Maria Miller: a compromised MP is easier to manipulate

Given that Cameron must have been fully aware of:

  • Maria Miller’s expenses ‘anomalies’ when he appointed her as Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport,
  • the UN’s gay marriage, press freedom curtailment and freedom of speech curtailment diktats  when he took office,
  • the likelihood that the public would be vehemently against all such moves from the UN,

… why did Cameron put a known expenses fiddler in charge of policies which he knew would cause volcanic political eruptions?

Could it be that Maria Miller’s dodgy expenses made her more pliable and keener to effect these monumental changes to our constitution and society, against the public will?

Why won’t he sack her, when he must be fully aware that nearly 80% of the public are disgusted and want her gone from office?

Perhaps he fears that he would be henceforth unable to persuade other self-soiled MPs to do his dirty bidding?  Or maybe he wants to defuse the Miller time bomb before he allows her to become an aggrieved back-bencher?

We need to vet our MPs very thoroughly indeed – and throw out ALL troughers at the 2015 GE.

PS: While Cameron appears to be somewhat rowing back from his support of Maria Miller, I don’t expect justice from the man who has brought this country to the point where tyranny of government can have free reign.

Lest we forget, Glenn Greenwald’s recent lecture on civil liberties, free speech and freedom of the press reminds us of what is at stake.


As an aside, I’m pleased to see that Charles Moore has been reading up on the New World Order.  Welcome to the club of the awake, Mr Moore.

BBC Licence fee share-out: a lure to capture the press?

I can only surmise that the government’s attempt to muzzle the press via a Royal Charter is not going well. Or perhaps our Dear Leader is merely lining up the next assault on the press, should his Royal Charter gambit not succeed.

We now learn that Grant Schapps, is considering depriving the BBC of its sole right to the licence fee – and would have us believe that such a move would be as a consequence to the BBC’s paedophile ‘scandals’ and fiscal impropriety.  A better and more popular penalty  would have been to begin dismantling the BBC licence fee system. But on that issue, Schapps was deafeningly silent. Under no circumstances would the government willingly relinquish its propaganda arm.

Instead, its cunning plan is to lure the free market broadcasters into its welfare trap. It worked on nearly half of our population, didn’t it?

Will what remains of the the free press be stupid or greedy or desperate enough to fall for it?  It is not impossible to imagine Telegraph TV, for instance, being temped, given the Telegraph’s ailing finances.

Oh, and when will we see police investigations into paedophile politicians?