Sometimes You Don’t Have To Wait Too Long For The Truth To Come Out

Over the weekend, I  read a couple of news stories about a petition to hold a second vote on Britain’s exit from the European Union (EU). I was somewhat concerned, because I understand that there are some globalists who will do pretty much anything to hold on to their power. I did see a comment on one story from someone who admitted that he had signed the petition illegally, so I wondered. Well, today I have my answer.

Yesterday Townhall posted a story about the petition to hold another Brexit vote. Evidently the person whose comment I read was not the only person who voted illegally.

The story reports:

LONDON, United Kingdom – Pro-European spammers have fooled the British establishment into believing a million people a day have signed a petition to hold a second referendum on Brexit. The petition demands the referendum rules are retrospectively changed forcing a second vote on Britain’s membership of the EU.

But doubts were raised about the authenticity of those signing after evidence that a code was being used emerged.

It shows how the petition website was tricked into registering millions of ‘signatures’ from people who do not exist.

Further questions were raised over the petition after analysis showed that just 353k of the nearly 3 million signatures were from the UK. A total of 3000 were reported to be from Vatican City, a country with a population of just 800.

Most UK national newspapers reported on the petition today, seemingly unaware of the fraud. Both the Sunday Telegraph and Mirror put the story on the frontpage.

The Independent has run multiple stories on the subject, at one stage crowing that the website kept crashing.

Let’s watch and see how long it takes for the British (and American) media to report this.

Coming To America?

The U.K. Daily Mail reported yesterday that under the new British welfare system, men with more than one wife will get extra benefits. My initial reaction to this is, “Are you nuts?”

The article reports:

Under the universal credit welfare system, which is not expected to be fully introduced until 2021, polygamous households will be rewarded with higher benefits, The Sunday Times reports. 

In the UK, it is illegal to marry more than one person.

Polygamous marriages, largely confined to Muslim families, are only recognised in Britain if they took place in countries where they are legal, such as Middle Eastern states, Pakistan and Zambia.

There no official figures but it is estimated that there may be as many as 20,000 polygamous marriages in the British Muslim community. 

Currently, a husband and his first wife are paid up to £114.85 a week. Subsequent spouses living under the same roof receive around £40 each. 

There is a basic premise in taxation and welfare systems–if you tax something, it decreases; if you offer a subsidy for something, it increases.

The article reminds us that in the United Kingdom, it is illegal to marry more than one person. However, polygamous marriages are recognized if they were legal in the country where they were performed. This is a further undercutting of one of the foundations of western civilization. If someone who is involved in a polygamous marriage decides to leave their home country, it should be understood that they would be better off going to another country that practices polygamy. Bringing polygamous families into western countries is simply not a good idea. In a similar vain, Muslims who feel justified by Islam to perform ‘honor killings’ should be told that should they not do that in a country that regards murder as a crime or they will be put in jail. There are many aspects of Islam that are simply not compatible with western civilization. It should be made clear to Muslims wanting to immigrate to western countries that they should be willing to adopt the customs of that country. If they are not willing to assimilate, they should be encouraged to go instead to a Muslim country.

Illogical Foreign Policy

The Kurds have been standing up to ISIS since ISIS decided to do horrible things in the Middle East. All of American aid to Iraq goes directly to the Iraqi troops who have, unfortunately, dropped their weapons and run away, giving ISIS access to some really good weapons technology. For whatever reason, the Obama Administration has consistently insisted that all weapons going to Iraq go through Baghdad to Iraqi troops and not directly to the Kurds (who obviously do not cut and run). Well, it’s even worse than that.

Yesterday the U.K. Telegraph reported that the Obama Administration is blocking the attempts of our Middle Eastern allies to send weapons directly to the Kurds.

The article reports:

Some of America’s closest allies say President Barack Obama and other Western leaders, including David Cameron, are failing to show strategic leadership over the world’s gravest security crisis for decades.

They now say they are willing to “go it alone” in supplying heavy weapons to the Kurds, even if means defying the Iraqi authorities and their American backers, who demand all weapons be channelled through Baghdad.

High level officials from Gulf and other states have told this newspaper that all attempts to persuade Mr Obama of the need to arm the Kurds directly as part of more vigorous plans to take on Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) have failed. The Senate voted down one attempt by supporters of the Kurdish cause last month.

The officials say they are looking at new ways to take the fight to Isil without seeking US approval.

I have very mixed emotions about this. First of all, the Gulf states should not need American approval to fight ISIS. They should automatically just do it. However, there is another side of this story. Fighting ISIS strengthens Iran. The only difference between the goals of ISIS and the goals of Iran is who will be in charge of the Islamic Caliphate they want to set up. ISIS and Iran both have plans for a worldwide caliphate which they plan to start in the Middle East. The dispute is over who will rule it and whether it will be Sunni or Shia. Both Iran and ISIS have plans to eliminate Israel, so supporting either one puts the Jewish state at risk. Note also that ISIL stands for “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.” The Levant includes the land of Israel as part of the Islamic state.

The article further reports:

The Peshmerga have been successfully fighting Isil, driving them back from the gates of Erbil and, with the support of Kurds from neighbouring Syria, re-establishing control over parts of Iraq’s north-west.

But they are doing so with a makeshift armoury. Millions of pounds-worth of weapons have been bought by a number of European countries to arm the Kurds, but American commanders, who are overseeing all military operations against Isil, are blocking the arms transfers.

One of the core complaints of the Kurds is that the Iraqi army has abandoned so many weapons in the face of Isil attack, the Peshmerga are fighting modern American weaponry with out-of-date Soviet equipment.

At least one Arab state is understood to be considering arming the Peshmerga directly, despite US opposition.

I think we need to get out of the way and let the Arab states arm the Peshmerga. In terms of the Middle East, lately we seem to have a gift for coming down on the wrong side of history.

Good News For Britain

David Cameron has won a resounding victory in the British election. Prime Minister Cameron has spoken out strongly against terrorism and has been a leading voice in enunciating the threat that radical Islam poses.

Yahoo News is reporting today on some of the Prime Minister’s other policies:

British Prime Minister David Cameron said he would press ahead with a planned referendum on the country’s membership of the European Union and he promised Scotland the most devolution “anywhere in the world” after his resounding election victory.

“Yes, we will deliver that in-out referendum on our future in Europe,” Cameron said as he addressed the media after visiting Queen Elizabeth to start the process of forming a new government.

Cameron said he would move ahead as fast as possible with a plan to give more powers to Scotland, which voted overwhelmingly for the pro-independence Scottish National Party.

Congratulations, Prime Minister Cameron. Best wishes for a successful term.

However You Feel About The Results, The Turnout Was Impressive

Yesterday, Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article about the rejection of separating from the United Kingdom by the voters of Scotland. In his article, Mr. Mirengoff refers to a previous article in which he listed his reasons for supporting Scottish independence. In that previous article, he points out that the majority of the people who represent Scotland in Parliament are Labor Party members. If Scotland were to leave the United Kingdom, the Labor Party would have a difficult time forming future governments in England.

Fox News reported on the referendum today. In an 85 percent voter turnout, Scots voted 55 percent to 45 to say with the United Kingdom.

Fox News reports:

Many saw it as a “heads versus hearts” campaign, with cautious older Scots concluding that independence would be too risky financially, while younger ones were enamored with the idea of building their own country.

The result saves Cameron from a historic defeat and also helps opposition chief Ed Miliband by keeping his many Labour Party lawmakers in Scotland in place. His party would have found it harder to win a national election in 2015 without that support from Scotland.

For his part, Cameron — aware that his Conservative Party is widely loathed in Scotland – had previously begged voters not to use a vote for independence as a way to bash his party.

The vote against independence keeps the U.K. from losing a substantial part of its territory and oil reserves and prevents it from having to find a new base for its nuclear arsenal, now housed in Scotland. It had also faced a possible loss of influence within international institutions including the 28-nation European Union and the United Nations.

The decision also means Britain can avoid a prolonged period of financial insecurity that had been predicted by some if Scotland broke away.

I am sure this issue will come up again in the future, but for now the United Kingdom is intact and has avoided the chaos and political turmoil that would have come with Scottish independence.

From A Friend On Facebook

Michael Yon, my favorite war correspondent, posted this:

A MESSAGE FROM THE QUEEN

To the citizens of the United States of America from Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

In light of your failure in recent years to nominate competent candidates for President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. (You should look up ‘revocation’ in the Oxford English Dictionary.)

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (except North Dakota, which she does not fancy).

Your new Prime Minister, David Cameron, will appoint a Governor for America without the need for further elections.

Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed.

To aid in the transition to a British Crown dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

———————–

1. The letter ‘U’ will be reinstated in words such as ‘colour,’ ‘favour,’ ‘labour’ and ‘neighbour.’ Likewise, you will learn to spell ‘doughnut’ without skipping half the letters, and the suffix ‘-ize’ will be replaced by the suffix ‘-ise.’ Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. (look up ‘vocabulary’).

————————

2. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as ”like’ and ‘you know’ is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as U.S. English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take into account the reinstated letter ‘u” and the elimination of ‘-ize.’

——————-

3. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.

—————–

4. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you’re not quite ready to be independent. Guns should only be used for shooting grouse. If you can’t sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist, then you’re not ready to shoot grouse.

———————-

5. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. Although a permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

———————-

6. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left side with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

——————–

7. The former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) of roughly $10/US gallon. Get used to it.

——————-

8. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.

——————-

9. The cold, tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. South African beer is also acceptable, as they are pound for pound the greatest sporting nation on earth and it can only be due to the beer. They are also part of the British Commonwealth – see what it did for them. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat’s Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.

———————

10. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie Macdowell attempt English dialect in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one’s ears removed with a cheese grater.

———————

11. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies).

———————

12. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable. You will learn cricket, and we will let you face the South Africans first to take the sting out of their deliveries.

——————–

13.. You must tell us who killed JFK. It’s been driving us mad.

—————–

14. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty’s Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).

—————

15. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 p.m. with proper cups, with saucers, and never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; plus strawberries (with cream) when in season.

God Save the Queen!


 

A message from Michael Yon: The author(s) of this hilarious message is unknown.  It has been attributed to John Cleese.  If Snopes is to be believed, this is untrue.  The message appears to have evolved from numerous authors over time.  It went viral on my Facebook with about 1 million viewers so far.  Please join my Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MichaelYonFanPage

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why Civil Unions Make More Sense Than Gay Marriage

The idea of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights is that these documents protect the rights of all Americans. Theoretically no person or group has more or less rights than any other person or group. However, some recent decisions by courts and lawmakers have put the idea of protecting the rights of all Americans in danger. Britain is learning a lesson that I fear America will soon be learning.

On Saturday, the International Business Times reported the story of Barrie and Tony Drewitt-Barlow.  In 1999, these two men were the first gay couple to be named as parents on a British birth certificate when they adopted a baby. The men entered a civil partnership in 2006. Now they are ready for the next step.

The article reports:

Now the pair, who entered a civil partnership in 2006, are planning to take another pivotal step forward for gay rights in the UK, after running out of options in their attempts to get married in church.

Barrie Drewitt-Barlow said: “I want to go into my church and marry my husband.

“The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the Church.”

Although the government lifted the ban on same-sex marriages in July, David Cameron promised Britain’s religious institutions they will not be forced to conduct gay weddings.

So why am I bringing this up? If a church believes what the Bible teaches about homosexuality, doesn’t the Pastor have the right to refuse to perform gay weddings based on his right to practice his religion? The only way to avoid this dilemma is to put marriage under the jurisdiction of civil law and let church weddings be a private church issue. If a church chooses to perform a gay wedding, they should be free to do so, but it is wrong to use the law to coerce a Pastor to do something that is against a fundamental belief.

Civil unions for everyone is one way to protect everyone’s rights on the issue of gay marriage. We need to protect the rights of Americans to practice their religion.

Enhanced by Zemanta

We Have Lost A Great Lady

The U.K. Mail is reporting today that Britain’s Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, died this morning. I am citing the U.K. Mail article because it includes a lot of pictures of Prime Minister Thatcher during her time as Prime Minister and after she left office. Lady Thatcher, along with President Reagan, stood up to the Soviet Union, and eventually the Soviet Union collapsed.

Lady Thatcher was Britain’s first and only woman prime minister. She won three consecutive general elections to that post. Please follow the link above to read the article in the U.K. Mail. It is an inspiring story of a lady who broke the mold when it came to British politics.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Making Friends All Over The World

On Friday the U. K. Mail posted an article entitled, “A Meddlesome Obama Should Keep His Nose Out Of Our Affairs.” Wow. How’s that for diplomacy? What is this about?

The article reports:

…Yet it was outrageous for a White House official to warn this week that our membership of the EU was ‘in the American interest’ and that pulling out would be a mistake.

State Department official Philip Gordon may hold a post that is the equivalent to a junior under-secretary in our Foreign Office but he is the authentic voice of the Obama administration.

His unwelcome interference in this country’s internal affairs comes at a most sensitive time, considering that David Cameron is soon due to make a major speech on the subject — and is expected to say whether we are to be offered the in/out referendum that the majority of voters want.

Ironically, those on the Left who normally revile America — for its interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, support of Israel and alleged mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — are happy to use the U.S. official’s remarks as a stick with which to beat Mr Cameron.

…As for Mr Gordon’s specific comments about the possibility of Britain holding a referendum on our future membership of the EU, he reveals America’s own myopia.

He said: ‘Referendums have often turned countries inwards.’

Such a remark is pretty rich coming from an American whose country is one of the most parochial societies in the world. What’s good for the U.S. should be good for Britain.

Mr Gordon and his Washington buddies must accept that we, too, should be able to decide what our national interest is — whether America likes it or not.

How to win friends and influence people…

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Interesting Perspective On National Healthcare

This morning while perusing the Wall Street Journal, I came across an article that caused me to pause for a moment. It had to do with Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the convicted Lockerbie bomber, who died in Libya on Sunday. Mr. al-Megrahi was released from jail in Scotland three years ago when doctors declared that he had only three months to live (he was suffering from prostate cancer).

The article reports:

Karol Sikora, a leading cancer specialist who examined Megrahi shortly before his release, explains that predicting how long a patient with end-stage prostate cancer has to live is a  “value judgment of probablility,” not an exact science. But Dr. Sikora also writes that his initial three-month prognosis was “based on his treatment as an NHS patient in Glasgow at the time, when not even standard docetaxel chemotherapy was offered.” by contrast, “Mr. Megrahi almost certainly had excellent care in Tripoli.”

The article further points out that “standard docetaxel chemotherapy”  did become available to some Scottish patients in certain circumstances in 2006, but was not available to Megrahi. When Megrahi arrived in Libya, he received advanced chemotherapy as well as abiraterone, a drug approved by U. S. regulators in 2011.  The treatment he received in Libya is still largely unavailable through the British medical system, although next year abiraterone will be available to the English and Welsh (but not in Scotland due to the price).

The article concludes:

Prime Minister David Cameron has often said that Megrahi should never have been released, and that’s right. But perhaps the Libyan’s longevity should spark a different line of questioning: whether the most compassionate aspect of his release was freeing him from government health care–and whether nonterrorists deserve similar succor.

Something to think about as the Supreme Court debates Obamacare…

Enhanced by Zemanta