on politicians - rogue, controversial or just bluster? | politics uk news at abelard.org
latest changes & additions at abelard.org link to short briefings documents link to document abstracts link to list of useful data tables quotations at abelard.org, with source document where relevant economics and money zone at abelard.org - government swindles and how to transfer money on the net latest news headlines at abelard's news and comment zone socialism, sociology, supporting documents described France zone at abelard.org - another France Energy - beyond fossil fuels visit abelard's gallery about abelard and abelard.org

back to abelard's front page

site map


news and comment
politics uk

article archives at abelard's news and comment zone topic archives: politics uk

for previously archived news article pages, visit the news archive page (click on the button above)

New translation, the Magna Carta

'Y

  Follow abelard.org      
   

on politicians - rogue, controversial or just bluster?


1:15 mins

"Of all the real concerns facing Britain, the British parliament is actually debating whether Donald Trump should be banned from the UK?! Every hard-working Brit should be up in arms that their elected officials are wasting their time, including tax payer funds, to debate such a stupid and inconsequential matter. What if Trump wins the presidential election? Will they ban an American president from their country? What about those British citizens who may agree with Trump? Will they too be banned from their own country?"

The Hoi Polloi, by popular outcry, wanted a 'debate'.

The British parliament is sort of democratic, so the Hoi Polloi got their 'debate'.

Thus, the party of the Hoi Polloi were given an opportunity to bluster and grandstand. But that party is shrinking and no-one with any intelligence believes that party has any relevance. (They're a bit like the lying Hillary Clinton, the Marxist Barak Obama and the nutty Bernie Sanders in the USA.)

The Hoi Polloi representatives had their time-wasting comedy.

So now we can go back to sleep, which anyone politically sophisticated, or with a modicum of intelligence, knew full-well would happen before the performance ever started.

Do you suppose Donald Trump the blow-hard will get the nomination? If that occurred, do you suppose Hillary the pathological liar would beat him, or will she get ten years jail?

Or will you be left with Sanders? He's the fellow who took his honeymoon in socialist Russia.

Our version, currently Opposition 'leader', took one of our more ludicrous, idiot party 'female' MPs (law-makers) around Socialist Russia on the back of his motor-bike - no marriage licence wanted.

The one before that was raised a Marxist by his daddy, just like Obama, but our one didn't get elected.!

So, no need to worry about Britain.

Introduction - socialism & sociology



the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/politics_uk_102015.php#rogue-contraversial-bluster-politicians-230116





advertising
disclaimer


advertising
disclaimer


advertising
disclaimer




france, russia, germany - the history they don't teach you

It is clear from Hillary Benn's summing up speech during the recent Syria debate in the UK, that he does not understand the overall political forces in Western Europe before WW2. Nor does he understand that Franco was fighting to stop an invasion of Spain by Stalin, and then by Hitler. Franco was a military dictator, but not a Fascist.

The following figures date from 1937:

State %age of national income
spent on defence
Defence expenditure
$000,000
British Empire 5.7 1,263
France 9.1 909
Germany 23.5 4,000
Italy 14.5 870
Japan 28.2 1,130
U.S.A. 1.5 992
U.S.S.R. 26.4 5,026

Source: Quincy Wright, A study of war, appendix 12, table 60, p.672;
extracted from The Labour Party and the world, vol. 1 by Rhiannon Vickers.

Further commentary at German bad faith between the wars - so few stood firm against the socialist dictatorships of Stalin and Hitler

The three socialist dictators, Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini, used the civil war in Spain [1936 to 1939] as a proxy war to test their military machines. Note that the U.S.S.R. (Russia) was outspending Germany by 5 to 4.

France was seeking alliance with the U.S.S.R., in preparation should Germany attack. France was a a country with a smaller and more backward (agricultural/peasant) economy than Germany. As well, France had ruined their economic situation by clinging to the gold standard, while most advanced countries abandoned it in the face of the Great Depression. Poland was trapped between the allied Socialist dictators. The only hope for France was Germany would recoil from another two-front war.

Paul Reynaud, French Prime Minister at the start of WW2 (21 March - 16 June 1940) and known as the French Churchill, commented:

"From 1924, I was haunted by the fear of Germany destroying Poland in order to shake hands with the Red Army over a corpse." [p.60, In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945]

and also,

"Do you want, in spite of the advice of very competent generals who went to study the tank regiments in Russia and found them outstanding, to judge the Russian army as worthless? It is said that the Soviet air force is most up to date and that it has proved its value in Spain. Do you want us to consider it valueless? [Spoken in 1938, p.61, ibid.]

In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945 is the only useful source of Reyaud's career I could find in English. It is a translation of Paul Reynaud's account of France, and Europe, before and during WW2, written contemporaneously.

Reyaud kept warning the French, as Churchill warned Britain. The French behaved as foolishly as did Britain, but France doesn't have a moat.

It is fascinating to see Hitler as viewed from France, instead of from England.

  • "He who wishes to buy the friendship of his enemy will never be very rich". Bismark
    This comment reminds me of responses to Pootin's behaviour.
  • Hitler won a court case banning Mein Kampf appearing in a French edition.
          "For Germans it is a sacred book. one does not correct the Koran."

  • "Money is filth." Hitler

  • "However unexpected it may seem, Macdonald appears to me to be very struck by Mussolini."
        Paul-Boncour, French foreign minister, 1933 (Macdonald was the then Labour PM in the UK).

  • "An economic system does not absorb credits, or at least, does not use them when it does not possess a margin of profit." Hitler

In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945 is a door-stop worth reading, both for its view of that period, and for information that is so often being rewritten out of history by the current left-wing media and politicians, eager to make sure the common man forgets the lessons of history.
An excellent book, worthy of Five GoldenYaks.

related material
socialist religions
Socialism and appeasement - so few stood firm against the socialist dictatorships of Stalin and Hitler
For Socialism and Peace - the Labour Party's Programme of Action

Introduction - socialism & sociology

In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945
by Paul Reynaud, translated by James D. Lambert
from Au coeur de la mêlée, 1951 five GoldenYak (tm) award

Cassell and Co. Ltd, hbk, 1955
684 pages

ASIN: B0000CJ8IQ
amazon.com / amazon.co.uk
shipping weight: 1.8 lb

In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945 by Paul Reynaud



the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/politics_uk_102015.php#france-russia-germany-061215

debate on stopping belligerent 'monsters'

Speech by Paul Reynaud, 27th December 1935

Context:
After several years of France asserting, with regard to the League of Nations, that all countries who want peace must stand together against National Socialist and Fascist warmongering, Britain was less inclined to being enmeshed in such treaties.

Mussolini decided to invade against Abyssinia. Britain decided to stand firm against Mussolini.
At just this point, France got cold feet.

Paul Reynaud was French Prime Minister at the start of WW2, and was known as the French Churchill.
The following is from his speech made to try to change opinion in France. Unfortunately France would not move.

"On the day Germany attacks Austria, she will say: 'But the Austrian people were coming to greet us with open arms.' On the day she attacks Czechoslovakia she will say:; 'There exists in Czechoslovakia a German and a Slav minority.' On the day she attacks Yugoslavia she will say: 'The Croats of Yugoslavia are bearing with difficulty the yoke of the Serbs.' On the day she attacks Roumania, she will say: There is a large Hungarian minority.' " [p.74, In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945]

And here, this speech is rewritten for today:

"On the day Pootin attacks Georgia, he will say: 'But the Georgian people were coming to greet us with open arms.' On the day he attacks the Ukraine he will say; 'There exists in Ukraine a Russian minority.' On the day he attacks the people of Syria he will say: 'Aassad wants us to protect him from the people.' On the day he attacks Crimea , he will say: 'There is a large Russian-speaking minority.' "

From Hitler's address to the commanders of the Wehrmacht on 22 August 1939, the so-called second speech:

"I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war, whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterwards whether he told the truth or not. When starting and waging war it is not right that matters, but victory."
"Close your hearts to pity. Act brutally. Eighty million people must obtain what is their right. Their existence must be made secure. The strongest man is right."

Introduction - socialism & sociology

In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945
by Paul Reynaud, translated by James D. Lambert
from Au coeur de la mêlée, 1951

Cassell and Co. Ltd, hbk, 1955
684 pages

ASIN: B0000CJ8IQ
amazon.com / amazon.co.uk
shipping weight: 1.8 lb

In the thick of the fight, 1930-1945 by Paul Reynaud



the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/politics_uk_102015.php#debating-war-021215

"the jesuits are trying to take over the world" - socialism is mental/social poison

What changes?

"The bourgeois families of France, like the middle classes today, wanted the best available education for their children irrespective of their own personal principles and prejudices. The Jesuits were unpopular, he said, but the [...] respectable folk of the [French] court and of the capital, did not care — it is enough for them to know that the Jesuits give a perfectly good education to youth in general." [Church and society in eighteenth-century France, vol.2, pp. 510-1]

In the mid-1700s, as they were trying to bring the Jesuit organisation down, the envious were going on about the Jesuits trying to take over the world. In due course, there came the French Revolution.

"The Jesuits, slaves of their general and obeying orders with military precision, were enlisted in a conspiracy to take over the Church and rule the world." [Church and society in eighteenth-century France, vol.2, p. 534]

related material
Marianne - a French national symbol photos
the calendar of the French Revolution

Introduction - socialism & sociology

Church and Society in Eighteenth-Century France

The Oxford history of the Christian Church
Church and society in eighteenth-century France: volume 2: The religion of the people and the politics of religion

by John Manners

Clarendon Press, hbk, 1998
880 pages

ISBN-10: 0198269633
ISBN-13: 978-0198269632

amazon.com
£257.50 [amazon.co.uk]

shipping wt: 1.5kg/3lb

Kindle edition

15,378 KB
Clarendon Press, 1998

ASIN: B005NE54GI

$36.72 [amazon.com]



the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/politics_uk_102015.php#socialists-eradicate-rivals-261015

verdun and afghanistan

By the end of the Battle of Verdun, 21 February to 18 December 1916, there were one thousand dead per square metre. Total fatalities could reasonably be' estimated at 182,000, both French and Germans.

"For many years after the armistice(sic) the great swathe, four hundred miles long, to or twenty miles wide, where the front had been lay desert, desolate."

Marker at abelard.org

The Afghanistan coalition operation started in 2001. since then, there have been 3,407 coalition deaths from all causes, of which there are several besides "as a result of hostile action". British forces have had 404 soldiers killed as a result of hostile action.

"In all, 404 of the fatalities are classed as killed "as a result of hostile action" and 49 are known to have died either as a result of illness, non-combat injuries or accidents, or have not yet officially been assigned a cause of death pending the outcome of an investigation."

related material


the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/politics_uk_102015.php#verdun-afghanistan-121015


You are here: politics uk news from October 2015 < News < Home

latest abstracts briefings information   hearing damage memory France zone

email abelard email abelard at abelard.org

© abelard, 2015, 12 october
all rights reserved

variable words
prints as increasing A4 pages (on my printer and set-up)