headerphoto


Was it Something I Said, Professor?




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Note: I did not videotape the below event, and my writing is based on my handwritten notes.


On Monday, I attended an event at UC Irvine sponsored by the UCI Center for Global Conflict Studies. The speakers were UC Irvine professor Mark LeVine and former Swedish ambassador Mathias Mossberg. Both of them have co-edited a new book that puts forth a rather bizarre proposal to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That is not a two-state solution, not a one-state solution, but a parallel state solution. ("One Land, Two States:Israel as Palestine as Two States").

The event was notable for two things: First, your humble correspondent made a serious factual error when I asked Ambassador Mossberg during the q and a about an article I understood he had written for a Swedish blog in which I quoted him (erroneously) as having condemned Israel over the recent Gaza fighting and denying that Hamas had used its people as human shields and had actually wished for civilian deaths as a strategy.  His response was that he had never written it, and as it turns out, he was correct. More about that later. The event was attended by Professor LeVine's students as well as several older attendees. Of course the book they had co-edited was available for purchase.

The presentation was supposed to be accompanied by a power point presentation, but it never came off since apparently neither LeVine or Mossberg knew how to operate the power point. An appeal was sent out to students in the audience to get it sorted out, but to make a long story short, the power point never happened.

At any rate, as Mossberg explained it, the basic points of the parallel states plan are that:

The state would respond to people as opposed to the state.

Free travel in the territories.

There would be two presidents, two parliaments, and everybody would have to cooperate.

There would be a joint external security force.

The different economies (Israel-West Bank-Gaza) would have to joined in an equitable manner.

There would also have to be legal harmony between the Palestinian and Israeli legal
systems.

Ambassador Mossberg stated that since the two sides don't trust each other, it would be difficult but not insurmountable. As for reactions to the plan, he added that some people had positive reactions while others said it "was the most stupid idea they had ever heard."

But let's be fair. Ambassador Mossberg was having to ad-lib a bit because the power point presentation had not materialized. This article in The Guardian outlines it a bit better.

As for LeVine, he severely criticized the Oslo Accords even calling them "corrupt" at one point. At one point he said, "Don't Palestinians have rights?" and stated that the Israeli government acts like they don't know what they (?) are talking about.

Also, at one point Ambassador Mossberg said that Europe was likely to get more involved in the conflict and that Europeans were shocked by what they had seem from the recent Gaza fighting.

When the q an a came I got the first question, and it went something like this. (It was addressed primarily to Ambassador Mossberg.)

"If either party were to accept this plan they would want to be confident that the authors of the plan were impartial. With all due respect, professor LeVine is an anti-Israeli activist...

At this point Mossberg expressed disagreement  and I added that LeVine would probably say that himself. LeVine then said that was not the case and that I had "disrespected" him. I was then allowed to continue with my question.

I continued with the article in question which came from a Swedish blog called Vänstra Stranden (Left Bank). I quoted the author (whom I erroneously thought to be Mossberg) as criticizing a previous article in Svenska Dagbladet by Israeli ambassador to Sweden Isac Bachman who had blamed Hamas for the recent Gaza war and charged that Hamas was using its own population as human shields and wishing for civilian deaths. The author of the Vänstra Stranden article had said there was no evidence that Hamas had used its people for human shields and absolutely none that they wished for civilian deaths. I countered those assertions by quoting reports from international journalists who had witnessed Hamas fighters firing from civilian sites and also a German film crew that filmed Hamas personnel forcing civilians back into buildings they were trying to evacuate after having been warned by Israel that an attack was coming.  After being told by LeVine to come to the question instead of making points, I asked why should the Israeli government accept a plan whose authors were biased. Ambassador Mossberg asked for a copy of the article, took a look at it, and passed it back to me saying that he had never written it.

When the event concluded, I approached LeVine and said that I had intended no disrespect. I started to explain that Ambassador Mossberg might want to look into this further, but I was cut off. At this point, with many of his students and other attendees still in the room, a visably angry LeVine began to shout at me. He told me that my writing was "sh--" and he was not embarrassed to say that it was "sh--" in front of the room. He also shouted that if I ever called him "anti-Israel" again, I was going to have a problem-that it was "slander". He finished by saying that I was not qualified to teach at this university and that he didn't want to talk to me-"Goodbye."



Temper, temper.


As I listened to all this, I told him that I was not going to engage in a heated shouting match since it was not the appropriate place. That was true. His own students were standing there, and as a teacher, I was not about to engage in this behavior in front of students.

So I went over to Ambassador Mossberg and told him that we should look further into this article, which I again showed him. This time he took the article which had his name above the text as if he were the author.  I said that if he didn't write it, I would apologize for bringing it up. He was very gracious, and we parted on good terms unlike the aforementioned Professor LeVine.

Later, I checked further into the blog and determined that misleading as the post was, it was not Mossberg who wrote the article. If you Google Vänstra Stranden and Mathias Mossberg, you come up with this posting with his name above the text. However, if you Google say, Isac Bachman (the Israeli ambassador to Sweden) and Vänstra Stranden, you get the same result-a page that appears as if Bachman wrote the same article. This is a misleading feature of the blog, but I have no excuses. I thought I had an article written by Mossberg, when in reality, it was written by the blog's editor, Marie Demker. It was my mistake, and I take full responsibility for not checking deeper.

As soon as I found the problem, I sent an explanatory e-mail to Ambassador Mossberg with the appropriate links and repeating my apology. Here is the text of that e-mail:

Dear Ambassador Mossberg, 
 
 
I am the one who brought up the question today at UCI about an article in 
Vanstra Stranden that bore your name. Upon returning to my office I did further 
checking into the blog in question and have confirmed that as you stated, you 
did not write the article. For that I repeat my apology for bringing it up. 
 
The reason your name is attached to the article is due to some feature in the 
blog which can lead to confusion. I originally found the article by Googling 
your name and came up with an entry from Vanstra Stranden. As you can see from 
the copy I gave you the page would indicate that you are the author of the 
article when it is actually Marie Demker the blogger herself. Your name appears 
also at the bottom in a footnote by Demker that caused the problem. 
 
http://vanstrastranden.wordpress.com/tag/mathias-mossberg/ 
 
For example, if you Google the name Isac Bachman, the Israeli ambassador to 
Stockholm, and Vanstra Stranden you will get the same page with his name at the 
top suggesting he is the author. 
 
http://vanstrastranden.wordpress.com/tag/isac-bachman/ 
 
 
I hope that clears up the confusion, and once again I apologize for the error. 
 
Best regards, 
 
Gary Fouse 



As for Professor LeVine, if I was in error in calling him "an anti-Israel activist", perhaps it was due to the time I saw him as part of the Whither the Levant  event at UC Irvine in 2009-a veritable one-sided Israel bash.

Or perhaps, it was the time he brought a representative of the Muslim Brotherhood, Ibrahim el Hudaiby to his class in 2008. I was there also.

Or how about this article from Campus Report Online and cross-posted by Campus Watch in 2006?

Or could it be articles like this written by LeVine for Al Jazeera?

Or how about that letter LeVine signed calling for an academic boycott of Israel? No anti-Israel activist there.

I could go on and on, but maybe I just got the wrong impression from all of the above (and much more).

But I will say this: There will be no apology to Professor LeVine. He embarrassed himself in front of his class with his meltdown, and I would hope that the next time he chooses to explode at me he will do it when no students are around. Then we can have a "real discussion."

And as for that Utopian idea of his for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, it strikes me as well, Utopian.

As long as LeVine keeps signing blatant, one-sided petitions supporting boycotts of Israel academic institutions and placing disproportionate blame on Israel for all the problems in the Middle East, his credibility and ideas are not likely to be taken seriously by people who are truly interested in finding a peaceful resolution to this long-standing conflict. He may think his spoken and written words do not make him an anti-Israel activist, but others would disagree.




Rudy Giuliani - An Inconvenient Truth


Source: Daily Mail


Tags: crime statistics To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

What are you listening to just now?

Blue Oyster Cult




Tags: Buck Dharma, Blue Oyster Cult To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

Joe Biden Buttering Up the Turks




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Memri and Janet Ellen Levy


Joe Biden, America's secret diplomatic weapon, is in Turkey this weekend trying to mend fences with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and praising Turkey for its humanitarian aid to Syrian and Iraqi refugees.

"That's a big f*****' deal."


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30155496

Well, that's all well and good, Mr Biden, but are you discussing US concerns with the rise of religious intolerance in Turkey?

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/8304.htm

"In addition to statements by government officials, the pro-AKP media regularly accuse Turkey's Jews of "treason,"[2] and other accusations are also levelled, including connecting Jews with the use of Ebola as a biological weapon in "global occupation" that "knows no borders"; in addition, a professor tweeted about sending Jews to Treblinka."

Is that being discussed. Mr Biden?

"At the same time that President Erdogan was denying, in his September 22, 2014 speech at the Council of Foreign Relations, that he or his government were in any way antisemitic, members of his party back home were tweeting praise for Hitler, and shops in Istanbul were displaying signs reading "No Admittance To Jewish Dogs."
On November 9, 2014, a sign reading "This Location To Be Demolished" was hung on the entrance to Istanbul's Neveh Shalom Synagogue; the synagogue has already been the target of two major terrorist attacks in which many congregants at prayer were killed and wounded."
Is that being discussed, Mr. Biden?
"Islamist columnist Ibrahim Tenekeci of the pro-AKP daily Yeni Safak wrote in a July 23, 2014 column titled "Of Men and Jews" (in which he refused to capitalize the term "Jew" except where he quotes another author):[3] "This title, reminiscent of John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, belongs to [Islamist author] Nurettin Topcu, not me. Topcu wrote three articles in 1967: 'The Islamic Cause and Judaism,' 'Money and the Jew,' and 'Of Men and Jews.' These articles define jews as the eternal curse of mankind. 'Those that attack to destroy the building of absolute truth,' 'those who reject all moral values,' 'the bloody and sinful hands,' 'the evil that replaces the good' – All these are the jews."
Are these statements by mr ibrahim tenekeci being discussed, Mr. Biden? (Forgive me if I don't capitalize mr. tenekeci's name.)
"Bilecik University Physics Department Head: "Treblinka Will Be Ready Soon; [We Are] Constructing The Railway To Transport Jews At The Moment"
Is that being discussed, Mr. Biden?
Mr. Biden, these are big f****' deals, too. It is time for the US to stop sucking up to Erdogan as he drags his country down the path of radical Islamism.






Taste





Tags: Taste, Rory Gallagher To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

Obama on Gruber







Tags: Obama, Stalin, lying politicians, Obamacare To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

Obama's Nancy Pelosi Moment in Brisbane




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Breitbart and Gateway Pundit



"Himmler? He was just some adviser who never worked on our staff."



As President Obama spoke before the press as part of the G-20 conference in Brisbane, Australia, the subject of Jonathan Gruber came up in a question. Obama tried to downplay Gruber's role in formulating Obamacare.

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/11/16/Obama-Just-Stepped-In-A-Pile-Of-Gruber

"...just some adviser who never worked on our staff."

Not only was this guy paid close to $400,000 for his services, but according to Gruber's  account on video, he was in the Oval Office with Obama when the problem of the so-called Cadillac Tax was "worked out".

Nancy Pelosi this past week claimed she didn't know who Gruber was even though she brought up his name, his analysis of Obamacare, and the fact that he was from MIT in 2009. That's all on tape as we now know. Now Obama tells reporters in Brisbane that Gruber was "just some adviser who never worked on our staff".



There is dignity in defying death

Revelation 21:4New American Standard Bible (NASB) 

and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away.”

Death is a part of life. There is no escaping this and it will come to all of us. How death is viewed in this country leaves much to be desired. At least for me it does. Every life is precious or is it? I find it deeply disturbing how casually life is thrown away. When we as a society so easily look the other direction and murder the most vulnerable, the unborn, the elderly, the disabled, we have lost some of our compassion for others and for life itself. PatriotUSA

 *******************

Commentary: There’s dignity in defying death

By Christine M. Flowers


The seamless vision of life, as the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin once noted, is the only way to ensure individual dignity. We are only as strong as the weakest links in our human chain, so the way we treat the young, the sick and the elderly is the truest bell weather of our evolution as a compassionate society.


Lately, though, that compassion has been lacking, and I suspect it’s due in no small part to our cavalier attitude toward unborn life. If you are capable of dehumanizing something at its most elemental level and packaging it as a wholly dependent appendage of a woman, it’s a short step from there to seeing older and ailing Americans as dependent appendages of society. Of course, we don’t put it in exactly those terms. No, we’re a lot smarter than that, which is how the terms “pro-choice” and “death with dignity” entered the popular lexicon. In “Through the Looking Glass,” Humpty Dumpty gives a fairly good summary of the nihilistic game plan so many of the pro-choice and pro-euthanasia people subscribe to: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”


So when the rights brigade start on about the “right to choose” and the “right to die” and the “right to be left alone,” they are asserting dominion over the language that they use to make their narrow and specific points. But those who oppose abortion are not generally allowed to call ourselves “pro-life” in the media, as I myself found out when I once put that term in a column and it miraculously morphed into “anti-abortion.” Humpty was apparently a social progressive.


To those of you who kept reading after you heard the word “abortion,” my thanks. And to reward you for your perseverance, I will now get to the point.


Recently, a young woman named Brittany Maynard took her own life. I would have said “killed herself” but that doesn’t fully express the motivation behind her act. Maynard was suffering from a terminal form of cancer, and decided that she didn’t want to put herself or her family through the final months of debilitating pain. I understand that, of course, and I have some empathy for her predicament given the fact that my father died a long and lingering death from lung cancer. It was a time of pain and horror.


What I don’t understand is the way that Maynard announced to the world, almost as if she were challenging us to evolve to some higher level of consciousness, that she would take ownership of her own presence on this earth and its significance. Maynard did not kill herself. She “took” back what she thought she owned, her life. This presupposes that her highest obligation was to herself, and that she was her own “keeper,” so to speak. That is a dangerous point of view, because it flows directly from the idea that we are all separate, unconnected islands in this vast ocean of humanity and are ultimately alone.


This is the same mentality that motivated Ezekiel Emmanuel to write his notorious essay in the Atlantic, expressing a hope that he would die by the age of 70 so as not to “burden” society. At least Emmanuel was considering the impact his life would have on others, albeit in a very negative way. He didn’t want to upset anyone, so he made a vow to bow out, stage left, when he became “troublesome” to his family and friends. I suspect that if he’d asked, those friends and family would have begged him to complete the contract he’d made with God and science and keep the machine operating until its natural end. I’m fairly certain that what he viewed as a potential burden was, for them, a gift. But that wouldn’t have advanced his almost Darwinian view of survival.


As someone whose brother took his own life for reasons that, to this day, we do not know, I am fully aware of the power of autonomy. Maynard said that she felt less fearful because she could choose the hour and moment of her death. And as someone whose father was in excruciating pain and yet raged against the dying of the light, at the end, I know how strong the survival instinct can be if we don’t extinguish it with rhetoric about “dignified deaths.”


This past week, folks in Philadelphia heard the story of a little boy who was beaten to death by his mother and her boyfriend, an act so vile that even those of us who’ve been jaded by daily violence had to take a step back in horror. While there is no direct connection between the evil in a criminal’s soul and the desire to escape a painful death, both acts exist on the same continuum which quantifies the value of a life by how much pleasure it gives us.


To me, true dignity lies in cherishing the life that we are given in custody, whether in our wombs or in ourselves. It exists even in the face of pain and regret for lost possibilities.


Dylan Thomas wrote “and death shall have no dominion.”


We, the defiant steel links in the human chain, can be proof of that.


— Christine M. Flowers is a lawyer and columnist for the Philadelphia Daily News.






Tags: Life, Abortion, Euthanasia, Margaret Sanger, Eugenics,  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

The Cameron Creature



“In making this speech I claim no religious authority whatsoever.” - David Cameron. [1]

“I'm not a scholar of any religion.” - David Cameron. [2]



Lee Rigby was a 25 year old drummer who served with the Second Fusiliers in the British Army in Cyprus, Germany and Afghanistan, where he was part of the Fire Support Group at Patrol Base Woqab. He was a young father and a lifelong supporter of Manchester United. On 22nd May 2013, he was murdered while walking along the street in London, the capital of Great Britain. [3]

Michael Adebolajo, one of the murderers, was caught red-handed by a passerby who filmed him on their mobile phone at the scene of the crime. Holding a dagger and a meat cleaver, Adebolajo stated clearly that he was following commands found in the Koran. He specifically cited surah at-taubah, the ninth surah of Islam's foundational text. [4]

Following the brutal murder of a British soldier by two devout Muslims carrying meat cleavers and daggers, Cameron stood in front of the TV cameras, adopted a very stern face indeed, and asserted that there were no Islamic doctrines that justified such savagery. Then he flew off to Ibiza for a few days in the sun with the wife. [5]

In recent months we have witnessed the rise of Al Qaeda in Iraq, which has been re-branded as the Islamic State. [6] The atrocities committed by the Islamic State are almost beyond comprehension. In the face of savagery that can only be compared to the Nazi actions carried out in Eastern Europe during WWII, David Cameron has said that although he knows nothing about Islamic doctrines and practices, he believes that Islam is a religion of peace, because he once met a woman from Birmingham who happened to be a Muslim, and he liked the cut of her jib. [7]

What Cameron has done here is make an I proposition; where the subject term is Muslims and the predicate term is peaceful people, Cameron's assertion is that Some S are P. That is the only proposition that his evidence supports. It can be shown using a Venn diagram (where x ≥ 1):


Cameron's I Proposition



In logical terms, Cameron's I proposition is quite different from the corresponding A proposition (All S are P), as we can see by looking at another Venn diagram (where the hash marks indicate that a category is empty):


The corresponding A proposition



Clearly the two propositions are different. It is important to understand that Cameron's evidence only supports the I proposition. And if an I proposition is true, it does not follow that the corresponding A proposition is true.

It is possible to see a marmalade cat walking along the street, and to say truthfully that at least one cat is a marmalade cat (Some S are P) but obviously, that is not the same thing as saying that all cats are marmalade cats, nor does it follow that all cats are marmalade cats (All S are P).

That is the logical error that Cameron wants you to make. However, the truth is that although some Muslims are peaceful, there are some who are violent, and there are some who may not be violent but who share the beliefs and goals of the Islamic State. [8] The new reality in Britain is that Muslims are being arrested every other day for planning to commit acts of terrorism. The political elite no longer mention the terrorist attacks of 7/7, but that did happen in our country. The wife of one of the terrorists who perpetrated that attack was wanted around the world after she entered her husband's line of work (until the Russians allegedly shot her dead.) And we all know that gangs of sexual predators have been raping thousands of young girls throughout England for years. Where the subject term is Muslims and the predicate term is peaceful people, it is obvious to anyone living in the real world that the O proposition (Some S are not P) is true.


The O proposition (where the subject term is not distributed)



Cameron tries to deny this by saying that the Muslims of the Islamic State are not real Muslims. [9] As any philosophy graduate will tell you, this is an blatant example of the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy, and as such, Cameron's statement can be ignored.

The reality is that where the subject term is Muslims and the predicate term is peaceful people, the I proposition (Some S are P) and the O proposition (Some S are not P) are subcontraries, therefore they can both be true. And reality shows that both propositions are true.

We need politicians who are able to accept that fact, and who are willing to do something about it. Before the Scottish referendum, the political elite sang the praises of the United Kingdom, and talked about how much traditional British values meant to them. The fact of the matter is, some thirteen years after the political elite secretly initiated a social engineering program in order to alter the social fabric of our country, the British public has sacrificed enough in the name of the radical multi-cultists' extreme Weltanschauung. It is high time we had politicians who did more than speak fine words about British values in order to keep their positions of power. We need new politicians who are willing to turn their backs on the European power machinery, who have the intellectual courage to take on and defeat the radical multi-cultists embedded within our society, and who understand that they have a duty to do what they are employed by us to do. We need politicians who will put our interests first.

Winston Churchill was a huge political figure, one of the finest writers Britain has ever produced, and if half the stories about him are true, he was able to hold his drink remarkably well. He stood against Nazi Germany when no one else did, and after he became Prime Minister, he inspired his countrymen and women to stand alongside him. Winston Churchill was a prince among men, and what's more, he was a Machiavellian prince who lived in the real world, and knew how to get his hands dirty. [10] In one of his books, The Gathering Storm, Churchill pointed the finger of blame at the British politicians whose 'delight in smooth-sounding platitudes' and 'refusal to face unpleasant facts' gave evil men the opportunity to unleash upon the world 'horrors and miseries which, even as far as they have unfolded, are already beyond comparison in human experience.' [11]

David Cameron is cut from the same cloth as the politicians who were condemned by Churchill for their failure to act in the best interests of the British state in the run-up to the war. There have always been evil men and women on this earth, and the times we live in now are no different in that regard. Cameron simply does not have it in him to deal with that reality.

What the members of the Westminster elite need to remember is that we have the power to terminate their political careers. There is a general election scheduled for May 2015, and if anyone needs to experience what it is like to be out of work, it is the man currently pretending to be a Prime Minister. Unfortunately, we are not going to be able to bring all of the men and women who have been trying to ruin our country to justice. Every single person who played a part in allowing those young girls in Rotherham to be raped by gangs of sexual predators in the name of multiculturalism, for example, should see the inside of a jail cell. What we can do is make sure that David Cameron is handed his P45 next year. On the second anniversary of Lee Rigby's murder, Cameron can head off for another holiday in Ibiza, only this time there will be no reason for him to come back.



References

1. Prime Minister's King James Bible Speech, Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street, 16th December 2011 (accessed 08/11/2014).

2. David Cameron's 2014 Eid al-Adha reception speech, Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street, 9th October 2014 (accessed 08/11/2014).

3. Drummer Lee Rigby killed in Woolwich incident, Ministry of Defence, 23d May 2013 (accessed 08/11/2014);
Weng, S. Drummer Lee Rigby, 25 [PHOTO]: Victim in Woolwich attack was loving father of two-year-old, Christian Today, 23d May 2013 (accessed 08/11/2013).

4. Aftermath Video of the Woolwich Butchers – FULL, youtube, 23d May 2013 (accessed 08/11/2014);
Grierson, J. Lee Rigby murder: Killer Michael Adebolajo handed witness a note attempting to justify actions, The Independent, 19th December 2013 (accessed 08/11/2014).

5. David Cameron: Woolwich attack 'sickened us all', youtube, 23d May 2013 (accessed 08/11/2014);
Morris, N. Murder of soldier in Woolwich was a 'betrayal of Islam' says Cameron as he insists Britain will stand resolute against terror, The Independent, 23d May 2013 (accessed 08/11/2014);
Samantha Cameron holidays with David and the family in Ibiza, Hello!, 27th May 2013 (accessed 08/11/2014).

6. Sekulow, Jay (2014-09-15). Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore (Kindle Locations 85-101). Howard Books. Kindle Edition.

7. David Cameron's Eid al-Adha reception speech, Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street, 9th October 2014 (accessed 09/11/2014).

8. Whitaker, B. Most Arab states share Isis’s ideology. They’re trying to have it both ways, The Guardian, 28th October 2014 (accessed 09/11/2014);
Raymond Ibrahim: Whitewashing Jihad, Shariah and Islam, youtube, 8th September 2011 (accessed 11/11/2014).

9. PM reaction to murder of aid worker David Haines, Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street, 14th September 2014 (accessed 11/11/2014).

10. Attack on Mers el-Kebir, Wikipedia (accessed 15/11/2014).

11. Churchill, W. The Gathering Storm, Mariner Books, p. 80.

A Public Apology-Pat Condell

A politically correct apology from Mr. Condell to the ESTABLISHMENT vermin that infest politics in England



Corruption across the EU "breathtaking" - EU Commission
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europ...

Dishonest MEPs arrive briefly to collect their allowance, then leave
http://dotsub.com/view/01ad2718-073c-...

The UK is well placed to have a bright and prosperous future outside the EU
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ec...

Britain’s net payments to the EU soar by a third in a year
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...

Farage vindicated. Chinese finance giant says UK doesn’t need the EU
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Lo...

Voting will not change Europe's power balance
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cef805e2-d1...

Auditors refuse to give EU accounts a clean bill of health for 19th year in a row
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...

Nigel Farage: This assault on the City shows you cannot reason with Europe
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ne...

Václav Klaus warns that the destruction of Europe's democracy may be in its final phase
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...

Brits are too ignorant to choose their European fate, says EU bureaucrat
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/20...

EU proposal to monitor "intolerant" citizens
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/403...

EU unveils crackdown on free speech
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/bruc...

Most Europeans regret joining the Euro (Survey)
http://www.businessinsider.com/most-e...

Spain's youth unemployment rate hits 57.7%
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/spains-youth...

"We make up the law as we go along" admits Britain's new Euro judge.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/dan...

Dishonest Euro fanatic Nick Clegg: "Read the small print"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tH7X...

Tags: Pat Condell, Cameron, Millibrand, Clegg, British establishment politicians and vermin. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!