Mick Greenhough

Mick Greenhough has 5 articles published.

How the Cabinet Office got the Lisbon Treaty through Parliament without MPs seeing it

in Brexit by

The Lisbon Treaty transferred nearly all of our remaining sovereignty to the unelected and undemocratic EU. So how on earth did our MPs vote it through?

The Lisbon Treaty was originally the EU Constitution. This was comprehensively rejected by the French and Dutch. To get around this Giscard d’Estaing , the ex French premier, had the constitution deliberately re-written in such a way that it was almost impossible for anyone but a constitutional expert to understand. Several critical passages were removed and hidden in other Treaties. The label on the tin was different but the contents the same.

Gordon Brown said after he had ratified it ‘I have ensured a number of red lines to secure Britain’s future’. Sounds good but he omitted to add that the red lines would be there for no more than 5 years. Was this lying? Was he deceitful to such an extent that it was no different to lying?

So how was the Lisbon Treaty ratified by our parliament?

The Lisbon Treaty was signed by Gordon Brown in October 2007 without first having the Referendum as promised in the Labour Party Manifesto.*

The unamended Treaty of Lisbon was deposited in the Commons on December 17th 2007. Most of the MPs had gone home for Christmas by then as parliament recessed the next day. How many knew it was there let alone read it? For the disastrous consequences for British democracy and sovereignty see “2014 – 028 The facts about the Lisbon Treaty”.

Parliament returned on Jan 7th 2008. One of their first votes was to ratify the Lisbon Treaty previously signed by Gordon Brown. Although the government had the amended Treaty (by now 3000 + pages) for some time it was not deposited in the Commons Reading Room until 11.45am on the morning that MPs had to vote to ratify it (21 Jan 2008).  Again how many knew the amended Treaty was there and would it have mattered? It was quite impossible for an MP to read 3000+ pages – with numerous sections having then been transferred to, and scattered among, numerous other Treaties and documents – and get an understanding of what it was all about before the vote.

Our elected MPs signed away British sovereignty and democracy with only a very small handful of them understanding just how sinister the Lisbon Treaty is. They were dismissed as hysterical scaremongers but have been proved right. The few who attended the session clearly did not pay attention. The majority did not have even the foggiest clue of what on earth they were voting for. They just did as the whips told them. This was an appalling betrayal of their duty as MPs, the British Constitution and the people of this country. They were the same MPs who fleeced the country with their expenses scandal.** It would seem that too many MPs have been involved in paedophilia either directly or complicit in covering it up.

What is very worrying is that this ploy was probably not concocted by the MPs. It must have been done by some very senior unelected and faceless bureaucrats. The finger of suspicion points directly to the Cabinet Office. This, which I believe is deliberate deceit, must surely call into question the validity of the vote and the legal status of the UK’s passing of the Lisbon Treaty.

Mick Greenhough’s Source: Info from Nigel Spearing – 26 years Labour MP for Newham, 18 years member of House of Commons Select Committee on the EU and 8 years chairman of that committee. Although no longer an MP his seniority allowed him an open pass in the House of Commons enabling him to ferret out this information.

*   Why did Gordon Brown ignore his manifesto promise to have a Referendum on the UK membership of the EU? Was it just another of their many empty promises?***

** There were some MPs who did not fiddle their expenses but who knew what was going on and kept silent. As such they are also complicit.

*** Tony Blair and Gordon Brown reneged on this promise but so has David Cameron reneged on his ‘Cast Iron’ promise. Their feeble excuse was that the EU Constitution has been renamed the ‘Lisbon Treaty’ and although the contents of the tin was the exactly same it was, somehow, totally different.

However, a court case challenged the decision by Gordon Brown not to have the Labour Party manifesto promise of a referendum, along with the formal statement by Tony Blair that the Labour Party manifesto was a Contract with the People.But Gordon Brown’s barrister Ms. Cecelia Ivimy said on behalf of her client:“They (NuLabour manifesto promises and contracts) are not subject to legitimate expectation”. 2013 – 020 The value of party manifestos

Even more astonishing is that the Brighton County Court judge accepted this defence. His judgement was: ‘The public should not expect promises or contracts made in NuLabour Party manifestos to be kept’. A case of lies, damn lies and NuLabour manifesto promises perhaps? From now on any promise in a NuLabour manifesto will be pointless as they can quite legally ignore all promises and contracts made in that manifesto if they regain power. (ref. 2008-15). Presumably that also applies to the Cameron Tories.

The ‘Treaty’ is the Constitution – with a different name. As previously noted: ‘the label on the tin may be different, but the contents are identical’ (see chapter 15 for Mandelson’s statement on referenda and ref. 2006-54).

And it should be remembered that the most insidious part of the Lisbon Treaty is that it’s ‘self-amending (see chapt. 13 & 17). That allows the unelected European Commission to alter anything in it they wish without involving any of the elected politicians.

It was not the first time. The MPs were allowed to see the 1972 European Communities Act but not allowed to read it until after they had voted for it.

EU Commissioners’ Oath & Privy Oath

in Anglophobia / Marxism/Brexit by

Lord Tebbit asked Her Majesty’s Government why they have been unable to inform members of the public who have enquired the reason for the repeal of the Treason Act 1795 during the passage of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon, “My Lords, I suppose that this could not possibly have anything to do with the fact that the European Union Commissioners affirm an Oath of Allegiance to the European Union. If they do so, they swear allegiance to somebody other than Her Majesty the Queen, which I understand in itself would be treasonable”.

Is it appropriate for a former EU Commissioner to sit in the Cabinet having sworn, when he became a Commissioner, not to allow questions of national allegiance to affect him? Having sworn a Privy Council Oath, or oath as a European Commissioner to be unmoved by national considerations? ……the most damning of which being the continual support of the EU and the electorate’s misinformation by government and Parliament alike, regarding our continuing membership of the EU.

You have consistently chosen to evade and dismiss the following:
“I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm. So help me God.”– Bill of Rights 1689 which is directly linked to the monarch’s Coronation Oath.

Note to Mr Mandelson. How is it possible to acknowledge the solemn swearing of this oath while, at the very same time, breaking it?
EU Commissioners’ Oath
“I solemnly undertake:
*to respect the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the fulfilment of my duties;
*to be completely independent in carrying out my responsibilities, in the general interest of the Union;
*in the performance of my tasks neither to seek nor to take instructions from any Government or from any other institution. body, office or entity;
*to refrain from any action incompatible with my duties or the performance of my tasks.
“I formally note the undertaking of each Member State to respect this principle and not to seek to influence Members of the ‘Commission in the performance of their tasks’
I further undertake to respect, both during and after my term of office, the obligations arising therefrom, and in particular to duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance, after I have ceased to hold office, of certain appointments or benefits.”

Now you know why our House of Lords is stuffed with EU pension supporters and why they continue to support the EU regardless of country of origin

If we go down the road of ‘treason’, then please be reminded that the Wilson Labour government did, in 1970, pave the way for the UK to join the EU by repealing the most part of Magna Carta which, for nearly 800 years, stood as our constitution. The very act of repealing Magna Carta, apart from being an act of treason, nullified any and all matters of legislation from the date onward. The constitutional ramifications include the annulment of every treaty with the EU, every trade agreement, every piece of legislation by the government and every high court, county court, magistrates court decision. In effect this country has had no legitimate government since 1970.

Whatever has happened to our police?

in Anglophobia / Marxism by

Whatever has happened to our police? Why are they so heavy on citizens and soft on criminals?

We no longer have a police force – I believe we have a Politically Correct Police Service dominated by alumni of the Marxist Common Purpose.

In my village we had a policeman in a police house as did the next parish. He knew everyone and who the problem locals were. His children went to our village school. He also was an active participant in the village life. He was a good, honest copper. Of prime importance, he was free to use his ‘common sense’ and expected to do so by his superiors when carrying out his police duties. The urban areas also had ‘beat’ policeman who knew their patch. The police house was then sold and the policeman removed to car duty. This meant that the close personal contact between the policeman and the villagers was broken. The political and police authorities were clearly starting to isolate the police from the public.

They were also dazzled by American methods with officers roaring around in fast cars with ‘blues and twos’ as they erroneously think that such behaviour means that the public will believe they are, therefore, being very active. The BBC closed down the local friendly copper Dixon of Dock Green programme to replace it with Z Cars to big up police in cars. Coincidence?

Sir Robert Peel set up the police to be a ‘shield between the government and the people’. The police were responsible to the citizens not the state. There have been attempts to remove the oath of allegiance to the Queen, although none have been successful.

The aim is to discredit our police so as to get the public to easily accept their replacement with Europol (the EU police force see 2013 – 008) and also replace English Common Law with EU Corpus Juris. Under CJ you can be arrested without evidence and held in custody without charge for an indefinite period and you have to prove your innocence. This is directly opposite to English Common Law where you are innocent until proven guilty. I believe it is the intention of the EU to completely destroy the British police and replace them with Europol and the Eurogendarmerie.

One of the worst things to happen to our police was the mad Macpherson Report that accused the police of ‘institutional racism’. The police probably no more have a racism problem than the rest of society supposedly does. The consequence of that is they are now terrified to apply the law to ‘ethnic minorities’. Certain persons and their solicitors know that and exploit it to the full. It was the influence of the Frankfurt School of thought on that declaration by Macpherson. It is the direct cause of our police allowing the systematic rape of hundreds of little white girls by Muslim men for fear of being called ‘racist’. It is a charter for criminals and their complicit lawyers.

At one time a senior policeman started as a constable progressing up after a few years via a period as desk sergeant to more senior positions. They then began recruiting ‘politically correct’ university graduates to be inserted into the career structure with accelerated and preferential promotion – many of them alumni of what I assert is the Marxist training college Common Purpose, heavily influenced by The Frankfurt School. We now have a police force where many of the senior police have had minimal experience of policing ‘on the streets’ or dealing directly with the public. Common Purpose alumni preferred. (2013 – 004). There is no formal policy statement for this but there are still very many ’good coppers’ who are fully aware that this is happening. The truth and a definite answer for this is difficult as the police constantly circumvent the Freedom of Information Act. Is it in the interests of London that the head of the Met is a Common Purpose alumnus?

It seems to be becoming practice of the police to ‘lose’ or even shred files of investigations into the crimes of the political elite and their chums to prevent later prosecution.  Examples here and here.

To be fair to the ‘good coppers’ they are given politically motivated targets that are not in the best interests of the citizens. However there are many who no longer consider they have a duty to the citizenry but to their political masters and themselves.

A major problem for ‘good policing’ is that of ‘targets’ as the police have to achieve these regardless of justice as these targets are often politically motivated. This may be by ‘booking’ motorists for marginal transgressions or not recording crime.  The senior officers have their potential for promotion increased by ‘reducing’ crime in their area. This is often achieved by ‘leaning’ on the desk sergeants not to record crime. A street robbery of a mobile phone may be recorded as ‘lost property’ or in the extreme case of Rotherham – there, 1400 little girls were systematically raped by a network of Pakistani men over many years, the police chose to ignore their pleas for help. There was a significant Common Purpose influence there, however. The head of Child Services was Joyce Thacker – a Common Purpose alumnus.

I believe the banning of gun ownership by citizens, but not worrying about gun criminals, is to prevent the possibility of an armed citizens’ uprising.

There is a very good book written by Peter Hitchens that gives the background to the collapse of law and order in the UK – “The Abolition of Liberty.”

The Frankfurt School ethos (2012 – 025) has infiltrated our police and legal system where the Human Rights of the criminal are equal to or greater than those of the victim. Also I believe the victim is considered to be as equally guilty as the criminal, eg a householder catches a young hooligan kicking down his garden fence and marches him to the police station. The response of the police now is to caution the hooligan, release him (the courts will not adequately deal with him and there is virtually no chance of getting any money from him) and put the householder in prison for up to 12 hours without charge for a possible charge of assault on the hooligan. That should teach him a lesson not to bother the police with problems that adversely affect achieving their targets.

The police now concentrate far more on petty motoring offences that raise revenue and tend to give housebreaking, public disorder, street and domestic violence a low priority target. Policing is becoming far more about meeting targets and raising money, rather than pursuing crimes that require time and effort but with no financial income. There are proposals to allow the police to retain the money from fines. The pressure for the police to generate income from ‘crimes’ that do not go to court or with creative arrests will be enormous. You get what you vote for and if you do not vote do not complain.

The new Police Commissioners are very much an unknown quantity. The cost of standing for election is prohibitive for all but political appointees. It is part of the move to separate the police from the public. The £5000 fee to stand and to contact just 100,000 voters with a couple of A5 leaflet and postage about yourself as an Independent candidate could be as much as £50,000. No other information is provided directly to the voters. An Independent candidate’s only hope of getting elected is if he is very wealthy indeed and there is a very small turnout to vote. Now they have been ‘in office’ for a few years, some 50% are under suspicion for malpractice and fraud. I strongly suspect that there is a hidden agenda to prepare our police for political control by Europol thus making them true agents of the state.

There is also PACE, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984. This seems to have been produced by someone who has never done any actual policing. It has tied the hands of honest policemen and given the distinct advantage to petty criminals. So much so that the police try not to arrest them as they take up so much time to process. There is no box to tick and the police authorities do not want them added to their local crime statistics.

One of the most unsavoury actions is to allow ‘bent coppers’ caught out indulging in severe corruption to take early retirement with their full pension instead of being prosecuted. In the short term this may protect the image of the police. In the long term this leaks out into the public domain. It also encourages other policemen to be corrupt as there are no serious sanctions.

Today they are planning to insert foreigners and those with no policing background into the higher echelons of the police.  A former director of a supermarket is now to be a suitable senior decision-making policeman. It looks very like further preparing the British police and public to accept the Corpus Juris EU police to run our police on EU principles and to bypass Habeas Corpus and Magna Carta.

Time will tell.

The Great Climate and Global Warming Fraud invented by the Club of Rome

in World News by

Copies of this have been sent to several Warmists including George Monbiot at the Guardian and Dr Brian Cox at the BBC asking that if they see any inaccuracies they inform me. To date I have had not a single adverse comment. We can, therefore, assume they agree with the following and they owe me a tenner.

The Global Warming debate can be very academic and riddled with mis-understandings, half truths and downright lies. This blog is shortened and written in non technical language for easier reading. For thoroughly researched account that gives the whole disgraceful story see The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science by Dr Tim Ball.

The output of the UN and IPCC are classic examples of Lysenkoic Science.

Global warming is indeed man-made – by cod scientists and fraudsters at government agencies who tamper with data.

Dr. Patrick Moore, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace, whom they have tried to erase from their website, resigned from the organization because:
Dr. Patrick Moore was right: @Greenpeace IS full of sh*t | Watts Up With That?
I’ve never had a headline like this, but Greenpeace deserves it for their mind-bending defence in a defamation lawsuit: basically their defense is “we publish hyperbole, therefore it isn’t actionable because it isn’t factual”. Give me a break!

The organisation I co-founded has become a monster. When I was a member of its central committee in the early days, we campaigned – usually with success – on genuine environmental issues such as atmospheric nuclear tests, whaling and seal-clubbing.

When Greenpeace turned anti-science by campaigning against chlorine (imagine the sheer stupidity of campaigning against one of the elements in the periodic table), I decided that it had lost its purpose and that, having achieved its original objectives, had turned to extremism to try to justify its continued existence.Now Greenpeace has knowingly made itself the sworn enemy of all life on Earth. By opposing capitalism, it stands against the one system of economics that has been most successful in regulating and restoring the environment.

See also 2015 – 134 Carbon Dioxide in a Nutshell There is within the Green Movement a desire to reduce atmospheric CO2 to zero which will kill all plant life.

See also

Also type CO2 into search box to see why we need more CO2 not less.

The day Al Gore was born there were 7000 polar bears on Earth. Today, only 26,000 remain.

Al Gore funded by Soros

What’s This All About Then? Global Warming is an invention of the Club of Rome (see 2014 – 002. see also 2014 – 059 & 2014 – 017 From the Somerset Levels to the EU to the UN to the Club of Rome.) aided and abetted by the EU and the United Nations Wildlands project 2014 – 021 The Wildlands Project Unleashes its War on Mankind and Agenda 21

Who are the Club of Rome?

Here’s a practical way to understand the CO2 problem.

How much CO2 is created by human activity? Imagine 1000 metres (1 km or well over 1/2 mile) of atmosphere laid out in a line on the ground. with all the gases separated out. ( I know the gas laws will not let it happen but just imagine they do)

Let’s go for a walk along it.

The first 770 metres is Nitrogen.

The next 210 metres is Oxygen.

That’s 980 metres of the 1000 metres.

20 metres (66 feet) to go.

The next 10 metres are water vapour. 1

0 metres (33 feet) left.

9 metres  is argon.

Just 1 more metre (3 feet).

A few other gases, ozone, neon etc,  make up 620mm of that last metre.

The last 380mm is carbon dioxide.

96% of that is produced by Mother Nature. (fermentation, bush fires and volcanoes, much of it underwater). The recent Icelandic Volcano negated all the UK efforts made by us to reduce CO2.

Of our journey of 1000 metres just 15 millimetres are left – about half  an inch. That’s the amount of carbon dioxide human activity puts into  the air. Of those 15 millimetres the UK contributes about 4% or 0.6mm  of the 15 milimetres. The thickness of a credit card, or another 10 people in the 90 000 crowd at a Rugby match at Twickenham

What is the effect of higher CO2 levels in the air?

At the start of the Carboniferous Era – some 350 million years ago – the CO2 in the air was about 12 times more than now (4200mm of the 1km). Despite this ‘dangerously’ high level of CO2 the world did not boil over. Instead there was an almost explosive growth of vast forests. For 50 million years the trees steadily grew and fell down to be covered up, crushed and eventually transformed into the extensive coal seams around the world. Vast quantities were absorbed into marine organisms to form chalk and limestone rock. The fungi that rots dead wood had not evolved then so the trees lay as wood. By the end of this era – some 300 million years ago – the CO2 level was about the same as now.

So where did all the CO2 come from and go?

Controlled burns of forest land and agricultural stubble are an additional anthropogenic contribution. Probably wildfires started by arsonists should be considered anthropogenic sources of CO2 also! Maybe we should also consider the CO2 resulting from smoking tobacco and marijuana for a thorough accounting!

Burning biomass merely accelerates the CO2 release. Burning a forest releases CO2 immediately rather than waiting for the trees to rot naturally. So the only differentiator between anthropogenic and natural is a few years. Then the regenerating forest sequesters CO2 for another cycle.

The trees in the almost limitless forests that flourished then had absorbed it to become stored underground in coal. Even more was deposited as chalk and limestone. How come?

Well let’s look at wheat. To grow wheat five conditions are required:

  • A grain of wheat,
  • Fertile soil,
  • Rain water,
  • Sunshine,
  • and Carbon Dioxide

The DNA in the grain of wheat contains the instructions for the energy from the sunshine to combine the rainwater and CO2 by photosynthesise into carbohydrate as new ears of corn plus oxygen gas released into the atmosphere, i.e. more wheat.  A similar process occurs in trees to make more wood

  • Any increase of the CO2 level in the atmosphere will increase the yield of wheat per acre.
  • As a rough example the CO2 from one ton of jet engine exhaust could become an extra 1,500 loaves of bread.
  • Reducing the CO2 level will give a lower yield of food per acre. Halve the CO2 level that we have now and it is estimated to just about extinguish most of the life on earth.

As more information leaks out it has now become known that the warming effect of CO2 only was considered. All other gasses were ignored.

The Hockey Stick Curve

We now come to Dr Michael Mann’s infamous Hockey Stick Curve. These Lysenkoist claims that CO2 levels have increased to dangerous levels since 1750 causing Global Warming. Mann’s paper was based on tree ring growth and a set of data and codes that he has refused to make public. His paper was published in Nature – one of the most respected scientific journals. Such journals always require that all data related to a paper must be put into the public domain to enable other scientists to repeat the claims to confirm them. Nature published it anyway – a very strange and unique decision by the editor that has seriously damaged its reputation. The Hockey Stick Curve requires the removal from the historical record of the Medieval Warm period and the Little Ice Age in 1700s when the Great Frost of 1683–84, the Thames was frozen for two months, with the ice 11 inches (28 cm) thick.

The pro-EU Remainers are particularly keen on UK staying in the Single Market. Why?

in Brexit by
There are continuous calls from the arch Remainers such as BBC, Clegg, Cable, Heseltine, Clarke etc for the UK to stay in the Single Market post Brexit.
Why? What is it that about the Single Market they consider so essential that UK stays in post Brexit?
Well, it is not really a market at all. It is a sweet name to disguise its real nature. The Single Market is not a version of Pettycoat Lane writ large as Remainers like to promote. It is a Single Regulatory Regime and the Single Market is only a part of it. It includes several political clauses that ensure the EU keeps complete control of any country foolish enough to sign up to it.
Their demand is for the UK to be in the Single Market and only mentioning the Single Market without mentioning the other clauses. It is their way to keep the UK under EU control by the back door without the UK public realising the implications.
These include:
  • Unlimited and uncontrolled migration from the EU into the UK. This would include non-EU people from anywhere in the world who have been given EU passports to enable them to move from any EU country to the UK.
  • Submission to the primacy of the European Court of Justice. The remit of the ECJ is not to administer justice but to make judgments that further ‘ever closer union’. This would make the UK Supreme Court no more than a body to rubber stamp ECJ judgments with no right to question or amend them.
  • Accept the supremacy of EU Corpus Juris over English Common Law and the Magna Carta. Free speech and the individual rights of British subjects enshrined at Runnymede would be null and void. It involves arrest without evidence and by no more than rumour. It would be illegal for UK subjects to criticise the EU. The Spanish Advocate General of the EU Court of Justice has claimed that “Criticism of the EU is akin to blasphemy and could be restricted without affecting Freedom of Speech”  It is now a criminal offence to criticise the EU as of 2013-002 and 2012 – 033.
  • Acceptance of all EU standards even when not applicable to UK. There are thousands of such standards and regulations that act as a ball and chain on our companies, seriously restricting their ability to operate competitively. Sadly, many of these Regulations were ‘gold plated’ by our Health and Safety Executive to make UK commerce even more uncompetitive.  Pre joining the EU, British standards were democratically set up by committees of those involved, not bureaucrats who have never worked in ‘the real world’.
These are euphemistically called the ‘Four Freedoms’ by the EU. They are in fact chains to bind a country into permanent subservience to the EU.
Three other small points:
80% of UK trade with the EU is SERVICES and not goods. Services are regulated by the G20 and not the World Trade Organisation, Single Market or Customs Union. Services are NOT part of the EU Single Market.
The EU has claimed it has been responsible for peace in Europe. Not so – it was NATO on the East German border and the nuclear balance.
The EU responsible for getting rid of mobile roaming charges? It was an international agreement where over 50 countries have removed them, not just the EU.
Go to Top