++++++++++++++++++ EBAY ITEMS 4 SALE ++++++++++++++++++

« Ron Paul to launch his own Republican Convention in St. Paul | Main | Americas Best Franchises For Your Future »




Tuesday 10 June 2008 08:40

IMPORTANT: We do realise that momentous developments in connection with the Settlements and the 'handling' of those who have been blocking them, may break at any moment. The timing of this report, however, is related to the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty taking place this Thursday.

We can also reconfirm that the massive armed police operations in London launched on Monday 2nd June 2008, resulting in the seizure of the criminalists' collateral, a MASTER STROKE, have indeed yielded the intended and desired results, although we cannot be specific yet.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press ARCHIVE. Order your subscriptions and our 'politically incorrect', hence correct, intelligence books from the Edward Harle segment.

•  BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• NOTE: The Subs/Books panel on the Home Page is a means to enable us to communicate with subscribers, the purpose being to announce when issues of our serials have been published, and also to provide updated information on our Books. On 23rd May, the Editor appended an essay for the specific benefit of subscribers to International Currency review, the purpose of which was to inform them of progress on the publication of International Currency Review, Volume 33, #s 3 & 4, which runs to almost 1,000 pages, and will provide a massive historical record/update with detailed documentation and related information on the worst financial corruption crisis in world history.

This private communication was lifted by another website and placed onto their space out of any context, causing some confusion. The reason for the confusion was that the information published in the second panel, though accessible to anyone, represents, as indicated, this Editor’s private communications with subscribers to our printed intelligence publications. Therefore, what we say in the second panel is nothing to do with anyone other than our actual or potential subscribers.

SPECIAL ORDERS FOR THIS ISSUE: The Editor will be emailing all who have kindly requested information on the cost and delivery of this mammoth presentation. The final sections are being printed in our factory 'as we speak'. The promised emails will be sent out this week.

•  Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story's ongoing financial global corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. The Editor's $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

LONDON, 10th June 2008: If the Editor were to publish what we know, and is known, about the global tensions raging behind the scenes right now, the keyboard would overheat, the screen might glow, and the Editor might risk self-vaporisation. Reports of the self-appointed, arrogant globalist claque falling out at its annual Bilderberg meeting, as occurred in 2007, of ongoing bitter arguments and position-taking inside the Federal Reserve's structures, of associates of highest-level trustees being abruptly conveyed to safe houses for their own safety, of World Court/ICJ immunities ceasing to apply, and of some of the most notorious criminalists holding high office quivvering at long last in their boots, would fill many column inches, or feet, of this service.

In the present circumstances, the Editor takes soundings several times daily to establish whether it would be helpful, or a hindrance, given the global coverage enjoyed by this website, to publicise details of the horrendous tensions that we and others know about.

At the present time, the decision has been finely balanced in favour of not tipping parties off about what is happening, in case certain measures are jeopardised as a consequence. We will therefore confine our comments on this unprecedented global crisis and the perpetrators thereof to one general observation for the present, which is as follows.

One of two outcomes is inevitable (if you understand our Irish logic here):

Either the banks are refunded, the world is refinanced and the US dollar refloated immediately, so that the underlying tensions are smoothed over for a period of years, or:

There will be an accelerating, cascading erosion leading to a collapse of the sinews of the financial sector and therefore of modern civilisation, as the banking sector implodes beneath the crisis for which it and its co-conspiring criminalist associates, are themselves responsible.

The logic underlying this is straightforward. The banks have been forced (since one minute past midnight on Monday 14th April: see preceding reports) to comply with the reordered requirements of Basel-II, by the international community led by the Europeans and fronted by the Group of Seven (omitting the pariah United States) financial powers. The banks were given precisely 100 days to put their books (house) in order. This 100 days expires on 29th August 2008.

The US banks have until 29th August 2008 to put their affairs in order, failing which their global creditworthiness will be severely impaired, exacerbating existing tensions between institutions, which have since the third quarter last year reportedly been reluctant to lend to each other, given the suspicions and knowledge of fraudulent finance that has degraded interbank relationships.

The ONLY way that the banks' overall positions can be repaired is via the Settlements, which the hard core of world-class criminalists are, or have been, trying, even at this late stage, to sabotage. The reason for this is that the banks cannot, without committing grave felonies, convert own funds onto the books or indulge in any other fancy footwork involving the transfer of secretly held fiat offshore assets onto their balance sheets. The ONLY way the banks' finances can be repaired is by receiving deposits from customers 'out there' onto their books. There will be an avalanche of new deposits onto the books of the banks with the cascading down of the Settlement funds.

The Settlements will have the effect of converting a great deal of 'Black' money into 'clean' money: or, to be more precise: all Settlements money will be 'clean'. (Yes, we know it stinks, but that is a subjective view: objectivity is mandatory here). Therefore, the Settlements funds, aggregating at the most conservative possible estimate, $300 trillion (but certainly much more than that) are the ONLY lifeline, in general, that is prospectively available to 'bail out the banks'.

HOWEVER, a life and death struggle is/has been taking place behind the scenes because the Settlements-cum-Basel-II process cuts the illicit financing ground from under the feet of the Dark Forces: the arrogant, opinionated cadres attending the Bilderberg Meetings in semi-secret, these globalist nutcases who believe that they, and only they, know how to order the world's affairs, who secretly despise democracy, and who consider the Goyim, the masses or the hoi polloi, i.e. the Rest of Us, to be fodder for the satisfaction of their unfettered, filthy greed and lust for power.

Oh yes, that's what those who are not sitting on their brains any longer, think of these people, as they alternately flatter each other and reportedly scratch each others' eyes out at Chantilly, VA, while the Tower of Babel that they thought they had built collapses round their ears.

Unfortunately, David Cameron's chief handler, George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, was one of the attendees at the 2008 Bilderberg globalist gathering, where these people contemplated the wreckage of their One World Strategy. Unless he was attending as a British intelligence officer, solely in order to report back to headquarters in London, which we doubt, this implies that the Cameron Conservatives are as 'far gone' as we of course assume.

In any case, since the UK Conservative Party has committed the catastrophic error of selling its headquarters building in Smith Square to the European Commission, no less, it can be stated without fear of contradiction (not that this will be forthcoming) that the Conservative Party will continue to betray the British people.

To take the European Commission's money and not care that the former HQ of the Conservative Party will soon be flying the European Union flag, represents a piece of insensitivity so gross that it can be calculated to ensure that a sizeable proportion of the four million Conservatives who have refused to vote in recent elections for this traitorous bunch, will again refuse to return to the Party at the next General Election, now expected in 2010.

Reverting, finally to what will happen if the Black criminalist forces are allowed to prevail in the horrendous struggle behind the scenes to complete the Settlements, you can work this out for yourself. If the banks are not refunded, the rapid inflation that one of the key perpetrators, Dr Ben Bernanke, is talking about, will materialise via the printing press, or banks will collapse, or both.

We sense that the prolongation of the struggle behind the scenes has placed certain banks in extreme jeopardy as they have to get their affairs in order by 29th August 2008 and the resources with which this can be done (the Settlement money) have not yet materialised.

The Settlement money would float them off and the crisis would then 'go away' for a while. But so far, this has not happened because of this hideous struggle behind the scenes.

However the fact that the banks have to be refinanced is the factor that makes the Settlements, buttressed by the London armed police raids and the confiscation of the collateral, inevitable.

We now turn to the Irish Question. It is bound up with the global crisis in several ways, of which the most immediate is the possibility that the Irish electorate, if it has any sense which we know from past observations that it has, will vote NO to ratification of the subsersive, anti-nation state Lisbon Treaty, which provides for the further usurpation of national sovereignty since the European Union is the enemy of its nation states [see the Editor's book The European Union Collective].

Clearly, if the Irish vote NO, such a wise decision will send the increasingly frantic cabal of self-appointed gravy-train globalist 'controllers' into further bouts of scratching each others' eyes out, handwringing and other displays of bad temper because they cannot immediately get their own way. Already their jaundiced spokesmen have been frenetically trying to BLACKMAIL the Irish voter into delivering the 'right' result, since of course these referenda are always staged purely for cosmetic purposes, to affix a veneer of popular consent to policies that are in fact driven by a long-range strategy of treason against the constituent satrap EU nation states. The cowardly UK Government has precluded a referendum because feeling is running so strongly against the European Union Collective in Britain, that Brown, an International Socialist, knows he would lose, which would be sure to trigger his own exit from the seat of power (which he appears to dislike intensely anyway).

At all events, the impertinent President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, was the first big EU noise to threaten the Irish, in remarks monitored in Brussels (1) on 27th May 2008. Crudely predicting that Ireland would be reduced to 'outcast status' if its electorate votes NO on Thursday 12th June, this little fellow prounounced that 'if there was a 'NO' in Ireland or in another country (but of course he meant Ireland), it would have a very negative effect for the EU. We will all pay a price for it, Ireland included, if this is not done in a proper way'.

In other words, you can have your beastly referendum as long as you deliver the answer we want: otherwise we will make sure you are penalised to the max. But what he really meant was that the new posts of President and Foreign Minister of the European Union, and the intended common European diplomatic service, not to mention the financial perks and opportunities for graft that this collective facilitates (see below), will be thrown into limbo.

In the same vein, the new globalist Irish Prime Minister, Brian Cowen, warned on 8th June (2) that Ireland's economic future was at stake if voters reject the Lisbon Treaty on Thursday. Using every devious psychological weapon available in his vocabulary, Mr Cohen said that voters would vote YES because they wouldn't want to 'embarrass Ireland', would they, and waffled that 'the road we choose will not only determine the shape of our economy but will define our role in the wider world and our destiny for years to come'. These statements are all without content, not least since state independence places the state in a much stronger position than collectivisation, which is what is meant by 'cooperation'. If Ireland votes YES, its brief period of independence will fade into history.

Coming to the assistance of his brethren (3), globalist operative Peter Sutherland, a former EU Commissioner who is now Chairman of BP and Goldman Sachs International, pontificated that an Irish 'NO' vote would (for him and his associates) be 'devastating' and 'would send shockwaves across Europe and stop European integration in its tracks'.

Since that is exactly what needs to happen, this intrusion aptly illustrates both the arrogance and blindness of these people: their arrogance, because they ASSUME that what THEY favour must BY DEFINITION be desirable for all; and their blindness, because they cannot see that in revealing what they fear, they automatically signal to those who don't agree with them, what course to follow.

Writing in The Sunday Business Post, Sutherland added, in purple prose backed by no evidence, that a 'devastating' NO vote would 'cause people everywhere to ask whether our pro-Europeanism was only superficial'. Irish rejection of the (pernicious) Lisbon Collective Treaty 'would be the most damaging decision in foreign relations ever taken by Ireland'. Note that such assertions are indeed devoid of all content: they represent nothing more than empty, vapid rhetoric, something that this creature is well known for, having honed his skills in the art of making vacuous statements when serving on the EU gravy train as a European Commissioner.

It is worth recalling WHY it is that ratification of these EU Treaties must be unanimous, or else in theory they fall to the ground. This is interesting. They must be unanimous in order to sustain the illusion of commonality, of collectivism, so that it can always be represented that collectivisation is indeed a collective intention of the satrap peoples.

In other words, because of the ideology of collectivisation (ultimately leading to Communism, as intended, through regulation), the EU is hooked on its own spike. If a national referendum on the Collective Treaty yields a NO result, these people have got a problem.

That's why these mindless ideologues cannot ever contemplate a NO outcome, and why they always browbeat national electorates ahead of these events; and if by any chance a NO vote is delivered, they conspire to have the outcome reversed. It is believed, however, that the Irish, if they vote NO, will stick to their guns later, when the time comes round for the next wave of gauleiters to demand that they must revise their decision, and vote YES or HEIL! FOR THE GRAVY TRAIN.

Which brings us now to the most compelling reason why the Irish should vote NO. The European Union Collective is irretrievably CORRUPT. The first report ever published on this website, before it was hijacked by Wantagate, graphically exposed the scale of this corruption. In the report dated 12th October 2005, and in the corresponding issue of International Currency Review [Volume 30, Number 4], we published 'devastating' information about embedded financial corruption inside the European Commission structures, as well as presenting our detailed evidence that 'facilitators' of the 'rolling' European Treaty, are routinely paid a huge 'bribe' from a slush fund in Switzerland that is secretly controlled by the pan-German long-term deception (Nazi Abwehr) strategists based at Dachau (Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst). We reported, in particular, that slush payments of $100 million each (payable in Euros) had been remitted to the 25 national 'facilitators' of the European Constitution Treaty following the 'successful' Intergovernmental Conference that year. We named two European leaders known by British intelligence to have received slush fund payments, and we reported that the total allocated to the first tranche of these payments was $2.5 billion. The second tranche of $2.5 billion was payable on ratification; but inconveniently, the Dutch and the French electorates refused to ratify the Treaty, thereby throwing the whole venture into disarray until the globalist Eurocrats could figure out a means of nullifying the decisions of those electorates.

Since we reported in 2005, corruption inside the European Commission and its structures has got considerably worse, according to inside documentation made available to the Editor of this service.

Specifically, on 28th May 2008, Herbert Bosch, Chairman of the Committee on Budgetary Control in the European Parliament, wrote to Herr Reimer Boge, MEP, Chairman, Committee on Budgets in the European Parliament, to convey the following concerns, which please read carefully:

'We would like to recall our preoccupation about the rapid increase of EU funds which are no longer managed by the Commission services themselves, but by international trust funds (an increase of 700% in the last 5 years) or are implemented via unspecific or sector specific budgetary support measures. In both cases the EU's political guidance, visibility and control are hampered'.

'[The European] Parliament has received from the Commission the list of entities that were not subject to a tender procedure for contracts received in 2006 in the external actions sector. This list, which was received two days before the 2006 Discharge (of the EC Budget) vote, is currently available for consultation in the secure reading room and indicates a high concentration in a very limited number of entities which have been selected for this kind of non-transparent procedure (about 50% of the overall volume is contracted to one single company)'.

Would the Budget Committee kindly work to 'make the Commission increasingly aware of the importance of transparency, visibility and political guidance for all EU funds implemented in the area of external actions, be it directly by the Commission, via decentralised management, or via international trust funds'? (4).

These concerns can be translated as follows:

1. In order to bypass the embarrassment of budgetary scrutiny, which the toothless European Parliament and the toothless EU Court of Auditors try to impose upon the European Commission's budgetary gravy train, methods have been developed to enable EC financial operations to be alienated from these procedures altogether.

2. One means of achieving this has been to establish so-called 'international trust funds', a hitherto unheard-of financial obfuscation device, to hide slush finance and other financial operations which the EC apparatchiks would prefer prying eyes not to notice.

3. There has been a 700% increase in the volume of EC funds (i.e., EU Member States' taxpayers' funds) that have been siphoned off into these opaque 'international trust funds', which, for all we know, are being used for fraudulent finance purposes, high-yield investment programmes and other 'private' aberrations beloved of these inveterate gravy train criminalists.

4. Some 50% of certain 'external actions' operations are being handled by one unnamed company. In other words, contracts are being awarded consistently to this corporation. It can be taken as read that the corporation in question is owned and operated by buddies of corrupt EC officials, as has so frequently been found to be the case in the past.

5. The collectivist EC structures have been devised in such a way that grotesque, corrupt abuses like this can be implemented with impunity. The way this works is as follows. If overt malfeasance is 'suspected', the self-serving OLAF Directorate (the so-called Anti-Fraud Directorate within the EC), which exists not to investigate and expose fraud inside these collective institutions but to cover it up, is mobilised to start an investigation. This is then widely publicised, to make sure that the whole world knows that OLAF is watching out for corruption.

Some months later, another entity within the structures 'calls for' an investigation, which is then launched. The first corruption investigation is subsequently suspended, pending the outcome of the second investigation. There have been instances where this procedure has been replicated by a third and even a fourth internal investigation.

The object of this obfuscation mechanism is to ensure that no definitive outcome can be achieved before the term of the prevailing European Commission expires: i.e., to kick the problem into the next Commission. When, finally, the next European Commission, consisting of a bunch of relegated national political has-beens who are typically rewarded for their past services by a period on the collective EU gravy train, is confirmed in office, it proceeds to distance itself from everything that its duplicitous predecessors did or knew about, the attitude being: 'That was then, this is now'.

In the course of the Irish referendum 'debate' over the Lisbon Treaty, voices have been heard pointing out the glaringly obvious: that nobody knows what goes on in Brussels. The reason for this is that NOBODY IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW WHAT GOES ON IN BRUSSELS, in order not to disturb the pigs with their snouts in the trough.

If you collectivise elements of your financial affairs, you cannot later complain that your funds are being misused, msiappropriated or otherwise abused, and neither can you complain that you can do nothing about it. The reason for this state of affairs is that in a collective, all decisions are taken collectively, so that nobody can be blamed for anything, which means that corruption can flourish as never before, sine die, and with impunity.

The financial corruption that flourishes in Brussels is almost more insidious than the unbelievable corruption that we have helped to expose in Washington. Both nodes of financial corruption feed off each other. Imagine the untold opportunities for fraudulent finance and other hidden financial carousels that might be associated with these so-called 'international trust funds' that have come to light in the aformentioned correspondence. Are we looking at hidden counterparties here to some of the corrupt financial operations unearthed in the US context?

Before, finally, reviewing how the Irish financial economy has been hollowed out, so that the Irish people have been taken to the cleaners and fleeced without apparently realising it, we note that the Irish Prime Minister, Brian Cowen, has actually acknowledged that he hasn't read 'all of' the 287-page Lisbon Treaty, and nor has Ireland's EU Commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, who is actually on record as having stated that 'no sane person could read it from cover to cover' (5).

This reveals that the leaders of the Irish people are demanding that they say YES to a prospectus that they haven't read. They are urging the Irish electorate to ASSUME that the dull verbiage in this document is 100% benevolent and that everything therein is by definition in Ireland's interests.

They are asking the highly intelligent Irish people to take their word for it that, even though the leadership can't be bothered to read the text and small print of this subversive document, it can be taken for granted that there is nothing to worry about.

Given this arrogance, the Irish voter has been placed on notice that he and she has everything to worry about. CAVEAT EMPTOR. If the leadership hasn't read the text of the Treaty, the voters should reject it. Since the leadership think it's not worth reading, it's not worth voting for either.

So an outright rejection of this document is appropriate. Ireland's leaders haven't read it, can't be bothered to read it, and yet are forcing it down the throats of the Irish along with their glasses of Guinness at the pub. We suspect that given this display of arrogance by the leadership, the Irish will deliver the 'right' answer, which will not be the 'right' answer demanded by Barroso, Cowen, Sutherland, and other intermeddlers whose global hegemony gravy-train agenda is endangered.

As for what happened when the Editor of this service asked whether the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, had read the text of the Lisbon Treaty, please see the Annexe appended below.

Finally, concerning the hollowing out of the Irish financial economy: Ireland is believed to have benefited from massive ongoing subsidies from the European Union, aggregating at least 35-40 billion Euros over the years, and probably much more. In 1988, the final year before the Euro was introduced, the foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank of Ireland amounted to $8,622 million. By December 2006, the official reserves of foreign exchange had been depleted to $492 million. The April 2008 issue of the Central Bank's Quarterly Bulletin reveals that, at the end of February 2008, the official reserves position stood at 384 million Euros.

Over the years 1999-2006, the total value of Ireland's accumulated trade surplus aggregated $256,177 million; and in 2007, a trade surplus of $33,579 million was achieved, bringing the accumulated trade surplus recorded between 1999 and 2007 inclusive, to $289,856 million.

Yet according to our investigations, we find that Ireland incurred a parallel current account deficit aggregating $15,593 million from 1999 to the end of 2006. In 2007, according to the Central Bank of Ireland, the Republic incurred a current account deficit of 9,274 million Euros, equivalent to 5.9% of Gross National Product (GNP). Translated into US dollars, the current account shortfall for 2007 was $13,652 million, an absolutely colossal deficit on this account given the huge trade surplus. Indeed in that single year, the total current account deficit incurred by Ireland equated to 88% of the entire deficit incurred since the introduction of the collective currency.

This is all back to front. The huge trade surpluses should be accompanied by large current account surpluses. What has been going on? The answer is to be found on the so-called 'services' account. Here, we note that, on the services account, Ireland achieved an accumulated 'credit' of $307,628 million during 1999-2006 inclusive, and yet an accumulated 'debit' over the same period of $404,145 million, leaving a shortfall of funds that had left the country of about $96,517 million.

In another ledger, recording income credits and debits, we find that the credits on the account aggregated $313,431 million in 1999-2006, but that the accumulated debits aggregated $493,243 million over the period. This left an outflow amounting to a total of $179,812 million.

The balance on goods and services account has been negative for every year since 1995.

On the basis of these data, it appears that the Irish financial economy has been 'Enronised'. The Enron scam consisted of the exploitation of cashflow to disguise the corrupt hollowing-out of the corporation's finances. In order to mask the fact that immense resources were being siphoned off into offshore bank accounts used by 'partnerships' set up by Enron personnel with their buddies, that were then used for high-yield investment programmes that wound up earning and turning over far more than Enron did itself, so that Enron became an empty shell as a consequence, internal and external accountants resorted to cooking the books.

In the case of this nation state, since few observers analyse such national financial data, the need to cook the books is much less pronounced. On the contrary, the Central Bank of Ireland does not trouble to disguise the fact that its official reserves of foreign exchange have been squandered to the point of near-obliteration. It simply publishes the data with no explanation.

However an economy cannot be hollowed out like this without the people eventually noticing that something is wrong. We suspect, right now, that the Irish electorate senses, quite correctly, that something has indeed gone badly wrong here, without knowing quite what the problem is.

The electorate may also sense that, since nobody really knows what goes on in Brussels, financial corruption may underly whatever has gone wrong in the Emerald Isle.

We therefore anticipate that the Irish electorate may deliver the 'right' result on Thursday and that the ubiquitous Peter Sutherland and his cronies will be 'devastated' accordingly.

Notes and References:

(1). The Daily Telegraph, London, 28th May 2008, article subheaded: 'EU Chief warns Irish that they 'will pay' of they reject Treaty', page 22.

(2). Financial Times, London, 9th June,  'Ireland's future depends on EU Treaty, says PM', page 5.

(3). 'Brethren' is used intentionally here. Financial Times, 9th June 2008, op. cit.

(4). Letter reference 203377 dated 21st May 2008 from Herbert Bosch, Chairman of the European Parliament Committee on Budgetary Control and Dan Jorgensen, Rapporteur for the 2006 Budget Discharge, to Reimer Boge, MEP, Chairman, Commitee on Budgets, European Parliament.

(5). The Daily Telegraph, London, 31st May 2008, 'Irish ayes aren't smiling', page 25. See also the Annexe to this report, immediately below.

ANNEXE: From our report posted on 21st January 2008:

At 2.55pm on Friday 14th December 2007, the Editor telephoned the Press Office at Number Ten Downing Street, the Residence of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown.

He asked the following question:

‘Did the Prime Minister read the European Union Treaty document that he has just signed in Portugal, before he signed it?’

The Downing Street Press Office official responded: ‘Er, I’ll get a Press Officer to call you back’.

Christopher Story: ‘Are you unable to answer my question?’

Downing Street Official: ‘I’ll get a Press Officer to call you back’.

Christopher Story: ‘When will that be?’

Downing Street Official: ‘Er, as soon as possible’.

At 1.30pm on Tuesday 18th December 2007, the Editor telephoned the Press Office at Number Ten Downing Street, the Residence of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown.

He asked the following question:

‘Did the Prime Minister read the European Union Treaty document that he has just signed in Portugal, before he signed it?’

Downing Street Official: ‘I’m sure he read it’.

Christopher Story: ‘Do you know when he read it?’

Downing Street Official: ‘No, but I can try and find out for you’.

Christopher Story: ‘You’ll call me back?’

Downing Street Official: ‘I will do, certainly’.

At 11.30am on Tuesday 17th January 2008, the Editor telephoned the Press Office at Number Ten Downing Street, the Residence of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown.

He asked the following question:

‘Did the Prime Minister read the European Union Treaty document that he has just signed in Portugal, before he signed it?’

Downing Street Official: ‘I’ll get someone to call you back. What’s your phone number, Chris?’

Christopher Story: ‘7222 3836’.

Downing Street Official: ‘I’ll get someone to give you a call back’.

The Editor of International Currency Review has been lied to by the Prime Minister’s Office.

No-one from the Downing Street Press Office had called him back with an answer to his simple, straightforward question, by the date of this posting.

One does not need to possess a first-class degree in psychology to understand why no answer has been forthcoming. Manifestly:

If the Prime Minister read the document before he signed it, he is a traitor and is in grotesque breach of his oath of loyalty to the British Head of State, HM The Queen.

If the Prime Minister did not read the document before he signed it, he is in dereliction of his duty to defend the interests of the British people and the Monarchy, is grossly incompetent, and should be impeached.

If the question could not be answered, the correct and honest answer should have been:

‘We cannot answer your question’.

Obviously, officials decided that their safest course would be not to respond at all, so that (a) they cannot be accused of deception and lying, and (b) the matter is conveniently left up in the air.

That is dishonest, small-minded, scandalous and reprehensible.

The Editor of this service, being a member of the press, was entitled to a straight answer to his simple question. He has been given the usual brush-off that is meted out to anyone who has the temerity to query the duplicitous official (revolutionary, anti-nation state) 'line'.

Please be advised that the Editor of International Currency Review cannot enter into email correspondence related to this or to any of the earlier reports.

We are a private intelligence publishing house and have no connections to any outside parties including intelligence agencies. The word ‘intelligence’ on this website and in all our marketing material is used for marketing/sales purposes only and has no other connotations whatsoever: see ‘About Us’ on the red panels under the Notes on the Editor, Christopher Story FRSA, who has been solely and exclusively engaged as an investigative journalist, Editor, Author and private financial and current affairs Publisher since 1963 and is not and never has been an agent for a foreign power, suggestions to the contrary being actionable for libel in the English Court.

June 11, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:



Post a comment