the rosette. They ‘take the colour’ of their chosen/adoptive party, whose machinery (machination/chicanery) underwrites and -over-stamps - their every heartbeat. They loudly espouse, and profess, every clause of the manifesto, when challenged, and distribute leaflets, composed by ‘HQ’ with party advantage in mind, over that of the candidate. The aspirant ‘progresses’ the high street, followed by fawning party acolytes holding party balloons, in the authorised colour, or toting totem-poles, with the aspirant’s name – heraldic – on the dominant party background hue.

It should be noted (both here, and when encountering this charade) that the aspirant individual is - in law – just an ordinary member of society; previous MP-ship, party affiliation, and current party backing, notwithstanding. Paradoxically, as far as I have been able to ascertain, to date, the candidate’s party, has no existence in law (unless it so chooses). Thus we have the spectacle, within a supposed ‘democracy under rule of law’, of an individual, living under social constraints, closely bound to an ephemeral entity (where law is concerned) yet doing its will, in a duplicitous pact.

ENTER PARTY POLITICAL ‘MORALITY’ and ELECTION ETHICS.

It only takes a moment to register that the typical Westminster Creature is, at best, amoral; and another moment to realise this is no accident: they are selected. Ordinary voters only get to choose between pre-selected (by party panels) individuals marked out by potential Westminster Creatureness. Collectively, they comprise the Westminster Ethos in all its base affront. In adversarial politics, immorality will always win out over scruples; parties have no time for scruples, and when a General Election is called: even less. It is against the Election backdrop, that parties put their most Machiavellian minds to work on duping the electorate; vast war chest being previously amassed (from donors expecting later favour) and now expended on false advertising, liar-flyers, and rank, abject seduction, in selected (‘marginal’) constituencies. This is not democracy. It is D MOCK CRASS Y!

Y?Y?Y? WHERE ARE THE VACLAV HAVELS OF ENGLAND?

Sunday 18 December 2011

RID US OF THIS TURBULENT BOAST

Arrogant Cameron is demanding more Christian input from 'Canterbury'. I am hoping the Archbishop will give Dave more 'Christianity' than he bargained for! Dave is a pretty wide target; the single MOST APPOSITE adjective one can attach to the man, after the LIAR FLYER, the FALSE IMAGE and the VILIFICATION OF CLEGG, surely has to be: UNCHRISTIAN? And now he adds this Dream Topping. Lets have biblical CLEANSING OF WESTMINSTER! Let's hear it for our TURBULENT PRIEST!

Friday 16 December 2011

FROM THE TOP - DISCOVERING CLEGG

What draws an individual to want to run the lives of others?

What selection criteria do PARTY political panels look for in MP wannabes?

What constraints are applied to the new MP, elected courtesy of a PARTY rosette?

What mentality accepts, unearned, the title HONOURABLE while DIShonouring?

Which 'exponent', from the above, will be elevated, in such company?

What common factors have we seen in Thatcher, Major, Blair, Cameron, CLEGG?

Nuff sed?

In passing: the Chilcot Enquiry set themselves the task of LEARNING LESSONS regarding the Iraq War. I have sent an impassioned plea that they focus, not on decisions and mechanisms, BUT ON PSYCHOLOGY AND DYSFUNCTION IN INDIVIDUALS. Perhaps the above, simple, 'flow chart' could help them to learn the ultimate lesson:

WE GOT OURSELVES ANOTHER ONE.

Sunday 11 December 2011

LIBERTY HYPOCRISY PERVERSITY



CONSERVATIVE ‘LIAR FLYER’
MAY 2010 – NEWBURY.
ANALYSIS

UNEQUIVOCAL ASSERTIONS (verbatim)

“A HUNG PARLIAMENT WOULD MEAN 5 MORE YEARS OF GORDON BROWN.”

“BROWN TO STAY AS PM IN HUNG PARLIAMENT.”

“THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE SURE WE DON’T HAVE 5 MORE YEARS OF GORDON
BROWN IS TO VOTE CONSERVATIVE.”

“THE CHOICE AT THIS ELECTION: 5 MORE YEARS OF GORDON BROWN or
CHANGE WITH THE CONSERVATIVES.”

“THE CONSERVATIVES MUST WIN HERE TO STOP ANOTHER 5 YEARS OF
GORDON BROWN.”

************************************

“A PERSONAL MESSAGE FROM DAVID CAMERON” endorses the above assertions AND IS SIGNED.


UNCONTROLLABLE VARIABLES (NB: Pertaining at the time the Liar Flyer was issued.)

Vote-share of each party, at close of poll.

Freedom to deal, between party leaders.

Growing Labour MP disaffection, regarding Gordon Brown as their leader. Not result-contingent.

Personal choices open to Gordon Brown, as a free agent.

Length of any future Parliament (pre Coalition fixed-term).

Nicholas Clegg’s pledge to do no deal with Gordon Brown.


UNDENIABLE ACTUALITIES

In some constituencies which received the Liar Flyer, the Conservative WAS DEFEATED.

The Election resulted in a HUNG PARLIAMENT.

GORDON BROWN DID NOT RETURN AS LEADER – indeed, he resigned and withdrew.

The ONLY CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE in Newbury (May 2010) was RICHARD BENYON.

The distributor of the Liar Flyer (named thereupon) was RICHARD BENYON.

PERSONAL ADVANTAGE, from any increase in the Conservative vote, accrued to RICHARD BENYON.






Wednesday 7 December 2011

EMAIL TO NATIONAL FRAUD AUTHORITY 7/12/11

My concern is fraud, deliberately configured to benefit - primarily - an ordinary citizen; vis: deception of the general public (numbered in thousands) to gain employment, and/or advancement of personal status and influence.

The above-described, pertains when an erstwhile MP is returned to normal citizenship, at prorogation of Parliament, and stands for re-election using printed material, comprising unequivocal falsehoods, delivered to private homes, in an attempt to gain advantage.

To date, ‘wider governance’ has (constructively?) hidden in ‘the fog of Election Law', to avoid addressing an unequivocal document of fraudulent claims, held by me. They (government officials, departments and individuals) leap to the convenient conclusion that, because the employment sought by the individual in question is: ‘Westminster MP’, and the fraudulent document originates from a political party, it is a ‘political matter’.

I put it to you that the FUNDAMENTAL situation is one of personal (individual) advancement, knowingly enacted by fraudulent means (deception) and I look to you for interaction with me in the matter.

Please DO NOT engage, if integrity is absent (silence speaks just as loudly) that is: if the intent is to disengage by stealth. I apologise if that seems rude, but I have had 18 months of such, from those self-termed ‘honourable’, and have drawn inevitable conclusions.

Fortunately , I have 3.5 years more of this Parliament to ‘make my point stick’.

Thursday 1 December 2011

YOU NEVER COUNT YOUR MONEY AT THE TABLE

Nor do you count the suffering of the people whose lives you trample on, saying 'WHO CARES', so long as you can sit at the Globopoly table flaunting GDP, nukes, global military reach, and 0.7% aid. But such is the 'emplacement' of 'born-to-rule' heads, they have not yet realised that ALL THAT IS GONE. We are STILL getting 'governance as usual'. Dave still steps up to the camera to tell Iran how to behave, and Nick to explain the Great Triumph (more likely a Libber Daemmerung) coming to a ‘party’ near him, in a notional 3.5 years time.

In the dim distant future, will these islands be remembered, in legend, for their race of clowns and losers, whose heads . . . (see above) and whose feet pointed in all directions - hence going nowhere?

In passing: "Who Cares Wins" is the title of a new book addressing commercial practice. In Westminster, of course, it is just: "Who Cares" - a motto for Dave, to rank with "Ich Dien"!