Sunday, February 04, 2007

Liam Fox: idiot fuck-dwarf

Iain Dale points out that Liam Fox is on the "parties other than the Conservative Party houldn't exist and the whole thing's really unfair bandwagon" on GMTV.
I think people who are wanting to vote UKIP, and many
Conservatives would sympathise with their general view in terms of European policy, they have to recognise that the person who would be happiest is people went out and voted UKIP would be the leader of the Labour Party. There’s only one party that’s going to take Britain in the direction that those who vote UKIP would like to see, that is standing up more for Britain’s interests, making sure that the decision that effect the British people are made here in the UK. That’s the Conservative Party.

That’s the simple choice that people who have voted UKIP will have to face if they continue to vote UKIP rather than Conservative they will increase the chance of getting an integrationist Labour government. That’s their choice...All parties have to be very aware of the availability of other choices to voters. We need to make the case that they also have to understand the consequences of their actions.

Liam Fox is a fuckwit of the very first water; how can he possibly say anything about the EU when he quite obviously doesn't understand the organisation even as it pertains to his own brief?
Liam Fox writes in The Telegraph today, telling us, "Britain will never join an EU army".

What he does not seem to understand is that this current government has already committed the UK to joining it. In that sense, we already have joined an EU army. Fox is way behind the curve.

Furthermore, the defence establishment is already working to fulfilling that commitment in the name of the the European Security Strategy [PDF], which was agreed in its current form in December 2003.

It was then that Member States (including the UK) decided to set themselves a new headline goal reflecting the evolution of the strategic environment and technology. In May 2004, EU defence ministers (including the UK defence minister) adopted the Headline Goal 2010 (HG 2010), which was later endorsed by the European Council held in Brussels on June 2004.

Unfortunately, Liam Fox simply doesn't seem to understand that some of us are actually informed about the issues; in fact, either we are more informed than him, or he is deliberately and knowingly lying to us. It's the old Polly Conundrum again: is he an ignorant fool or a perficious liar?
What Fox and the rest of his fellow Tory travellers must get their brains around is that a lot of us are better informed than they give us credit for – and we no longer have to rely exclusively on politicians to tell us what is happening. We have this thing called the internet. They may even have heard of it themselves.

Thus, before Dr Fox even begins to convince us that, as part of a Tory government he would arrest the progress of European defence integration, he must convince us that he understands what is going on. To succeed in that, he needs to do more than write patronising, superficial little pieces in The Torygraph.

Mind you, it is hardly surprising that Liam "Patronising Short-Arse" Fox should take this line: he is, after all, only listening to the sound of His Master's Voice.
Although the Sunday Telegraph is trying to spin it in a way that makes it sound as if the Boy King has taken a firm line of the EU constitution - and thus lay claim to Eurosceptic credentials - he also writes his own opinion piece.

There, the Boy writes: "With reform, Europe can be a force for good." He actually means the European Union, so the man is either being deliberately obtuse, or is genuinely stupid, in not making the difference clear.
...

Those of us who care about Europe's future, he says, "must make the EU confront its endemic flaws." And to do that, he has the "European Reform Commission". It will do just that…
In March we hold our inaugural conference in Brussels, where some of the EU's leading politicians will listen to, and learn from, a range of public policy experts. Together we will set out an agenda for European reform, and explore practical reform proposals.

The conference will also launch a comprehensive and detailed review of the EU's policies, priorities, institutional capabilities and budget based on the Movement for European Reform's three commitments: open markets, a Europe of nation states and a strong Atlantic relationship.

The European Reform Commission will publish its recommendations in 2008, and it will be open to all those individuals, organisations, businesses and political parties in Europe who share our determination to make the EU work better.

Please, please, please tell me that he doesn't believe this guff … that it is just a wind-up. Please tell me that he knows about Intergovernmental Conferences … that he knows about the need for unanimity to achieve treaty changes … that he knows that all he suggests would require treaty changes …

But the sad truth is that he probably doesn't. Like so many dismal Tory fantasists before him, he is locked in never-never land where he thinks that all he has to do is toddle off to Brussels and say "pretty please" - and the "colleagues" will immediately roll over and give him everything he wants. So, in that never-never land, he trots out the same mindless Europhile drivel that his predecessors have done for so many decades.

This is the man who, as prime minister, would represent us in "Europe". If he believes that drivel, he is a dangerous cretin, and unfit for office. He doesn't believe it, then he should not be saying it. That makes him unfit for office. Either way, then, he is unfit for office.

Precisely; it is the Polly Conundrum yet again; how often it comes up in relation to the EU, eh? So, let's hear it, chaps: is Cameron an ignorant fool or a perfidious liar?

And, seriously, you want to vote for this cunt?

Does anyone still seriously think that anything is going to change once the New Blues get into power? Cameron keeps telling us that, if you vote for anyone other than him, then you will get NuLabour again; does anyone remember NuLabour's "vote LibDems, get the Tories by the back door strategy"? Even Cammy-Baby's election strategy is the same as NuLabour's. And seriously, what is the difference between the two main parties, eh? There actually isn't any fucking difference at all, as far as I can see.

And that's why Cameron and Fox can go fuck themselves. If they know that they are lying about the EU, then I don't want those bastards in office. If they aren't lying and are just pig-fucking-ignorant, then in what way, precisely, are the Tories any more competent than UKIP are perceived to be?

Let me spell this out: the Tories are not Eurosceptic. The EU is the single biggest issue in British politics today: controlling some 80% of our legislation.

If you don't like it, then don't vote for the party who have often laid claim to the Eurosceptic label, whilst
  1. taking us into the EEC in the first place, and lying about its true nature,

  2. pushing the Maastricht Treaty through Parliament (with a three-line whip) whilst both disguising its true nature and refusing to have a referendum on the issue,

  3. consistantly demonstrating that they either know nothing about the EU or shamelessly and deliberately lying about its nature,

  4. refusing to hold a referendum on our membership of the EU or the single currency.

A vote for the Tories (or Labour or the libDems) is a vote for rule by an unelected, foreign bureaucracy.

It really is that simple.

2 comments:

Prodicus said...

He may be ignorant (just a sec - the face of Blears just filled my TV screen - argh) or he may think we are, but he still has a point about the voting arithmetic. Until UKIP gets its act together (omigod there's bloody Blears again - it's a re-run of an old HIGNFY ... SOMEONE SHUT THAT WOMAN UP!) I don't want my vote giving Mugger Broon the keys to No 10. A real problem.

Colin said...

"He doesn't believe it, then he should not be saying it. That makes him unfit for office."

I beg do differ. If he doesn't believe it and doesn't say it, he would be a deceiver. That makes him fit for a political office because this appears to be the modus operandi of politicians.

Or is there anybody who believes that politicians always tell the truth?