Log in

No account? Create an account
Liberal Democrats [entries|friends|calendar]
Liberal Democrats

[ website | Lib Dems ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

As Russia sees the USA [07 Apr 2013|04:47pm]


I want to talk about the United States from the point of view of Russia.
I want to tell you about Russia as it really is.
I'm not going to lie about Russia. Any Russian will tell as I am.
U.S. looks as aggressive and as a fascist state.
The Americans and the British brought to power in the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev.
Today Russian know that Mikhail Gorbachev a traitor Russia. For what he destroyed the Soviet Union, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union Americans hired Yeltsin.
Russian President Boris Yeltsin continued destruction of Russia.
Russian people demanded a national leader and a miracle happened.
President Putin is a wonderful gift from President Yeltsin.
Putin is not dependent on the U.S. and leads the Russian policy in the interests of the Russian people.
In Russia, the president is not a puppet, but a real head.
Putin's bloody regime is a myth. This myth invented Western forces.
This is cheap propaganda. In the West, people believe in this myth. Our neighbors to the east in this myth do not believe.
Terrorist attack September 11, 2001 was coined by the U.S. Congress. He was made with remote controlled airliners.
Due to the terrorist attacks of September 11, the U.S. came up with the myth of global terrorism. Under the guise of global terrorism the U.S. expand their influence in the East.
Indeed, Europe, Russia and the East, are aware of these crimes the U.S.. Such methods are supported monopoly dollar.
Central banks in most countries are totally dependent on the U.S. Federal Reserve.
Most of the world can not trade in their money. Foreign trade only through the dollar.
But still want to trade through its currency.
If someone decides to do so, the country is attacked by the U.S. Army.
Any country that is independent of the U.S. and Britain, Americans consider totalitarian.
Today, Russia is a strong country. We got stronger after the devastation of the nineties.
Russian government wants to restore the Soviet Union, but in another form.
Russia will have many allies in Europe and the East.
Russia is included in alliances BRICS, SCO and the Eurasian Union. Eurasian Union is an analogue of the Soviet Union.
These alliances have one goal. The purpose of this is to destroy the U.S. dollar as the monopoly.
This fall BRICS began to make external transactions through their own money. BRICS today refused dollars.
For the U.S., this means the beginning of the end.
World domination is based on the U.S. dollar. Printing dollars instead of real work. Very soon, this will not do.
When the dollar collapses, the U.S. could start a civil war.
Individual U.S. states will divide the property. Special services of Russia, Germany, China and other countries, will warm the U.S. population.
So we try to divide the United States. Our share is Alaska. Easy way to get just as easily and take away.
post comment

My post on the Election restults and how the uk has failed once again. [07 May 2010|01:08pm]


post comment

Marriage Without Borders [14 Jan 2010|01:08pm]

I'd just like to promote a new campaign by Nick Clegg and LGBT Lib Dems calling for Marriage Without Borders - removing the gender restrictions on marriages and civil partnerships, and improving international recognition of same-sex relationships.

Please do sign the petition; if you're on Facebook you can become a fan, but do make sure you sign as well - and then invite your friends to become fans, and share the page on your own profile!

HTML code for LiveJournal and other blog sites: (this does not work well on Facebook - simply become a fan and then share the link!)

I'd just like to promote a new campaign by <a href="http://www.nickclegg.com/">Nick Clegg</a> and <a href="http://lgbt.libdems.org.uk/">LGBT Lib Dems</a> calling for <a href="http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/marriagewithoutborders">Marriage Without Borders</a> - removing the gender restrictions on marriages and civil partnerships, and improving international recognition of same-sex relationships.

Please <a href="http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/marriagewithoutborders">sign the petition</a>; if you're on Facebook you can <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Marriage-Without-Borders/255805030828">become a fan</a>, but do make sure you sign as well - and then invite your friends to become fans, and share the page on your own profile!

Get <a href="http://community.livejournal.com/libdems/33055.html">HTML code to copy and paste on LiveJournal and other blog sites here</a>.
1 comment|post comment

David Tennant and Gordon Brown; should it matter who Doctor Who picks as Prime Minister? [09 Jan 2010|02:01pm]

[ mood | contemplative ]

After the failed "snow plot" coup by Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt, I'm sure Gordon Brown (and his advisers) have been trying to come up with a way to bolster his popularity ahead of the General Election.

Now, the BBC is supposed (as a taxpayer funded institution) to be neutral. After the starting gun is fired (eg a General Election is called versus what's now which is just an expenses period for candidates from January 1st); they're under OFCOM rules. This means they have to show balance in their reporting of Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Conservatives etc etc...

Which brings me to this story. As most of my Doctor Who friends will know; the actor playing him has just left, the two parter Christmas special got about 10 million viewers. As well as this the BBC had David Tennant on just about every Christmas slot they could promote him in and the trailers.

Before he left, it would've been a big no-no for an actor viewed on a tax-payer funded public broadcaster to have pledged support to any political party. However the leadup to General Elections is silly season; they're all darting about for "celebrity endorsements".

Here is a link to the BBC article of David Tennant pledging his support for Gordon Brown.

One of the few and only times I wrote about Gordon Brown in this blog was during a student union presidential election at Liverpool University. During the campaign one of the leading candidates (one of 17!), a photo emerged of Danielle Grufferty and Gordon Brown and some Labour Students in a marginal constituency (Wirral West).

Bear in mind even the people who lived in Woodchurch didn't know Gordon Brown was coming. His visit was to prop up Stephen Hesford's popularity and improve the morale in Wirral West Labour Party members; although it seems Stephen Hesford MP will have a fight on his hands this time with Esther McVey (Conservative candidate who he called a "blonde bimbo" one year).

However a contingent from Labour Students (along with Dannie) went along and were photographed with Gordon Brown.

Danielle was (it looked like from the photo) laughing at a Gordon Brown joke. As the President of the Liberal Democrat Society, I and others supported (as well as chairing the hustings of and I'll admit) voted for Danielle; she later became President (now in her 2nd year).

The truth was at the time I felt being photographed with the Prime Minister with a bunch of Labour Party students meant she was trying to have have it both ways with support from both Labour & Lib Dem. In the hustings she incorrectly stated that the Liberal Democrats party policy was pro-tuition fees when they were the only mainstream party against them.

I corrected her (the only candidate I corrected during the hustings as I preferred to let them answer the questions in their own way; it's just with one's own party one can get quite passionate when people get the policy wrong).

She later apologised (but was unlucky that the President of the Liberal Democrat Society was chairing the hustings and pointed out her error). She later also mentioned the article I wrote as it became the #1 ranked term for her name at the time and gave an explanation as to what had happened.

Her "Chief Whip" of the campaign; a Labour students officer asked me to remove/change the article stating it would damage her chances of getting elected. In the end he decided to remove the photo instead and said that they had only just got the photos from the photographer; she'd been tagged in it and the timing had nothing to do with Dannie's elected bid to what is technically (as the taxpayer funds student unions) public office.

However NOLS has a pretty firm grip over NUS politics. In fact each political party tries to get its party members elected, as NUS delegates or other positions. The year in question; the Vice President (Communications) was an ex-Liberal Democrat Chair of Wirral LDYS (later Liberal Youth).

Course I haven't seen Dannie much in the past 2 years and have been very part-time (read 2hours of lectures a year) at the university apart from using the university library.

My point is the following, Dannie's supporters tried to use a picture of her and the Prime Minister; but during a campaign to elect her as student President; thought this'd turn Lib Dem/Conservative leaning students to vote for other candidates.

Gordon Brown (or his special advisers) are trying to use the popularity of David Tennant (and Doctor Who) to bolster his popularity (remember the earlier stories regarding Susan Boyle, Jedward and the Prime Minister?).

The Prime Minister seems to be needing the popularity of actors to boost his own popularity through testimonials? Will anybody actually vote differently in May because Labour was recommended by "Doctor Who" (or David Tennant)?

Testimonials are very powerful things as they're supposed to be independent. Due to the party political nature of this blog post, the necessary imprint is at the end. As usual, answers on a postcard, please leave a comment or email me if you prefer with any thoughts, inaccuracies or if you just disagree with what I wrote.

Maybe I should set up a straw poll of voting preferences to see how Lib Dem, Tory or socialist my readership is. :D

Published and Promoted by John Brace (Liberal Democrats), both at 134 Boundary Road, Birkenhead, CH43 7PH

Printed by Google Inc, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View, CA 94043 USA

8 comments|post comment

LGBT Lib Dems at Autumn Federal Conference [11 Sep 2009|01:45pm]

[ mood | busy ]

DELGA, the Lib Dem LGBT wing, is revving up for a fantastic conference in Bournemouth next week. For an overview of DELGA's events, please visit http://lgbt.libdems.org.uk/pages/bournemouth2009.html

We have our AGM, where we'll be electing the brave souls who will steer the organisation into a General Election year. Our Fringe with Stonewall will explore the fight for LGBT rights in the midst of financial and ecological meltdown. And to wind it all off, we'll be spending Tuesday night having a drink and a boogie in Bournemouth's Pink triangle.

If you can volunteer an hour or two on the DELGA stall (particularly if you're a lady - we would like our stall to at least be as representative as our membership), please contact us - it's simple work and a good way to meet people!

post comment

Conference and Liberal Youth grant [30 Aug 2009|10:39pm]

From 2004 to 2006 the Federal Grant to Liberal Youth (then LDYS) was £28,000. For the last two years it's been £16,000. Do other people think it should go back up to its former levels?

The Federal party gives out about £449,000 each year to other party bodies (inc. Liberal Youth) through this grant. About £130,000 goes to SAOs.

What proportion of this should go to Liberal Youth and what to other sections eg Women Liberal Democrats for the Campaign for Gender Balance?

Personally as a man who's 30 I think Liberal Youth is a better use of the money; but others may disagree!

Anyway, I am looking forward to the Bournemouth conference... won't be there in person but will watch it on the TV.

Acronym key:-
LDYS - Liberal Democrat Youth and Students
SAO - Specified Associated Organisation
12 comments|post comment

Hustings Questions? [20 Nov 2007|11:10pm]

I'd like to attend the North-West leadership hustings in Manchester this weekend, but I can't find out how to get a question onto the agenda. Does anybody know?
5 comments|post comment

Wikipedia [03 Oct 2007|04:50pm]

I've decided to work on improving articles concerning the lib dems on wikipedia. A lot of people use wikipedia as a source of information and if we have good, balanced and well references articles it might actually help gain us support! Believe you me, young people are more likely to read the wiki article than the manifesto because I'm one of them.

If anyone has any images of Lib Dem politicians, that they have taken themselves and would be willing to release under a free documentation license such as GFDL I would be able to use them on the articles which tends to improve their appearance significantly.

And of course, help with the actual editing of articles (especially finding reliable references)would also be very much appreciated.
3 comments|post comment

Top 100 Lib Dem blogs [25 Sep 2007|05:13pm]

Just a quick little plug;
Ian Dale has published his Top 100 Liberal blogs, and my blog is number 72 :)

The list is well worth a look through, and most (if not all) of the 100 can also be seen over on Lib Dem Blogs

one interesting point though is number 40 (Clowns to the Left of Me) and 59 (Bernard Woolley), are the same blog.
1 comment|post comment

Democracy In Action [23 Sep 2007|05:23pm]

I'm trying to understand a little how Liberal Democrat policy is decided. At Federal Conference there were a number of policy motions presented to conference, and each local party sent voting members who could vote on them.

My question is: how do the voting members know which way to vote on behalf of their local party?
11 comments|post comment

Lib Dem Blog of the Year [18 Aug 2007|09:45am]

[ mood | amused ]

The Liberal Democrats, in conjunction with Lib Dem Voice are running the 2nd annual Lib Dem Blog of the year.

This year there are several categories up for grabs:
• Liberal Democrat blog of the year
• Best blog from a Liberal Democrat elected to public office
• Best new Liberal Democrat blog (started since 1st October 2006)
• Best posting on a Liberal Democrat blog (since 1st October 2006)
• Most humorous Liberal Democrat blog
• Best designed Liberal Democrat blog

Nominations can be emailed to - ecampaignteam@libdems.org.uk
The Judging panel will consist of;

Ryan Cullen – From Lib Dem blogs
Lynne Featherstone MP – MP for Hornsey and Wood Green, and a blogger herself
Will Howells – From the Party’s innovations department, and a blogger himself
Stephen Tall – Last year’s winner, and commissioning editor of Lib Dem Voice

The judges will choose a short list of the blogs nominated, for each category. They will then pick the winner for each category, with the exception of the "best designed" category, which will be decided by an online readers poll hosted by Lib Dem Voice

The results will be announced at the awards ceremony at the party's autumn conference: 21.00-23.00, in the Holiday Inn Restaurant on Sunday 16th September.

The decision of the judges will be final and the competition is not open to any blogs run by the judges or any postings written by them.

post comment

New libdem mailing list : Liberal Drug Use [23 Jul 2007|11:15am]

I noticed we didn't have a mailing list for discussing drug policy, law, research and problems so I created one - you can subscribe at : http://lists.libdems.org.uk/wws/info/liberal_drugs (if you have a libdem list account, which means being a card carrying member iirc).
post comment

Baroness Neuberger's statement on cannabis BBC Radio Any Questions [21 Jul 2007|08:52pm]

As a lib dem I can't believe the statements made last night by Baroness Neuberger on the subject of cannabis and
marijuana on the BBC Any Questions show. You can listen to her, and other equally misinformed, opinions at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/anyquestions.shtml

Our party spokesperson on Health in the Lords claimed that 'Skunk' is far stronger, than it was historically (not the case), and that it was causing mental health problems (again not the case) - both of these current ideas have been thoroughly debunked by published research.

Perhaps our shadow Health Minister and Spokesperson could take their information from the guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/drugs/Story/0,,2041749,00.html) or the indy ( http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2788634.ece) rather than the Daily Mail.

Furthermore, following Sir Campbells fine words about the RSA report being a 'wake up call' in March, closely followed by publication of an article by experts in The Lancet in march debunking current myths, and more recently the Transform report on drug policy - surely now is a better time than ever to set out an ambituous plan for liberalisation going much further than the wishy washy policy on drugs set in 2005.

The Indy has done another u-turn on Cannabis liberalisation ( http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/deborah_orr/article2788635.ece ) - after waking from it's "Skunk Nightmare", ministers are admitting it didn't do them any harm and the public are making it clear that actually they
don't care if other people smoke weed.

And it's not just me - I think most lib dem bloggers see now as a great opportunity to grow some backbone and stand out from the other parties with some genuine liberal and progressive policies - sensible drug liberalisation rather than mumbling about taking it at uni and not liking it much or fiddling with classification.
1 comment|post comment

a quick plug [11 Jul 2007|04:19pm]

http://www.libdemblogs.co.uk/ hopefully the name explains it all :)

basically its a collection of over a hundred blogs written by liberal democrats across the country. with the number of blogs growing week by week, its a great place to read what other lib dems are thinking
3 comments|post comment

Trades Unions [10 Jul 2007|04:33pm]

[ mood | busy ]

I've been doing some research into trades unions of late. Though it's possible to be a member of most (all?) unions without actively donating to the Labour Party, it seems that the ties between unions and Labour are still strong. As a Liberal Democrat who's interested in joining a union, what's my best course of action? Are there any unions which aren't in bed with Labour at the higher levels?

Update: I know that I don't have to contribute directly to the Labour Party, but if the general activities of the union are supportive of New Labour, then my union membership is in effect contributing to Labour. One of the unions I looked at while trying to find one good for IT workers is Amicus, who are strongly linked to Labour. See also Trade Union & Labour Party Liason - is there a Lib Dem equivalent?

13 comments|post comment

Lib Dems, IT and open source [12 Mar 2007|02:47pm]

Two issues to raise here..

The first is that we lack any serious Information/Communication Technology at shadow cabinet level, and none of our spokespeople or working groups have the experience or knowledge to contribute any useful ICT policy beyond the basic obvious, hand-wavey, stuff like 'Big IT Projects always fail', 'ID Cards are a bad idea', etc.

What bugs me is that there are so many issues that are critical to governance, policy and serving as her majesty's opposition that require that, as in every FTSE 100 company, we have the equivilent to an IT director 'on the board', in the case of government and political party's it is a nonsense that we have nobody like this at cabinet or shadow cabinet level and no group with experience and an ear to the ground to research, inform and build policy on so many issues from hundreds of failing government IT projects, to procurement, to anti-trust and software patents, to growing our own software industry instead of being dependant on the U.S.

Anyway, I hope to get this issue recognised in the party so that we can be a 21st century party, and not fall even further behind the Tories, who are looking (aside from the occasional relic from 'the old nasty party') like a greener, more technology aware and energetic liberal party than my own.
8 comments|post comment

My first Spring Conference [04 Mar 2007|11:04pm]

[ mood | cheerful ]

I just got back from my first-ever Lib Dem conference. I had a great time and came away feeling that I understand the Party much better and that I want to focus far more of my energy on it, because I think I'm going to be able to contribute more effectively there than in most of the other organisations of which I'm a member.

The highlights for me were the Health consultative session on Friday afternoon, and the Glee Club last night. I now have an earworm of the chorus to "The Land", but I don't think I mind too much! The lowest point for me was the rally on Friday evening; the choice of theme seemed opportunistic, the repeated use of context-less statistics was embarrassing, and the video presentation had a Pythonesque quality at times, as well as appearing to contradict Ming (we really can't have it both ways on ASBOs). It's a shame, because the crime policy motion and the paper underlying it were actually much better than the rally or Ming's Five Points make them appear. It was also disappointing to see Nicol Stephen disingenously claiming that we don't know what the SNP's crime policy is - it took me two minutes to find it on their website afterwards, and guess what? it's remarkably similar to ours. I'm a former SNP member myself, having left partly because of a weakening in their commitment to LGBT Scots and partly because I'm probably going to live in England for the rest of my life and wanted to join a party that could exercise some influence there. From my experience, the SNP has very similar values and a very similar culture to ours and would make a far more natural coalition partner for us than New Labour, if we could only see past the hypocrisy of being in favour of self-determination for every nation in the world except Scotland and Wales.

Still, overall it was a very interesting and energising Conference. My top tips for anyone considering going to one would be 1) pace yourself and don't try to do everything; 2) prepare in advance for any session you think you might want to contribute to, so you've got facts to back you up and can make your point or ask your question with confidence; and 3) take a coat with large pockets so that you can leave handbags, backpacks etc in your hotel room and walk straight past the bag check on the way into Conference.

3 comments|post comment

[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]