We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service.

Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State.

Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends.

A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed.

As a direct consequence of the betrayal of the British people by the collective political establishment, and others, the British Constitution Group is calling for Lawful Rebellion, as is our right under article 61 Magna Carta 1215.

We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service.

Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State.

Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends.

A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed.

As a direct consequence of the betrayal of the British people by the collective political establishment, and others, the British Constitution Group is calling for Lawful Rebellion, as is our right under article 61 Magna Carta 1215.

We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service.

Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State.

Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends.

A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed.

As a direct consequence of the betrayal of the British people by the collective political establishment, and others, the British Constitution Group is calling for Lawful Rebellion, as is our right under article 61 Magna Carta 1215.

The bit in bold pretty much tells you these people are too stupid, or, at best, too ignorant, to be worth listening to. If you're going to advocate revolution or any kind of meaningful change, you should know what you're rebelling against first.

Watch the Keiser Report on Russia Today, Freeview Channel 85 or Sky 512

08.00am Tuesday and Thursday and repeated at 12.00pm.

Every week, Max Keiser looks at all the scandal behind the financial news headlines. I am impressed by his truthful, emphatic and straightforward manner of speaking... I'm also impressed by the fact that RT allows so much economic truth to be spoken of on their programs/shows/reports, especially "Keiser Report"... Quite contrary to most if not all of the world's mainstream media.

The people running BCG are ex policemen, retired naval officers etc, not a bunch of idiots.

Why are we assuming those things are mutually exclusive? You get idiots in all walks of life and jobs.

Why are we assuming those things are mutually exclusive? You get idiots in all walks of life and jobs.

Would have been tricky to remove the constitution from the national curriculum in the 70s considering we didn't have a national curriculum until 1988.

I studied British government and politics for a GCSE in 1994.

On the topic of the world's economy check out the Keiser Report on Russia Today.

You seem completely willing to accept the opinion of fringe commentators and random bloggers, but never willing to either read conventional news media in any depth or listen to the arguments of people on here, even if they take the time to search out info or facts for you.

So Alan Johnson leaves the Shadow Cabinet because of 'issues at home'

Resigned before pushed? Ill bet the 'blind' sites will be having a field day?

On a Personal Level its a great thing for politics, because I cant stand the odious self righteous cunt.. Whatever issues he has at home though I hope get sorted swiftly.

Question Time looks to be a decent watch tonight, with Simon Hughes, Caroline Spelman, Alastair Campbell, George Galloway and Clarke Carlisle on the panel.

Galloway is always an interesting guy when it comes to shows like this.

So Alan Johnson leaves the Shadow Cabinet because of 'issues at home'

Resigned before pushed? Ill bet the 'blind' sites will be having a field day?

On a Personal Level its a great thing for politics, because I cant stand the odious self righteous cunt.. Whatever issues he has at home though I hope get sorted swiftly.

Why can't you stand him? I like him but I don't think he was a good choice for the shadow chancellor. I am glad Ed Balls will now be able to rip Osborne to shreds.

Erm, mainly the 'self righteous odious cunt' bit I mentioned before

That will do it


NB: Transpires according to This week that one of his bodyguards has been indicted on something.. Intriguing

Why do you think he is self-righteous and odious?

Because he always comes across as always being holier than thou

Because he always comes across as always being holier than thou, and a cretinous ratbag despite being a 'a calamity' and generally not having a scooby doo. Examples. going after Debbie Hirst over her fighting to get Avastin while Health Secretary, his 'slimey and very cuntish' appearences on Question Time, that he has been proven time and again to not have a fucking clue what he is going on about. How much are Employers National Insurance contribuionss? He was meant to be Shadow Chancellor and was miles out! Yet he went on as if he spoketh the truth His part in the Gitmo torture cover up and so on

Utter Cunt of the highest order professionally. Hope what ever has caused his resignation is solvable and not utter crap privatly

Alan Johnson was too normal for the very top flight. The great paradox of his recent career is that the sense of perspective which would have made him a great leader is precisely what made him recoil from the job.

He didn’t even really want to be deputy leader. The famously common-touch polished performer was the overwhelming favourite to succeed John Prescott in 2007. But he ran a lacklustre campaign because his heart wasn’t in it and was pipped by Harriet Harman, whose heart always is.

What people like about Johnson is that he lacks the crazed ambition which is the sine qua non of top level political success. The blinkered focus. The ruthless ambition. His top-flight peers all have it, that restless lust for power that never stops. All day, every day. All night. They text you at 3 in the morning, dead sober. But obsessed. Then at five to six the phone rings and it’s them again. On a point of tiny detail. Which doesn’t matter to anyone else. But is important to them. They’re all like it.

But Alan Johnson was not. He was hard-working and ambitious. He had an extremely successful career. He was an excellent minister. But all within limits. Mainly during the very long days, but not the short nights. For all of the very long weeks, often into the weekends. But not all weekend. Not every weekend.

And in the leaving of it, most of all, he demonstrated the sense of proportion which made him unsuited to lead. His shadow chancellorship wasn’t working. Everyone could see it. His heart wasn’t in it and his head wasn’t keeping up.

In those circumstances, a normal politician of Johnson’s seniority drags it out as long as they possibly can, undoing the years of good work, unravelling a decade and a half of goodwill. They slide down the greasy pole, as their muscles lose power and their fingers lose grip, finally collapsing, shivering and sobbing, in a broken and contemptible heap on which their proteges trample. That is how it is done. It is the only way.

Normal politicians end as the only ones in the world who can’t see the tragedy they eventually become. Johnson, not having been issued with the “warped self-image” spectacles that he should have been given, has seen all this quickly and with clarity. He has figured that he has nothing left to prove or achieve; nothing left to do that he wanted to. He was perfectly placed, in every way, to simply call it a day.

It will serve Miliband politically that Ed Balls’ economic views will be better aligned with his own than those of Alan Johnson, who had begun to look like the last Blairite standing. And whose undisguised contempt for Miliband’s leftist revisionism was more insidiously damaging to the Labour revival than the mere opportunity cost of his failure to grasp his brief.

In short, though: exit Johnson, swiftly yet gracefully, with dignity and credibility intact. It is not supposed to be like that. For which, and for the rest of an exemplary life and career, bravo!

Andy Coulson has resigned as David Cameron's director of communications in the wake of the phone hacking scandal at the News of the World.

Mr Coulson is thought to have concluded that his position has become untenable following a “drip drip” of disclosures over the activities of the newspaper while he was editor.

He has repeatedly denied any knowledge that a reporter at the tabloid newspaper had hacked the phones of well-known people. It is understood that his resignation is not linked to any new revelation regarding Mr Coulson’s conduct.

Mr Coulson said it had been a "privilege and an honour" to work for the Prime Minister for three-and-a-half years.

In a statement he added:"Unfortunately, continued coverage of events connected to my old job at the News of the World has made it difficult for me to give the 110 per cent needed in this role."

The Prime Minister said he was "very sorry" that Mr Coulson had felt "compelled" to resign due to continuing pressure over the row.

The Metropolitan Police recently reopened its criminal investigation into phone hacking at the newspaper after News International suspended a senior news executive.

News International is currently facing a series of legal claims from celebrities who claim their privacy was violated after their phones were hacked.

Mr Coulson announced his resignation as Tony Blair was giving evidence at the Iraq inquiry. It follows the dramatic resignation of Alan Johnson, the shadow Chancellor.

Mr Coulson resigned from his position as editor of News of the World amid an investigation into illegal phone-tapping by his journalists in January 2007.

He was appointed the Conservative Party's director of communications the following July.

Good riddance.

Shadow culture secretary Ivan Lewis last night described Cameron's decision to meet Brooks as "extraordinary".

"People will question his judgment at a time when ministers are making a quasi-judicial decision about News Corp's bid for BSkyB," Lewis said. "The prime minister may be in breach of his own ministerial code, which requires openness and transparency. There is an arrogance about this prime minister that is slowly coming to the surface."

The presence of Andy Coulson in No 10 always made a mockery of David Cameron's claim to represent a break with the sleaze of the New Labour years. It was either highly reckless or highly stupid of the PM to accept the "rogue reporter" account of events at the News of the World.

Cameron's decision to hire Coulson in the first place was a bad judgement but his decision to retain him was a worse one. From the moment the Guardian revealed News International's secret payouts to the victims of phone-hacking, Coulson's departure became inevitable.

The affair is reminsicent of Cameron's past failure to resolve the issue of Lord Ashcroft's tax status. He missed repeated opportunities to bring Ashcroft to heel, with the result that the story caused far more embarrassment for the party than anyone originally expected. Similarly, rather than dispensing of Coulson's services after the election, Cameron falsely calculated that his spin doctor could ride out the scandal.

The Prime Minister's defenders will argue that Coulson was simply too talented to let go. He was the man who tabloid-proofed all Conservative policy and who ensured the defection of the Murdoch press to the Tories. But while there may have been a political justification for retaining Coulson, there was never a moral one.

Owing to Rupert Murdoch's media empire and Fleet Street's code of omerta, the phone-hacking scandal has received little coverage beyond the pages of the Guardian. But voters can sense the growing stench of sleaze around the government. Cameron's promise of a "new politics" will ring increasingly hollow. As for Coulson, one expects his troubles are just beginning.

THE FUCKING FORESTS

FOREST CHUMPS

THE coalition is having trouble seeing the wood for the trees if it thinks its plan to sell vast swathes of Forestry Commission (FC) land in England makes economic sense.

In 2009 an attempt by the Scottish National Party to lease Scotland's national forests to private firms was defeated by opposition from all political parties. It was recognised, among other things, that as well as threatening jobs and access, any firm taking over the land and continuing forestry would still be eligible for public funding. As MSP Elaine Murray said at the time, logging firms could "chop down timber that was planted at public expense, walk away with the profit and then get paid to plant more trees" (Eye 1228). The same issue exists in England, where the cost of regulating and dishing out funds to private forestry companies is likely to outweigh the money raised from land sales. Lorraine Adams, branch president for the scientists' union, Prospect, which represents more than 200 researchers, cartographers, rangers and skilled Forestry Commission workers, has uncovered evidence of this since the FC already sells off land occasionally. When it recently flogged an area of woodland for £60,000, for example, the new landowner immediately applied for funds under the English Woodland Grant Scheme to grow and cut timber and was given assistance totalling £55,000. The private landowner will also be able to come back and ask for more grants in future - as well as bidding for other environmental stewardship and rural development subsidies available to forest owners - while the government can only sell the land once.

So will the coalition cut back on grants so the sale makes economic sense? Er, no. In an attempt to head off the more alarming protests -suggestions that buyers would develop huge holiday parks or housing estates - the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said in a statement: "Full measures will remain in place to preserve the public benefits of woods and forests under any new ownership arrangements. Tree felling is controlled through the licensing system managed by the Forestry Commission, public rights of way and access will be unaffected, statutory protection for wildlife will remain in force and there will be grant incentives for new planting that can be applied for."

Then there are the earnings the FC will lose from no longer selling timber (around £61m in 2008). Thanks to that cash, it costs the taxpayer just £15m a year to regulate and license the private forestry sector, plus providing numerous education schemes and leisure access to woodland, not to mention the FC scientists who do vital research to combat tree diseases - such as sudden oak death (now devastating larch trees in the south west) and pests like leaf miner moths which attack horse chestnuts.

Anger at the proposed sale is particularly acute in the Forest of Dean, where a campaign group, Hands Off Our Forest (HOOF), has been mobilised and 3,000 people rallied earlier this month to make their voices heard. Notably absent was local Tory MP Mark Harper, who believes the forest sale to be an example of Dave's Big Society in action as it would allow local people to buy and manage things as they see fit. As environmentalist Jonathon Porritt and many others point out, however, thanks to rights and entitlements secured over centuries, people in the Forest of Dean already see "the Dean" as their forest anyway. The strong relationship between the foresters and the local Forestry Commission is largely down to longstanding mutual respect and an understanding well beyond the financial realm of what "ownership" of this precious resource means. For Harper to offer to sell people something they already believe to be theirs could be a suicidal electoral strategy for the ex-KPMG accountant.

The last Tory MP to trip up in the Forest of Dean was one of Harper's predecessors, Paul Marland. He favoured the Thatcher government's attempt to sell the Forest Estate in the early 1980s. But public pressure on him was so intense he managed to secure an exemption for the Forest of Dean, concluding: "I regard the possible sale of the Royal Forest of Dean and other Crown Forests to faceless investors as a national disaster. The Royal Forest of Dean is steeped in ancient history and tradition. Today's Forester is of the same independent mind and rugged character as were his forefathers. It is our duty to preserve his ancient rights and traditions."

If Harper disappoints his constituents, he could become the first victim of another coalition brainwave: the "right of recall" which enables voters to recall an MP if they lose faith in him or her. This would be ironic. When Harper isn't calling for the sale of his constituents' natural environment, he is the minister for constitutional reform responsible for... the right-to-recall policy!

Cameron betrays 60,000 families as 250 Sure Start centres set to shut

Sixty thousand families have been betrayed by David Cameron as a new survey indicates that 250 Sure Start centres will close over the next 12 months. The findings undermine key promises before and after the general election by David Cameron and Michael Gove.

As widely reported this morning, a new survey of close to 1,000 Sure Start Children’s Centre Managers across England – carried out by 4Children and Daycare Trust – reveals that:

• 250 (7%) will close or are expected to close, affecting an estimated 60,000 families

• 2,000 (56%) will provide a reduced service

• 3,100 (86%) will have a decreased budget

• Staff at 1,000 centres (28%) have been issued with ‘at risk of redundancy’ notices

The findings are a slap in the face for many local authorities who were told by Education Secretary, Michael Gove, as recently as December:

“We have additionally ensured that there is enough money in the EIG [Early Intervention Grant] to maintain the existing network of Sure Start Children’s Centres”

On the eve of the general election, David Cameron was asked for a guarantee that Sure Start centres would continue to receive funding. In response, the Tory leader said:

“Yes, we back Sure Start. It’s a disgrace that Gordon Brown has been trying to frighten people about this. He’s the Prime Minister of this country but he’s been scaring people about something that really matters.”

Responding to the same question, Nick Clegg said:

“Yes. Sure Start is a really important programme that has made a real difference to millions of parents. Difficult decisions are going to have to be made in public spending, but Sure Start is one of the best things the last government has done and I want all these centres to stay open.”

Anand Shukla, acting Chief Executive of Daycare Trust said: “Behind every Children’s Centre facing closure is a community of families devastated at losing one of their most valued local services.” Anne Longfield OBE, Chief Executive of 4Children said: “Families across the country, particularly the most vulnerable, depend on Sure Start Children’s Centres to help get their children off to the best start in life.” Andy Burnham MP, Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Education, said:

“David Cameron made a personal promise to protect and build on Sure Start. Today we learn that these were just hollow words and yet another broken promise to the families of our country. By asking children and families to bear the brunt of their cuts, this Tory-led Government is showing that they have no idea what pressure ordinary families are under.

The survey of Children’s Centre Managers took place between January 20th and 25th following an email to Centre Managers listed on the Family Information Service (FIS) / Directgov database. A total of 917 Children’s Centre Managers took part in the survey using surveymonkey.com. Figures were then extrapolated to understand the impact the results would have for the 3,578 Centres across England. The 60,000 figure was based on a conservative average of 244 families using each Centre. 32% of survey respondents said their Centre catered for 150+ families; a further 52% said it was 300+.

The excuse of course will be we didn't know how bad things really were until we got into office followed by the usual we must all make sacrifices/feel the pinch.

That's because it's all Labours fault of course. The poor Tories/Tories lite have no option.