The Royal Air Force is practising attacking raids as the Ukraine crisis deepens.
Training flights were conducted yesterday across Wales, flying over the Christian Voice office in Carmarthenshire.
The aircraft, which flew at low level over the rolling Welsh hills, were most likely to have been Hawk fighter jets, based at RAF Valley on Anglesey and used by the RAF for twin-seat training.
Similar exercises were carried out before the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan began.
The practice runs come as Ukrainian armed forces have been trying, without success, to retake cities in Eastern Ukraine held by pro-Russian demonstrators.
Three people are reported to have been killed, but their has been no condemnation of Ukraine for ‘firing on its own people’ from either the Rt Hon William Hague MP, Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, or US Secretary of State John Kerry.
Meanwhile, the United States is talking about sending ‘non-lethal’ equipment to Kiev, and the European Union is beefing up its armed forces in the Baltic States and Poland.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Nato Secretary General, said the alliance would be providing “more planes in the air, more ships on the water, and more readiness on land”.
What these would be used for, apart from taking on Russian forces in what could easily become a Third World War, is not very clear.
We join Nigel Farage and John Redwood in calling for Britain to leave the EU
and we are with The Daily Express as it urges Britain to stay out of the Ukrainian conflict.
We need to remember that the problems in Ukraine started when pro-EU NGO’s including the ‘Open Society’ of George Soros, financed trouble-makers in Kiev who took over government buildings when the elected President decided to align the country with Russia rather than with the EU.
Charitably, these actions may be regarded as stupid, and bound to lead to the copycat actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine which came to pass. Uncharitably, Messrs Soros et al foresaw all the Eastern Ukraine trouble in advance and want to start a full-scale war, from which they could benefit financially. (Take what you will from that last link!)
Either way, the Ukrainian conflict is one which Britain must not play any part in. William Hague will never admit that it was pro-EU agitation which started the Ukraine crisis, but at the very least HMG could end the self-defeating sanctions against Russian figures, and stop sabre-rattling.
Email your MP and demand that the UK keeps right out of Ukraine.
Stop Press: The above article was written 17th April 2014.
23rd April 2014: ‘Four RAF Typhoon fighters will next week join Nato warplanes from Poland and Denmark in the Baltic states’. Daily Telegraph
Christian Voice: We have the news before it happens!
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Sock Puppets: The Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum
The 2014 secession vote in Crimea is derided as ‘illegal’ by all but two of the UN Security Council. Now further information has surfaced about European and American funding of the Ukrainian pro-EU ‘Maidan Square’ movement. It was intended to weaken Russian influence. Those behind the unrest will not care it has cost so many lives.
The Policy Association for an Open Society (PASOS) is heavily-EU-slanted. Its website carried an article dated 13th December 2013 deriding the Ukrainian authorities under then President Viktor Yanukovych for identifying certain Western groups as its ‘enemies’. The groups included ‘ three members of the PASOS network of think tanks.’ Imagine that.
‘The memo also targets Europe Without Borders, a Ukrainian NGO which partnered with PASOS on a program to encourage the European Union to remove visa requirements for the Eastern Partnership countries, including Ukraine.’
What a give-away. The ‘Eastern Partnership countries’ is a term coined by Euro-expansionists five years ago. It refers to countries from the former Soviet Union on the EU’s eastern fringe. These include Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. However, the ‘Eastern Partnership’ is now regarded by John Lloyd of Reuters (worth a read) as being in retreat. Nevertheless, the visa proposal from PASOS would have allowed nationals of these states unfettered access to the EU and its labour markets.
George Soros financed Maidan Square activists
PASOS goes on to report without denial the Ukrainian Government memo’s identification of another six US groups financing the Maidan Square activists. In addition, the Soros Open Society offshoot the International Renaissance Fund was fingered:
‘The website published images of the memo, which it said was leaked by a member of the party. According to the report, the Party of Regions blames the current EuroMaidan protests in Ukraine on American donors who have funded pro-democracy programs in Ukraine, including the National Endowment for Democracy, the United States Agency for International Development, the U.S. Department of State, the Peace Corps, Freedom House and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.
‘In addition, the memo also blames the eruption of protests on the European Union. The International Renaissance Fund, a Ukrainian NGO founded by George Soros, is likewise identified as an enemy of the party.’
Democratic Principles?
Says PASOS: ‘News of the memo drew a sharp rebuke from PASOS Executive Director Jeff Lovitt.
‘“Our members are not dangerous to anyone who defends democratic principles and the free exchange of ideas,” Lovitt said. “What is dangerous is a political party identifying independent pro-democracy groups as enemies.”’
Calling a bunch of thugs who stormed government offices and removed a democratically-elected president by violent street protests ‘pro-democracy’ beggars belief. So does the use of the expression to refer to unashamed interference and destabilisation of a sovereign state by US NGO’s. Welcome to the world of the Eurocracy. The EU and the US can interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. But woe betide Russia when it defends it interests.
The EU expanding its empire
Jeff Lovitt is also Co-Chair of yet another Pro-EU expansionist body. This is the well-funded ‘Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum.’ This group boasted:
‘Many participants of the EaP Civil Society Forum have been active in various sectors of Euromaidan movement. Several examples below are just a tip of the iceberg of the civic activities that our colleagues from Ukraine have been involved in.’
It then listed a number of groups which helped destabilise Ukraine. These included ‘Euromaidan Council’ and ‘Maidan SOS’. Even the name ‘Euromaidan’ betrays the origin of the driving force.
An Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum webpage lists its Steering Committee. This had the strange give-away picture of what appear to be sock puppets at the top of this page. The picture has now been removed.
‘The Forum was created as part of a European Commission effort “to support the further development of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs)” and “to promote contacts among CSOs and facilitate their dialogue with public authorities.”’
Moreover, who funds PASOS, the Policy Association for an Open Society? Any guesses? Does the expression ‘… Open Society’ in its title give any clues?
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Population Control Guru is ‘Science Envoy’ to Muslim Nations
President Obama has sent population control guru, John Holdren, on missions of ‘science diplomacy’ to the rest of the world
The Obama administration has been sending population control guru, John Holdren, to Muslim nations in what it calls ‘science diplomacy.’
The official purpose of ‘science diplomacy’ is to bridge the so called ‘cultural gap’ between the United States and the rest of the world.
John P Holdren, director of the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, uses these visits to meet his counterparts in foreign nations, along with his team of ‘Science Envoys.’
The man Obama has chosen to represent America is on record as saying that the world has far too many people. In a testimony before the Senate in 1974, Holdren teamed up with Paul Ehrlich to argue that overpopulation was heading the world towards a no-growth economy.
In an essay collaborated with Ehrlich in 1969, titled ‘Population and Panaceas: A Technological Perspective’, Holdren suggested that “man’s present technology is inadequate to the task of maintaining the world’s burgeoning billions, even under the most optimistic assumptions.” Even advancements to increase food supply, he argued, would be fruitless until “the population growth rate drastically reduced.”
In his 1973 book, co-authored with the Ehrlichs, calledHuman Ecology: Problems and Solutions, Holdren wrote that toddlers, let alone babies in the womb, are not fully human:
“The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being.”
In the book he set out a pro-abortion, pro-sterilisation Doomsday scenario which could only be averted by a sudden and rapid decrease in the population.
Myron Ebell, director of international energy and global warming policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, has drawn attention to Holdren’s history of false predictions: “Dr. Holdren has a record only surpassed by his longtime collaborator Paul Ehrlich for spreading misinformation and making failed predictions.”
“In addition, Dr. Holdren has advocated a wide array of despicable policies, such as mandatory population control, and was a willing stooge of the Soviet Union as a member for several decades of the Pugwash Conference (and of which he was chairman when it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995),” Ebell added. “John Holdren is therefore the perfect “science diplomat” for an administration that peddles junk science and supports policies that will make poor people, and especially poor people in poor countries, poorer. As President Obama’s science diplomat, he can now advocate for global impoverishment on a global stage.”
Obama Supports China’s One-Child Policy
Why would Obama choose a population control guru like Holdren to represent America abroad? Could it be a simple oversight? Hardly! From the day he took office, Obama has sided with the powerful population control lobby, giving tens of millions of dollars in subsidies to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which helps to fund China’s population control agenda.
The Obama Administration reflects a growing sympathy among Western politicians towards China’s family planning policies.
At the UN Climate Change Conference 2009, Chinese government’s delegation argued that their country’s one-child-only-policy should “serve as a model for integrating population programs into the framework of climate change adaptation.” Zhao Baige, vice-minister of the National Population and Family Planning Commission of China said that China’s policy of forced population control “has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society.”
The Chinese delegates also cited the UN’s own State of World Population 2009 report, put out by UNFPA, which suggests that if the global population can be kept to 8 billion by the year 2050 (it is currently projected to increase to just over 9 billion), “it might result in 1 billion to 2 billion fewer tons of carbon emissions.”
The irony is that, despite its draconian population control measures, China leads the world in CO2 emissions. Nevertheless, this Communist nation has been praised for its contribution to the world’s ecology. Sven Burmester, a representative of the UNFPA, said, “China has had the most successful family planning policy in the history of mankind in terms of quantity and with that, China has done mankind a favor.”
Canada’s Financial Post also praised China for its contribution to the environment. “Despite its dirty coal plants,” said the Canadian equivalent of America’s Wall Street Journal, “[China] is the world’s leader in terms of fashioning policy to combat environmental degradation, thanks to its one-child-only edict.” The paper calls China’s solution a “simple” and “dramatic” fix that, if extended to other nations, would reduce global population by 50 percent by 2075.
From Eugenics to Environmentalism
Population control has an impressive pedigree among the sages of the West. In fact, until the early twentieth century, it was politically fashionable for liberals to talk about finding ways to reduce the “surplus population.” Twentieth-century advocates of population control often drew on the social theories of men like Thomas Malthus and Charles Darwin’s cousin Sir Francis Galton, who, a century earlier, had argued that the poor were draining the world’s recourses. (One of Malthus’s solutions for reducing the “surplus population” was to introduce policies specifically designed to bring death to large numbers of peasants. For example, he encouraged poor people to move near swamps, so they would catch diseases and begin dying off.)
In the early twentieth century, Malthusian ideas on population control were linked to theories of eugenics and social Darwinism. It was not until Hitler tried to move these ideas out of the anthropology class and into the gas chamber that population control stopped being a politically correct topic—for a while.
But it didn’t take long for the spectre of Hitler to wear off. Following the huge birth explosion that occurred in the decades after World War II, the issue of population control gradually returned to the national limelight. But this time, instead of being explicitly linked to theories like eugenics and social Darwinism, it was propelled by the emerging ideology of environmentalism.
While it was no longer politically correct to appeal specifically to social planners like Galton and Malthus, the basic concern of these men—namely, that because the resources on earth remain limited, there will be a demographic Armageddon if the human population continues to expand—was revived but packaged as ecological responsibility. Thus, it became politically correct once again to advocate population control. The American Eugenics Society (founded in 1922, as social Darwinism was laying the foundations for the Nazi experiment) jumped on this bandwagon but attempted to garner more respectability in 1972 by changing its name to the Society for the Study of Social Biology.
As the twentieth century wore on, however, something happened to change the tide once again. The key factor this time was not that the world’s population had stopped growing, but that it had stopped growing in the West. (Many factors contributed to this. It became fashionable for women to marry late, while books like The Feminine Mystique helped make women feel guilty if their greatest ambition was to be a wife and mother. These things, together with the rise in abortion and homosexuality, meant that the birthrate in the West began to decline steadily.)
This fact alone would not have been sufficient to change the direction of the population debate, since population continued to grow worldwide (though at a significantly lower rate). However, by this time the specter of racism loomed large in the background of almost every debate. It did not take long before people began realizing that if Western populations were decreasing while non-Western ones were growing, and if the former are primarily white and the latter primarily brown, then calling for a lower international birthrate was equivalent to calling for fewer brown babies. And that left one open to charges of racism.
Thus did population control become politically incorrect once again. English journalist Anthony Browne lamented this shift in his 2006 book The Retreat of Reason: “Now that the population of the West has stopped growing, concern about overpopulation has become very unfashionable because, as Tony Benn put it, it means wanting fewer brown babies. The combination of Western guilt and fear of racism has all but killed off public concern about overpopulation in the last few decades.”
But even as Browne was writing, the wheels of one more paradigm shift slowly began to turn. Thanks to the increased hysteria about global warming, talk about overpopulation has become politically correct once again. As Garry Egger of the New South Wales Centre for Health Promotion and Research insists, “The debate [about population control] needs to be reopened as part of a second ecological revolution” The UNFPA has framed the issue like this on its website: “Greenhouse gases would not be accumulating so hazardously had the number of earth’s inhabitants not increased so rapidly, but remained at 300 million people, the world population of 1,000 years ago, compared with 6.8 billion today.”
The connection between global warming and a renewed interest in population control was evident in a report commissioned by the Optimum Population Trust in August 2009. Titled “Fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions, Less Cost,” the report argued that the best way to combat global warming would be to reduce the population through contraception and abortion. The utilitarian logic was simple: Fewer people = fewer polluters.
The reality is that most CO2 emissions are not the result of man-made technology at all, but occur naturally, as in the water vapor released by the oceans and through the consumption of vegetation by animals and microbes. But this “inconvenient truth” doesn’t fit the environmentalists’ story line, so they routinely ignore it. To them, the earth has a surplus population of polluters, and those polluters are the human population.
This “fact” is considered so obvious to them that only “deniers,” who are “motivated by religious-right attitudes,” could possibly think otherwise. Or so said population control advocate Morris Sullivan in a 1999 article for impactpress.com, titled “Population Control: How Many Are Too Many?” Claiming that problems such as global warming are “at least partially due to growing world population,” Sullivan wrote that “it’s hard to imagine anyone opposing restraints on population controls.” While acknowledging that “such people exist,” he asserted that the best of them “are well-meaning optimists blinded by their denial,” while the others “have more pernicious motivations—like greed and religious fanaticism.”
Paul Watson, a co-founder of Greenpeace, was even more severe. In a 2007 article for seashepherd.org, he wrote that we humans act “in the same manner as an invasive virus” and that we are “killing our host the planet Earth.” This requires, he continued, a “radical and invasive” cure. How invasive? “We need to radically and intelligently reduce human populations to fewer than one billion.”
Contracept for Credit
Even with the fate of planet Earth supposedly hanging in the balance, Western nations are a long way off from advocating the forced abortion policies of China. Nevertheless, global warming is continually put forward as a reason for increasing the availability of contraception, abortion, “comprehensive” sex education, and family planning services. The National Wildlife Federation, for example, put out a Population and Global Warming Fact Sheet (http://cf.nwf.org/globalwarming/pdfs/climatefactsheet.pdf) calling for better “family planning and related health care and education.” “Providing these services,” claims the federation, “will not only reduce poverty and improve the lives of many, it will reduce the danger of climate change and other environmental stressors.”
Dr. Barry Walters, a professor of obstetrics at the University of Western Australia, argued a few years ago that those who refuse to use contraception should be levied with a climate-change tax. In a 2007 article in the Medical Journal of Australia, Dr. Walters proposed that such a tax be assessed on all couples having more than two children. He suggested an initial fine of $5,000 for each “extra” child when born, with another $800 assessed every year thereafter. However, parents could redeem themselves by using contraceptives or undergoing sterilization procedures, for which they would receive carbon credits.
Those who propose these schemes are unconcerned by the obvious fact that a sparse population is, in general, a poorer population. Consider that the more people there are, the greater division of labor there can be, the more capital there will be, the more hands there will be to tend gardens, and, as a result, the more fruitful the earth and human society can become. The industrial revolution would never have been possible if Europe’s population had remained at the levels it was at during the Middle Ages.
These facts are conveniently ignored by the gurus of population control, such as John Holdren, as he and his ‘Science Envoys’ go around representing America.
‘Involuntary Fertility Control’
This 1977 book floats the idea of ‘involuntary fertility control’ as a possible solution to over-population.
Thankfully, public calls for compulsory sterilization are no longer mainstream as they were in the early twentieth century. Nevertheless, the Mr Holdren’s high profile position suggests that the tide may be turning.
In 1977 Holdren helped to co-author the controversial textbook, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. The book discussed drastic measures that could be implemented if population continued to increase. Plans discussed in the book include “coercive,” “involuntary fertility control,” including “a program of sterilizing women after their second or third child.”
They also suggest forcing single women to abort their babies, implanting sterilizing capsules in people when they reach puberty and spiking public reserves and staple foods with a chemical that would lead to sterility. To help achieve those goals, the authors suggest it might be necessary to formulate a “world government scheme” with an “armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force” to enforce population control measures.
Holdren’s controversial 1977 book declares: “Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”
“Unfortunately,” they add, “such a program therefore is not practical for most less developed countries….”
The word ‘unfortunately’ is significant, since it suggests that Holdren & co. would be quite happy to see these type of draconian measures implemented if they got the chance.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Greenpeace activists protest on a barge in Rotterdam harbour containing illegal US GM rice.
In an astonishing outburst, a Government minister has accused opponents of genetic modification of being ‘wicked’, reports the BBC.
Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Rt Hon Owen Paterson, MP, made the comments in an interview in the Independent newspaper.
He was referring in particular to so-called ‘Golden Rice’ which has vitamin A added by genetic modification.
Mr Paterson told The Independent that NGOs such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth that oppose GM technology were “casting a dark shadow over attempts to feed the world”.
And he backed an open letter signed by a group of eminent international scientists calling for the rapid rollout of vitamin A-enhanced rice which he believes will help prevent the cause of up to a third of the world’s child deaths.
Owen and Rose Paterson
“It’s just disgusting that little children are allowed to go blind and die because of a hang-up by a small number of people about this technology,” he said. “I feel really strongly about it. I think what they do is absolutely wicked.”
The BBC says, in its story on Mr Paterson’s claim, that opponents of GM rice can point to the World Health Organisation’s advocacy of routine administration of vitamin A supplements in countries where deficiency is a problem.
‘Vitamin A is needed for healthy skin and eyes and to help strengthen the immune system so that the body can fight infections. Deficiency can lead to blindness, illness and death,’ the BBC article went on.
‘People in the developed usually world get enough vitamin A from their diet by eating foods like cheese, yoghurts and eggs, but deficiency is a common problem in developing countries, and is estimated to affect between 140 million and 250 million children under the age of five.’
Bill Gates reportedly owns 500,000 Monsanto shares
The rice would be made available only in the developing world. The European Union has put such a break on the development of GM crops in member states that Monsanto has retreated into conventional plant breeding in Europe and has said it will no longer seek approval of its products across the Union.
There are no commercial GM crops in Britain, and there is only one active field trial, currently being grown under tight security at Rothamsted Research in Hertfordshire. Across the EU, only two GM crops have been sanctioned for commercial planting.
That is in contrast to the United States, where GM corn (maize), soybeans, cotton, oil-seed rape and squash are commercially grown with around 85% of cotton and 50% of maize being GM. Opposition has had only limited success. Resistance is said to be growing in the developing world, despite heavy promotion by the Gates Foundation and United States Embassies world wide of GM crops manufactured by US giants Monsanto and Dupont. With Swiss firm Syngenta, they together account for 47% of the global proprietary seed market.
Owen Paterson became well-known for his opposition to gay marriage, and has also voted against civil partnerships, homosexuals adopting children, giant casinos, identity cards, hate-speech laws, the production of ‘saviour siblings’, and animal-human hybrids. He voted in 2008 to limit abortion to 12 weeks, the most ‘pro-life’ option on offer at the time.
So how come Mr Paterson finds himself so emotionally attached to the bad guys in the GM debate?
The Register of Parliamentary Interests merely records him accepting small-scale hospitality from Betfair, New Century Media and Co-operation Ireland to go to Ascot and other posh parties. He has not declared being on the pay-roll of any bio-tech company.
Matthew, Viscount Ridley
But Christian Voice has discovered that Owen Paterson is the brother-in-law, through his wife Rose, of Matthew, Viscount Ridley. Matthew Ridley isvisiting professor at Cold Spring Habor Laboratory. And what do they do? The answer is: genetic modification of plants.
The Cold Harbor website proudly proclaims: ‘CSHL has taken part in numerous plant genome sequencing projects including Arabidopsis, rice, sorghum and maize, as well as epigenomic sequencing and profiling. We are part of the iPlant Cyberinfrastructure consortium and the Long Island Biofuels Alliance. The Laboratory owns 12 acres of farmland nearby called Uplands Farm. Here, an expert staff raises maize, tomato and Arabidopsis plants for study.’
Quite simply, it appears Owen Paterson has had his ear bent by his fellow land-owning aristocratic brother-in-law. As my dear late mother used to say, ‘It’s not what you know, it’s who you know.’ Quite. Or perhaps as the Bible says:
Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
God’s created order was given us for a purpose:
Psalm 104:14 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth;
Woe betide us if we interfere with it. We shall do so at our peril.
Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
In 1971 92 per cent of working-age men were in employment. This year the figure had fallen to 76 per cent.
The number of women in work has gone up by almost as much as the number of men working has shrunk.
Only 53 per cent of women were in paid employment in 1971 compared with 67 per cent.
In August, the Institute for Public Policy Research published its ‘Who’s Breadwinning?’ study reporting that 2.2 million women are now the main breadwinner for their households – a rise of 80 per cent in 15 years.
The number of mothers living with a partner who are the principle household earner has risen from 18 per cent to 31 per cent. The employment rate of lone mothers has risen form 43 per cent to 58 per cent. The report called for universal child-care provision.
Feminists are delighted by all this, except by the news that more men work in high-status professions earning bigger salaries than women.
Daisy Sands, of women’s rights group the Fawcett Society, said: “While highlighting the strides women have made over the last 40 years, this (ONS) report serves as a timely reminder of how far we have to go before we have a women-friendly labour market.”
Meanwhile, the implications for our society of men losing their God-given role as providers of their families as women scurry around trying to balance home and work while children are left in day-care have not been addressed by anyone.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
The ancient Christian settlement of Maalouda in Syria
Syrian rebels have attacked an ancient Christian town in Syria.
Residents fled as the al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front occupied Maalouda. Government forces are said to have all but retaken the town, but there are reports of fighting carrying on in the town, which housed 3,000 people, many of them speakers of Aramiac, the ancient tongue spoken by the Lord Jesus himself.
The BBC’s Jeremy Bowen disputed reports of wholesale damage to churches but confirmed that six Christians have been kidnapped.
Mallouda is one of the most famous and historic centres of Christianity in the world. The attack illustrates the threat faced by the Christian minority from the rebels, who want to evict all non-Sunni minorities, including the Alawites amongst whom President Assad is numbered, and establish an Islamic state in Syria.
On 27th May, according to the Assyrian International News Agency (AINA), armed rebels affiliated to the Free Syrian Army (FSA) raided the Christian-populated al-Duvair village in Reef on the outskirts of Homs near the border with Lebanon and massacred all its civilian residents, including women and children.
Amid the chorus of denunciations of the brutality of President Assad’s forces, it has been difficult to hear any similar recognition of the abuses of the rebels from the likes of UK Foreign Secretary the Rt Hon William Hague and US Secretary of State John Kerry.
Kerry was accused of lying by the Russians last week after his response to a question from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee asking if the Syrian opposition had become more infiltrated by al-Qaeda.
“Kerry responded that that was ‘basically incorrect’ and that the opposition has ‘increasingly become more defined by its moderation.'” reported USA Today.
Despite the clear intentions of the Islamist rebels to butcher religious minorities in Syria, and the atrocities committed by them (see George Galloway’s speech in the House of Commons), Western Governments, including the UK, France and the US, are still supporting the rebels and doing all they can to destabilise President Assad.
Their actions, and those of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, have kept the fighting going when the rebellion might well have come to an end. Their support for the rebels has achieved nothing except tens of thousands of deaths and displacements.
Yesterday the Washington Post reported that the CIA are now arming the Syrian rebels. Weapons deliveries have been ‘streaming into the country over the past two weeks,’ the paper said.
This is despite the Russian intervention in which Syria will join the Chemical Weapons Convention, but cruise missile strikes appear to have been averted after it became clear that the American Congress would join the UK House of Commons in voting against its executive’s desire to start bombing Syrian Government positions. Congressmen were reporting that emails and telephone calls from constituents were in some case 244 to 1 opposed to military intervention. A straw poll on WND’s news story reporting the figures is currently running at around 98% opposed.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Foreign Secretary William Hague was ready to ignore the UN Security Council and start military action against Syria.
The UK’s House of Commons has voted against any military action in Syria.
The House threw out Labour’s amendment, which watered down the Government motion, by 332 votes to 220, then voted against the Government motion itself by the narrower margin of 285 votes to 272.
Thirty Conservatives voted against military action and eleven LibDems. Thirty-two more Conservatives and 14 LibDems abstained or were absent, partly balancing the thirty-five Labour members who did not vote.
Except for three absent DUP MPs, all the ‘minor party’ MPs voted against. Their votes swung the day.
Here are the details (scroll down for good points from speeches and scroll right down for how your MP voted):
The Government motion:
‘That this House:
‘Deplores the use of chemical weapons in Syria on 21 August 2013 by the Assad regime, which caused hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries of Syrian civilians;
‘Recalls the importance of upholding the worldwide prohibition on the use of chemical weapons under international law;
‘Agrees that a strong humanitarian response is required from the international community and that this may, if necessary, require military action that is legal, proportionate and focused on saving lives by preventing and deterring further use of Syria’s chemical weapons;
‘Notes the failure of the United Nations Security Council over the last two years to take united action in response to the Syrian crisis;
‘Notes that the use of chemical weapons is a war crime under customary law and a crime against humanity, and that the principle of humanitarian intervention provides a sound legal basis for taking action;
‘Notes the wide international support for such a response, including the statement from the Arab League on 27 August which calls on the international community, represented in the United Nations Security Council, to “overcome internal disagreements and take action against those who committed this crime, for which the Syrian regime is responsible”;
‘Believes, in spite of the difficulties at the United Nations, that a United Nations process must be followed as far as possible to ensure the maximum legitimacy for any such action;
‘Therefore welcomes the work of the United Nations investigating team currently in Damascus, and, whilst noting that the team’s mandate is to confirm whether chemical weapons were used and not to apportion blame, agrees that the United Nations Secretary General should ensure a briefing to the United Nations Security Council immediately upon the completion of the team’s initial mission;
‘Believes that the United Nations Security Council must have the opportunity immediately to consider that briefing and that every effort should be made to secure a Security Council Resolution backing military action before any such action is taken, and notes that before any direct British involvement in such action a further vote of the House of Commons will take place; and
‘Notes that this Resolution relates solely to efforts to alleviate humanitarian suffering by deterring use of chemical weapons and does not sanction any action in Syria with wider objectives.’
Some points from some of the speeches
Dr Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con): I began my speech by referring to the first world war. Next year, we will commemorate the centenary of the events of August 1914. Those events have a worrying parallel. At that time, a series of actions and reactions drew in, in an escalating fashion, one country after another. Nobody thought that the assassination of an obscure archduke would lead to a world conflagration. As Admiral Lord West has said, this is a powder keg, and we should not be lobbing weapons into the heart of such combustible material.
George Galloway (Bradford West) (Respect)
The reason for the unease is that people can see the character of the Syrian opposition. They have seen the horrific videos that we have heard about. Take a look at the video of one of the commanders of the Syrian revolution cutting open the chest of a human being and eating his heart and liver. He videotaped himself doing it and put it up on YouTube because he thought that it might be considered attractive. Take a look at the videos of Christian priests having their heads sawn off—not chopped off; sawn off—with breadknives. Even a bishop in the Christian Church was murdered by these people. Every religious minority in Syria—there are 23 of them—is petrified at the thought of a victory for the Syrian rebels, whom the British Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have been doing their utmost to supply with weapons and money over the last two years.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern, and that of many Members, about the Christian minority of some half a million, who have been displaced, murdered and ethnically cleansed? Any attack upon Syria, whatever it may be, could have repercussions for the Christian minority, who are concerned about what would happen given the example of Iraq, where there were 1.3 million Christians before the war and only 300,000 afterwards.
Dr Alasdair McDonnell (Belfast South) (SDLP): I share the hon. Gentleman’s concerns…
Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) (Lab): I remember, 10 years ago, like many Members, sitting on the Government Benches listening to the whole of the Iraq debate and agonising about how I should vote. I remember my heart telling me that I should support my leader—I particularly wanted to support my right hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mr Straw), my good friend—and my head telling me throughout that debate, “No, there’s something wrong here,” and I voted no. …
On this occasion, 10 years on, I am very clear and I am not agonising. I oppose military action in this case.
I do not think … we have any proof that bombing will make things any better or get rid of the chemical weapons, if they are there. We need to remember that once we cross that line of military action, as other Members have said, even if it is a short strike and very few civilians are killed, which is highly unlikely, the result will be that when anyone is killed in future years in Syria, whoever has killed them or whatever the background, the west will be blamed. The United Kingdom will be blamed, as has happened throughout the middle east, and we will see the repercussions on our streets in the form of increased extremism.
Mr Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP): The Democratic Unionist party has never been found wanting when it has come to supporting military action on behalf of our nation when it was deemed necessary. That has happened on at least three occasions during my time in Parliament. I have to say, however, that I have not yet heard a compelling argument today to convince me that military intervention in this case is either necessary or in our national interest.
Main Question put.
The House divided:
Ayes 272, Noes 285.
10.17 pm
How your MP voted:
Voted No: Abbott, Ms Diane (Lab) (Hackney North & Stoke Newington)
Voted No: Abrahams, Debbie (Lab) (Oldham East & Saddleworth)
Voted Aye: Adams, Mr Nigel (Con) (Selby & Ainsty)
Did not vote: Afriyie, Mr Adam (Con) (Windsor)
Voted No: Ainsworth, RH Mr Bob (Lab) (Coventry North East)
Voted Aye: Aldous, Mr Peter (Con) (Waveney)
Voted Aye: Alexander, RH Danny (LD) (Inverness Nairn Badenoch & Strathspey)
Voted No: Alexander, RH Mr Douglas (Lab) (Paisley & Renfrewshire South)
Voted No: Alexander, Ms Heidi (Lab) (Lewisham East)
Voted No: Ali, Ms Rushanara (Lab) (Bethnal Green & Bow)
Voted No: Allen, Mr Graham (Lab) (Nottingham North)
Voted No: Amess, Mr David (Con) (Southend West)
Voted No: Anderson, Mr David (Lab) (Blaydon)
Voted Aye: Andrew, Mr Stuart (Con) (Pudsey)
Voted Aye: Arbuthnot, RH Mr James (Con) (North East Hampshire)
Voted No: Ashworth, Jonathan (Lab) (Leicester South)
Did not vote: Austin, Mr. Ian (Lab) (Dudley North)
Voted No: Bacon, Mr Richard (Con) (South Norfolk)
Voted No: Bailey, Mr Adrian (Lab) (West Bromwich West)
Voted No: Bain, Mr William (Lab) (Glasgow North East)
Voted Aye: Baker, Mr Norman (LD) (Lewes)
Voted No: Baker, Mr Steve (Con) (Wycombe)
Voted Aye: Baldry, Sir Tony (Con) (Banbury)
Voted Aye: Baldwin, Ms Harriett (Con) (West Worcestershire)
Voted No: Balls, RH Ed (Lab) (Morley & Outwood)
Voted No: Banks, Mr Gordon (Lab) (Ochil & South Perthshire)
Voted Aye: Barclay, Mr Stephen (Con) (North East Cambridgeshire)
Voted Aye: Barker, rh Gregory (Con) (Bexhill & Battle)
Voted No: Baron, Mr John (Con) (Basildon & Billericay)
Voted No: Barron, RH Mr Kevin (Lab) (Rother Valley)
Voted Aye: Barwell, Mr Gavin (Con) (Croydon Central)
Voted No: Bayley, Mr Hugh (Lab) (York Central)
Voted Aye: Bebb, Mr Guto (Con) (Aberconwy)
Voted No: Beckett, RH Margaret (Lab) (Derby South)
Voted No: Begg, Dame Anne (Lab) (Aberdeen South)
Voted Aye: Beith, RH Sir Alan (LD) (Berwick-upon-Tweed)
Did not vote: Bellingham, Mr Henry (Con) (North West Norfolk)
Voted No: Benn, RH Hilary (Lab) (Leeds Central)
Voted No: Benton, Mr Joe (Lab) (Bootle)
Voted Aye: Benyon, Mr. Richard (Con) (Newbury)
Did not vote: Bercow, Mr John (Speaker) (Buckingham)
Voted Aye: Beresford, Sir Paul (Con) (Mole Valley)
Voted No: Berger, Ms Luciana (Lab) (Liverpool Wavertree)
Voted Aye: Berry, Mr Jake (Con) (Rossendale & Darwen)
Voted No: Betts, Mr Clive (Lab) (Sheffield South East)
Voted No: Bingham, Mr Andrew (Con) (High Peak)
Voted Aye: Binley, Mr Brian (Con) (Northampton South)
Voted No: Birtwistle, Mr Gordon (LD) (Burnley)
Voted Aye: Blackman, Mr Bob (Con) (Harrow East)
Did not vote: Blackman-Woods, Dr. Roberta (Lab) (City of Durham)
Voted Aye: Blackwood, Ms Nicola (Con) (Oxford West & Abingdon)
Did not vote: Blears, RH Hazel (Lab) (Salford & Eccles)
Voted No: Blenkinsop, Mr Tom (Lab) (Middlesbrough South & East Cleveland)
Did not vote: Blomfield, Mr Paul (Lab) (Sheffield Central)
Voted No: Blunkett, RH Mr David (Lab) (Sheffield Brightside & Hillsborough)
Voted No: Blunt, Mr Crispin (Con) (Reigate)
Voted Aye: Boles, Mr Nick (Con) (Grantham & Stamford)
Voted Aye: Bone, Mr Peter (Con) (Wellingborough)
Voted Aye: Bottomley, Sir Peter (Con) (Worthing West)
Voted Aye: Bradley, Ms Karen (Con) (Staffordshire Moorlands)
Did not vote: Bradshaw, RH Mr Ben (Lab) (Exeter)
Did not vote: Brady, Mr Graham (Con) (Altrincham & Sale West)
Voted Aye: Brake, RH Tom (LD) (Carshalton & Wallington)
Voted Aye: Bray, Ms Angie (Con) (Ealing Central & Acton)
Voted Aye: Brazier, Mr Julian (Con) (Canterbury)
Voted No: Brennan, Mr Kevin (Lab) (Cardiff West)
Voted Aye: Bridgen, Mr Andrew (Con) (North West Leicestershire)
Voted Aye: Brine, Mr Steve (Con) (Winchester)
Voted Aye: Brokenshire, Mr James (Con) (Old Bexley & Sidcup)
Did not vote: Brooke, Ms Annette (LD) (Mid Dorset & North Poole)
Did not vote: Brown, RH Mr Gordon (Lab) (Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath)
Voted No: Brown, Ms Lyn (Lab) (West Ham)
Voted No: Brown, RH Mr Nicholas (Lab) (Newcastle upon Tyne East)
Voted No: Brown, Mr Russell (Lab) (Dumfries & Galloway)
Voted Aye: Browne, Mr Jeremy (LD) (Taunton Deane)
Voted No: Bruce, Ms Fiona (Con) (Congleton)
Voted Aye: Bruce, rh Sir Malcolm (LD) (Gordon)
Voted No: Bryant, Mr Chris (Lab) (Rhondda)
Voted No: Buck, Ms Karen (Lab) (Westminster North)
Voted Aye: Buckland, Mr Robert (Con) (South Swindon)
Did not vote: Burden, Mr Richard (Lab) (Birmingham Northfield)
Voted Aye: Burley, Mr Aidan (Con) (Cannock Chase)
Voted No: Burnham, RH Andy (Lab) (Leigh)
Voted Aye: Burns, Mr Conor (Con) (Bournemouth West)
Voted Aye: Burns, RH Mr Simon (Con) (Chelmsford)
Voted Aye: Burrowes, Mr David (Con) (Enfield Southgate)
Voted Aye: Burstow, rh Paul (LD) (Sutton & Cheam)
Voted Aye: Burt, Mr Alistair (Con) (North East Bedfordshire)
Did not vote: Burt, Ms Lorely (LD) (Solihull)
Voted Aye: Byles, Mr Dan (Con) (North Warwickshire)
Voted No: Byrne, RH Mr Liam (Lab) (Birmingham Hodge Hill)
Voted Aye: Cable, RH Vince (LD) (Twickenham)
Voted Aye: Cairns, Mr Alun (Con) (Vale of Glamorgan)
Voted Aye: Cameron, RH Mr David (Con) (Witney)
Voted No: Campbell, Mr Alan (Lab) (Tynemouth)
Voted No: Campbell, Mr Gregory (DUP) (East Londonderry)
Voted Aye: Campbell, RH Sir Menzies (LD) (North East Fife)
Voted No: Campbell, Mr Ronnie (Lab) (Blyth Valley)
Voted Aye: Carmichael, RH Mr Alistair (LD) (Orkney & Shetland)
Voted Aye: Carmichael, Mr Neil (Con) (Stroud)
Voted Aye: Carswell, Mr Douglas (Con) (Clacton)
Did not vote: Cash, Mr William (Con) (Stone)
Voted No: Caton, Mr. Martin (Lab) (Gower)
Did not vote: Champion, Sarah (Lab) (Rotherham)
Voted No: Chapman, Mrs Jenny (Lab) (Darlington)
Voted Aye: Chishti, Mr Rehman (Con) (Gillingham & Rainham)
Did not vote: Chope, Mr Christopher (Con) (Christchurch)
Voted Aye: Clappison, Mr James (Con) (Hertsmere)
Voted Aye: Clark, RH Greg (Con) (Tunbridge Wells)
Voted No: Clark, Ms Katy (Lab) (North Ayrshire & Arran)
Did not vote: Clarke, RH Mr Kenneth (Con) (Rushcliffe)
Voted No: Clarke, RH Mr Tom (Lab) (Coatbridge Chryston & Bellshill)
Voted Aye: Clegg, RH Mr Nick (LD) (Sheffield Hallam)
Voted Aye: Clifton-Brown, Mr. Geoffrey (Con) (The Cotswolds)
Did not vote: Clwyd, RH Ann (Lab) (Cynon Valley)
Voted No: Coaker, Mr. Vernon (Lab) (Gedling)
Voted No: Coffey, Ms Ann (Lab) (Stockport)
Voted Aye: Coffey, Dr Th‚rŠse (Con) (Suffolk Coastal)
Voted Aye: Collins, Mr Damian (Con) (Folkestone & Hythe)
Voted Aye: Colvile, Mr Oliver (Con) (Plymouth Sutton & Devonport)
Did not vote: Connarty, Mr. Michael (Lab) (Linlithgow & East Falkirk)
Did not vote: Cooper, Ms Rosie (Lab) (West Lancashire)
Voted No: Cooper, RH Yvette (Lab) (Normanton Pontefract & Castleford)
Voted No: Corbyn, Mr Jeremy (Lab) (Islington North)
Did not vote: Cox, Mr Geoffrey (Con) (Torridge & West Devon)
Voted Aye: Crabb, Mr. Stephen (Con) (Preseli Pembrokeshire)
Did not vote: Crausby, Mr David (Lab) (Bolton North East)
Voted No: Creagh, Ms Mary (Lab) (Wakefield)
Voted No: Creasy, Ms Stella (Lab) (Walthamstow)
Voted No: Crockart, Mr Mike (LD) (Edinburgh West)
Voted No: Crouch, Ms Tracey (Con) (Chatham & Aylesford)
Voted No: Cruddas, Mr Jon (Lab) (Dagenham & Rainham)
Did not vote: Cryer, Mr John (Lab) (Leyton & Wanstead)
Voted No: Cunningham, Mr Alex (Lab) (Stockton North)
Voted No: Cunningham, Sir Jim (Lab) (Coventry South)
Voted No: Cunningham, Sir Tony (Lab) (Workington)
Voted No: Curran, Ms Margaret (Lab) (Glasgow East)
Voted No: Dakin, Mr Nic (Lab) (Scunthorpe)
Voted No: Danczuk, Mr Simon (Lab) (Rochdale)
Voted No: Darling, RH Mr Alistair (Lab) (Edinburgh South West)
Voted Aye: Davey, rh Mr Edward (LD) (Kingston & Surbiton)
Voted No: David, Mr Wayne (Lab) (Caerphilly)
Did not vote: Davidson, Mr Ian (Lab) (Glasgow South West)
Voted No: Davies, David T. C. (Con) (Monmouth)
Voted No: Davies, Mr Geraint (Lab) (Swansea West)
Voted Aye: Davies, Mr Glyn (Con) (Montgomeryshire)
Voted No: Davies, Mr Philip (Con) (Shipley)
Voted No: Davis, RH Mr David (Con) (Haltemprice & Howden)
Voted No: de Bois, Mr Nick (Con) (Enfield North)
Voted No: De Piero, Ms Gloria (Lab) (Ashfield)
Voted No: Denham, RH Mr John (Lab) (Southampton Itchen)
Voted Aye: Dinenage, Ms Caroline (Con) (Gosport)
Voted Aye: Djanogly, Mr Jonathan (Con) (Huntingdon)
Voted No: Dobbin, Mr Jim (Lab) (Heywood & Middleton)
Voted No: Dobson, RH Frank (Lab) (Holborn & St Pancras)
Voted No: Docherty, Mr Thomas (Lab) (Dunfermline & West Fife)
Voted No: Dodds, RH Mr Nigel (DUP) (Belfast North)
Did not vote: Doherty, Mr. Pat (SF) (West Tyrone)
Voted No: Donaldson, RH Mr Jeffrey M. (DUP) (Lagan Valley)
Voted No: Donohoe, Mr Brian H. (Lab) (Central Ayrshire)
Voted No: Doran, Mr Frank (Lab) (Aberdeen North)
Voted Aye: Dorrell, RH Mr Stephen (Con) (Charnwood)
Did not vote: Dorries, Mrs. Nadine (Con) (Mid Bedfordshire)
Voted No: Doughty, Stephen (Lab) (Cardiff South & Penarth)
Voted No: Dowd, Mr Jim (Lab) (Lewisham West & Penge)
Voted No: Doyle, Ms Gemma (Lab) (West Dunbartonshire)
Voted Aye: Doyle-Price, Ms Jackie (Con) (Thurrock)
Voted No: Drax, Mr Richard (Con) (South Dorset)
Voted No: Dromey, Mr Jack (Lab) (Birmingham Erdington)
Voted Aye: Duddridge, Mr. James (Con) (Rochford & Southend East)
Voted No: Dugher, Mr Michael (Lab) (Barnsley East)
Did not vote: Duncan, RH Mr Alan (Con) (Rutland & Melton)
Voted Aye: Duncan Smith, RH Mr Iain (Con) (Chingford & Woodford Green)
Voted Aye: Dunne, Mr Philip (Con) (Ludlow)
Voted No: Durkan, Mr Mark (SDL) (Foyle)
Voted No: Eagle, Ms Angela (Lab) (Wallasey)
Voted No: Eagle, Ms Maria (Lab) (Garston & Halewood)
Voted No: Edwards, Mr Jonathan (PC) (Carmarthen East & Dinefwr)
Voted No: Efford, Mr Clive (Lab) (Eltham)
Voted No: Elliott, Ms Julie (Lab) (Sunderland Central)
Voted Aye: Ellis, Mr Michael (Con) (Northampton North)
Voted Aye: Ellison, Ms Jane (Con) (Battersea)
Voted No: Ellman, Mrs Louise (Lab) (Liverpool Riverside)
Voted Aye: Ellwood, Mr Tobias (Con) (Bournemouth East)
Voted Aye: Elphicke, Mr Charlie (Con) (Dover)
Voted No: Engel, Ms Natascha (Lab) (North East Derbyshire)
Voted No: Esterson, Mr Bill (Lab) (Sefton Central)
Voted Aye: Eustice, Mr George (Con) (Camborne & Redruth)
Voted No: Evans, Mr Chris (Lab) (Islwyn)
Voted Aye: Evans, Mr Graham (Con) (Weaver Vale)
Voted Aye: Evans, Mr Jonathan (Con) (Cardiff North)
Did not vote: Evans, Mr. Nigel (Con) (Ribble Valley)
Voted Aye: Evennett, Mr David (Con) (Bexleyheath & Crayford)
Voted Aye: Fabricant, Mr Michael (Con) (Lichfield)
Voted Aye: Fallon, rh Michael (Con) (Sevenoaks)
Voted No: Farrelly, Mr Paul (Lab) (Newcastle-under-Lyme)
Did not vote: Farron, Mr Tim (LD) (Westmorland & Lonsdale)
Voted Aye: Featherstone, Ms Lynne (LD) (Hornsey & Wood Green)
Voted No: Field, RH Mr Frank (Lab) (Birkenhead)
Voted Aye: Field, Mr Mark (Con) (Cities of London & Westminster)
Voted No: Fitzpatrick, Mr Jim (Lab) (Poplar & Limehouse)
Voted No: Flello, Mr. Robert (Lab) (Stoke-on-Trent South)
Voted No: Flint, RH Caroline (Lab) (Don Valley)
Voted No: Flynn, Mr Paul (Lab) (Newport West)
Voted Aye: Foster, rh Mr Don (LD) (Bath)
Did not vote: Fovargue, Ms Yvonne (Lab) (Makerfield)
Voted Aye: Fox, RH Dr Liam (Con) (North Somerset)
Voted No: Francis, Dr Hywel (Lab) (Aberavon)
Voted Aye: Francois, RH Mr Mark (Con) (Rayleigh & Wickford)
Voted Aye: Freeman, Mr George (Con) (Mid Norfolk)
Voted Aye: Freer, Mr Mike (Con) (Finchley & Golders Green)
Voted Aye: Fullbrook, Ms Lorraine (Con) (South Ribble)
Voted Aye: Fuller, Mr Richard (Con) (Bedford)
Voted Aye: Gale, Sir Roger (Con) (North Thanet)
Voted No: Galloway, Mr. George (Res) (Bradford West)
Voted No: Gapes, Mr Mike (Lab) (Ilford South)
Voted No: Gardiner, Mr. Barry (Lab) (Brent North)
Voted Aye: Garnier, Sir Edward (Con) (Harborough)
Voted Aye: Garnier, Mr Mark (Con) (Wyre Forest)
Did not vote: Gauke, Mr David (Con) (South West Hertfordshire)
Voted No: George, Mr Andrew (LD) (St Ives)
Voted Aye: Gibb, Mr Nick (Con) (Bognor Regis & Littlehampton)
Voted Aye: Gilbert, Mr Stephen (LD) (St Austell & Newquay)
Did not vote: Gildernew, Ms Michelle (SF) (Fermanagh & South Tyrone)
Voted Aye: Gillan, RH Mrs Cheryl (Con) (Chesham & Amersham)
Voted No: Gilmore, Ms Sheila (Lab) (Edinburgh East)
Voted No: Glass, Ms Pat (Lab) (North West Durham)
Voted Aye: Glen, Mr John (Con) (Salisbury)
Voted No: Glindon, Mrs Mary (Lab) (North Tyneside)
Voted No: Godsiff, Mr Roger (Lab) (Birmingham Hall Green)
Voted No: Goggins, RH Paul (Lab) (Wythenshawe & Sale East)
Voted Aye: Goldsmith, Mr Zac (Con) (Richmond Park)
Voted No: Goodman, Ms Helen (Lab) (Bishop Auckland)
Voted Aye: Goodwill, Mr Robert (Con) (Scarborough & Whitby)
Voted Aye: Gove, RH Michael (Con) (Surrey Heath)
Voted Aye: Graham, Mr Richard (Con) (Gloucester)
Voted Aye: Grant, Mrs Helen (Con) (Maidstone & The Weald)
Voted Aye: Gray, Mr James (Con) (North Wiltshire)
Voted Aye: Grayling, RH Chris (Con) (Epsom & Ewell)
Voted No: Greatrex, Mr Tom (Lab) (Rutherglen & Hamilton West)
Voted Aye: Green, rh Damian (Con) (Ashford)
Voted No: Green, Ms Kate (Lab) (Stretford & Urmston)
Did not vote: Greening, Ms Justine (Con) (Putney)
Did not vote: Greenwood, Ms Lilian (Lab) (Nottingham South)
Voted Aye: Grieve, RH Mr Dominic (Con) (Beaconsfield)
Voted No: Griffith, Ms Nia (Lab) (Llanelli)
Voted Aye: Griffiths, Mr Andrew (Con) (Burton)
Voted Aye: Gummer, Mr Ben (Con) (Ipswich)
Voted No: Gwynne, Mr Andrew (Lab) (Denton & Reddish)
Voted Aye: Gyimah, Mr Sam (Con) (East Surrey)
Voted Aye: Hague, RH Mr William (Con) (Richmond Yorks)
Did not vote: Hain, RH Mr Peter (Lab) (Neath)
Voted Aye: Halfon, Mr Robert (Con) (Harlow)
Voted Aye: Hames, Mr Duncan (LD) (Chippenham)
Voted No: Hamilton, Mr David (Lab) (Midlothian)
Voted No: Hamilton, Mr. Fabian (Lab) (Leeds North East)
Voted Aye: Hammond, RH Mr Philip (Con) (Runnymede & Weybridge)
Voted Aye: Hammond, Mr Stephen (Con) (Wimbledon)
Voted Aye: Hancock, Mr Matthew (Con) (West Suffolk)
Voted No: Hancock, Mr Mike (LD) (Portsmouth South)
Voted Aye: Hands, Mr. Greg (Con) (Chelsea & Fulham)
Did not vote: Hanson, RH Mr David (Lab) (Delyn)
Voted No: Harman, RH Ms Harriet (Lab) (Camberwell & Peckham)
Voted Aye: Harper, Mr Mark (Con) (Forest of Dean)
Voted Aye: Harrington, Mr Richard (Con) (Watford)
Voted Aye: Harris, Ms Rebecca (Con) (Castle Point)
Voted No: Harris, Mr Tom (Lab) (Glasgow South)
Voted Aye: Hart, Mr Simon (Con) (Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshir)
Did not vote: Harvey, Mr Nick (LD) (North Devon)
Did not vote: Haselhurst, RH Sir Alan (CWM) (Saffron Walden)
Voted No: Havard, Mr Dai (Lab) (Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney)
Voted Aye: Hayes, rh Mr John (Con) (South Holland & the Deepings)
Voted Aye: Heald, Mr. Oliver (Con) (North East Hertfordshire)
Voted No: Healey, rh John (Lab) (Wentworth & Dearne)
Voted Aye: Heath, Mr David (LD) (Somerton & Frome)
Voted Aye: Heaton-Harris, Mr Chris (Con) (Daventry)
Voted Aye: Hemming, Mr John (LD) (Birmingham Yardley)
Voted No: Henderson, Mr Gordon (Con) (Sittingbourne & Sheppey)
Voted No: Hendrick, Mr. Mark (Lab) (Preston)
Voted Aye: Hendry, Mr Charles (Con) (Wealden)
Voted No: Hepburn, Mr Stephen (Lab) (Jarrow)
Voted Aye: Herbert, RH Nick (Con) (Arundel & South Downs)
Voted No: Hermon, Lady (UU) (North Down)
Did not vote: Heyes, Mr David (Lab) (Ashton-under-Lyne)
Voted No: Hillier, Ms Meg (Lab) (Hackney South & Shoreditch)
Voted No: Hilling, Ms Julie (Lab) (Bolton West)
Voted Aye: Hinds, Mr Damian (Con) (East Hampshire)
Voted Aye: Hoban, Mr Mark (Con) (Fareham)
Voted No: Hodge, RH Margaret (Lab) (Barking)
Did not vote: Hodgson, Mrs Sharon (Lab) (Washington & Sunderland West)
Voted No: Hoey, Ms Kate (Lab) (Vauxhall)
Voted Aye: Hollingbery, Mr George (Con) (Meon Valley)
Voted No: Hollobone, Mr Philip (Con) (Kettering)
Voted No: Holloway, Mr Adam (Con) (Gravesham)
Voted No: Hood, Mr Jim (Lab) (Lanark & Hamilton East)
Voted No: Hopkins, Mr Kelvin (Lab) (Luton North)
Voted Aye: Hopkins, Mr Kris (Con) (Keighley)
Voted Aye: Horwood, Mr Martin (LD) (Cheltenham)
Voted No: Hosie, Mr Stewart (SNP) (Dundee East)
Voted No: Howarth, RH Mr George (Lab) (Knowsley)
Voted Aye: Howarth, Sir Gerald (Con) (Aldershot)
Voted Aye: Howell, Mr. John (Con) (Henley)
Did not vote: Hoyle, Mr. Lindsay (Lab) (Chorley)
Voted Aye: Hughes, RH Simon (LD) (Bermondsey & Old Southwark)
Voted Aye: Hunt, RH Mr Jeremy (Con) (South West Surrey)
Voted No: Hunt, Mr Tristram (Lab) (Stoke-on-Trent Central)
Did not vote: Hunter, Mr Mark (LD) (Cheadle)
Voted No: Huppert, Dr Julian (LD) (Cambridge)
Voted Aye: Hurd, Mr Nick (Con) (Ruislip Northwood & Pinner)
Voted No: Irranca-Davies, Mr Huw (Lab) (Ogmore)
Voted No: Jackson, Ms Glenda (Lab) (Hampstead & Kilburn)
Voted Aye: Jackson, Mr Stewart (Con) (Peterborough)
Voted Aye: James, Ms Margot (Con) (Stourbridge)
Voted No: James, Mrs Siƒn C. (Lab) (Swansea East)
Voted No: Jamieson, Ms Cathy (Lab) (Kilmarnock & Loudoun)
Voted No: Jarvis, Mr Dan (Lab) (Barnsley Central)
Voted Aye: Javid, Mr Sajid (Con) (Bromsgrove)
Voted Aye: Jenkin, Mr Bernard (Con) (Harwich & North Essex)
Voted No: Johnson, RH Alan (Lab) (Kingston upon Hull West & Hessle)
Did not vote: Johnson, Ms Diana (Lab) (Kingston upon Hull North)
Voted Aye: Johnson, Mr Gareth (Con) (Dartford)
Voted Aye: Johnson, Mr Joseph (Con) (Orpington)
Voted Aye: Jones, Mr Andrew (Con) (Harrogate & Knaresborough)
Voted Aye: Jones, rh Mr David (Con) (Clwyd West)
Voted No: Jones, Mr Graham (Lab) (Hyndburn)
Voted No: Jones, Ms Helen (Lab) (Warrington North)
Voted No: Jones, Mr Kevan (Lab) (North Durham)
Voted Aye: Jones, Mr Marcus (Con) (Nuneaton)
Voted No: Jones, Susan Elan (Lab) (Clwyd South)
Voted No: Jowell, RH Dame Tessa (Lab) (Dulwich & West Norwood)
Voted No: Joyce, Mr. Eric (Lab) (Falkirk)
Voted No: Kaufman, RH Sir Gerald (Lab) (Manchester Gorton)
Voted Aye: Kawczynski, Mr Daniel (Con) (Shrewsbury & Atcham)
Did not vote: Keeley, Ms Barbara (Lab) (Worsley & Eccles South)
Did not vote: Kelly, Mr Chris (Con) (Dudley South)
Voted No: Kendall, Ms Liz (Lab) (Leicester West)
Did not vote: Kennedy, RH Mr Charles (LD) (Ross Skye & Lochaber)
Voted No: Khan, RH Sadiq (Lab) (Tooting)
Voted Aye: Kirby, Mr Simon (Con) (Brighton Kemptown)
Voted Aye: Knight, RH Mr Greg (Con) (East Yorkshire)
Voted Aye: Kwarteng, Mr Kwasi (Con) (Spelthorne)
Voted Aye: Laing, Mrs Eleanor (Con) (Epping Forest)
Voted Aye: Lamb, Mr Norman (LD) (North Norfolk)
Voted No: Lammy, RH Mr David (Lab) (Tottenham)
Voted Aye: Lancaster, Mr. Mark (Con) (Milton Keynes North)
Voted Aye: Lansley, RH Mr Andrew (Con) (South Cambridgeshire)
Did not vote: Latham, Ms Pauline (Con) (Mid Derbyshire)
Voted No: Lavery, Mr Ian (Lab) (Wansbeck)
Voted Aye: Laws, RH Mr David (LD) (Yeovil)
Voted No: Lazarowicz, Mr. Mark (Lab) (Edinburgh North & Leith)
Voted Aye: Leadsom, Ms Andrea (Con) (South Northamptonshire)
Voted Aye: Lee, Ms Jessica (Con) (Erewash)
Voted No: Lee, Dr Phillip (Con) (Bracknell)
Voted Aye: Leech, Mr John (LD) (Manchester Withington)
Voted Aye: Lefroy, Mr Jeremy (Con) (Stafford)
Did not vote: Leigh, Mr Edward (Con) (Gainsborough)
Did not vote: Leslie, Ms Charlotte (Con) (Bristol North West)
Voted No: Leslie, Mr Chris (Lab) (Nottingham East)
Voted Aye: Letwin, RH Mr Oliver (Con) (West Dorset)
Voted No: Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma (Lab) (South Shields)
Voted Aye: Lewis, Mr Brandon (Con) (Great Yarmouth)
Voted No: Lewis, Mr Ivan (Lab) (Bury South)
Voted No: Lewis, Dr Julian (Con) (New Forest East)
Did not vote: Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian (Con) (Bridgwater & West Somerset)
Voted Aye: Lidington, RH Mr David (Con) (Aylesbury)
Voted Aye: Lilley, RH Mr Peter (Con) (Hitchin & Harpenden)
Voted Aye: Lloyd, Mr Stephen (LD) (Eastbourne)
Voted No: Llwyd, RH Mr Elfyn (PC) (Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
Voted No: Long, Ms Naomi (All) (Belfast East)
Did not vote: Lopresti, Mr Jack (Con) (Filton & Bradley Stoke)
Voted Aye: Lord, Mr Jonathan (Con) (Woking)
Voted Aye: Loughton, Mr Tim (Con) (East Worthing & Shoreham)
Did not vote: Love, Mr Andrew (Lab) (Edmonton)
Voted No: Lucas, Ms Caroline (Gre) (Brighton Pavilion)
Voted No: Lucas, Mr Ian (Lab) (Wrexham)
Voted Aye: Luff, Mr Peter (Con) (Mid Worcestershire)
Voted Aye: Lumley, Ms Karen (Con) (Redditch)
Voted Aye: Macleod, Ms Mary (Con) (Brentford & Isleworth)
Voted No: MacNeil, Mr Angus Brendan (SNP) (Na h-Eileanan an Iar)
Voted No: MacTaggart, Ms Fiona (Lab) (Slough)
Voted No: Mahmood, Mr Khalid (Lab) (Birmingham Perry Barr)
Voted No: Mahmood, Ms Shabana (Lab) (Birmingham Ladywood)
Did not vote: Main, Mrs Anne (Con) (St Albans)
Voted No: Malhotra, Ms Seema (Lab) (Feltham & Heston)
Voted No: Mann, Mr John (Lab) (Bassetlaw)
Voted No: Marsden, Mr Gordon (Lab) (Blackpool South)
Did not vote: Maskey, Mr. Paul (SF) (Belfast West)
Voted Aye: Maude, RH Mr Francis (Con) (Horsham)
Voted Aye: May, RH Mrs Theresa (Con) (Maidenhead)
Voted Aye: Maynard, Mr Paul (Con) (Blackpool North & Cleveleys)
Voted No: McCabe, Mr. Steve (Lab) (Birmingham Selly Oak)
Voted No: McCann, Mr Michael (Lab) (East Kilbride Strathaven & Lesmahago)
Voted No: McCarthy, Mr Kerry (Lab) (Bristol East)
Voted No: McCartney, Mr Jason (Con) (Colne Valley)
Voted Aye: McCartney, Mr Karl (Con) (Lincoln)
Voted No: McClymont, Mr Gregg (Lab) (Cumbernauld Kilsyth & Kirkintilloch)
Did not vote: McCrea, Dr William (DUP) (South Antrim)
Did not vote: McDonagh, Ms Siobhain (Lab) (Mitcham & Morden)
Voted No: McDonald, Andy (Lab) (Middlesbrough)
Voted No: McDonnell, Dr Alasdair (SDL) (Belfast South)
Voted No: McDonnell, Mr John (Lab) (Hayes & Harlington)
Voted No: McFadden, RH Mr Pat (Lab) (Wolverhampton South East)
Voted No: McGovern, Ms Alison (Lab) (Wirral South)
Voted No: McGovern, Mr. Jim (Lab) (Dundee West)
Did not vote: McGuinness, Mr. Martin (SF) (Mid Ulster)
Voted No: McGuire, RH Mrs Anne (Lab) (Stirling)
Voted Aye: McIntosh, Miss Anne (Con) (Thirsk & Malton)
Voted No: McKechin, Ms Ann (Lab) (Glasgow North)
Voted No: McKenzie, Mr Iain (Lab) (Inverclyde)
Voted No: McKinnell, Ms Catherine (Lab) (Newcastle upon Tyne North)
Voted Aye: McLoughlin, RH Mr Patrick (Con) (Derbyshire Dales)
Voted No: McPartland, Mr Stephen (Con) (Stevenage)
Voted Aye: McVey, Ms Esther (Con) (Wirral West)
Voted No: Meacher, RH Mr Michael (Lab) (Oldham West & Royton)
Voted No: Meale, Sir Alan (Lab) (Mansfield)
Voted No: Mearns, Mr Ian (Lab) (Gateshead)
Voted Aye: Menzies, Mr Mark (Con) (Fylde)
Did not vote: Mercer, Mr Patrick (Con) (Newark)
Voted Aye: Metcalfe, Mr Stephen (Con) (South Basildon & East Thurrock)
Voted No: Miliband, RH Edward (Lab) (Doncaster North)
Voted No: Miller, Mr Andrew (Lab) (Ellesmere Port & Neston)
Voted Aye: Miller, rh Maria (Con) (Basingstoke)
Voted No: Mills, Mr Nigel (Con) (Amber Valley)
Voted Aye: Milton, Ms Anne (Con) (Guildford)
Voted Aye: Mitchell, RH Mr Andrew (Con) (Sutton Coldfield)
Did not vote: Mitchell, Mr. Austin (Lab) (Great Grimsby)
Voted No: Moon, Mrs Madeleine (Lab) (Bridgend)
Voted Aye: Moore, rh Michael (LD) (Berwickshire Roxburgh & Selkirk)
Voted Aye: Mordaunt, Ms Penny (Con) (Portsmouth North)
Voted No: Morden, Ms Jessica (Lab) (Newport East)
Voted Aye: Morgan, Ms Nicky (Con) (Loughborough)
Voted No: Morrice, Mr Graeme (Lab) (Livingston)
Voted No: Morris, Ms Anne Marie (Con) (Newton Abbot)
Voted Aye: Morris, Mr David (Con) (Morecambe & Lunesdale)
Voted No: Morris, Grahame M. (Lab) (Easington)
Voted Aye: Morris, Mr James (Con) (Halesowen & Rowley Regis)
Voted Aye: Mosley, Mr Stephen (Con) (City of Chester)
Voted Aye: Mowat, Mr David (Con) (Warrington South)
Voted No: Mudie, Mr George (Lab) (Leeds East)
Did not vote: Mulholland, Mr Greg (LD) (Leeds North West)
Voted Aye: Mundell, RH David (Con) (Dumfriesshire Clydesdale & Tweeddale)
Did not vote: Munn, Ms Meg (Lab) (Sheffield Heeley)
Did not vote: Munt, Ms Tessa (LD) (Wells)
Did not vote: Murphy, Mr Conor (SF) (Newry & Armagh)
Voted No: Murphy, RH Mr Jim (Lab) (East Renfrewshire)
Voted No: Murphy, RH Paul (Lab) (Torfaen)
Voted No: Murray, Mr Ian (Lab) (Edinburgh South)
Voted Aye: Murray, Ms Sheryll (Con) (South East Cornwall)
Voted Aye: Murrison, Dr Andrew (Con) (South West Wiltshire)
Voted No: Nandy, Ms Lisa (Lab) (Wigan)
Voted No: Nash, Ms Pamela (Lab) (Airdrie & Shotts)
Voted Aye: Neill, Mr Robert (Con) (Bromley & Chislehurst)
Voted Aye: Newmark, Mr Brooks (Con) (Braintree)
Voted Aye: Newton, Ms Sarah (Con) (Truro & Falmouth)
Voted Aye: Nokes, Ms Caroline (Con) (Romsey & Southampton North)
Did not vote: Norman, Mr Jesse (Con) (Hereford & South Herefordshire)
Voted Aye: Nuttall, Mr David (Con) (Bury North)
Voted Aye: O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen (Con) (Eddisbury)
Voted No: O’Donnell, Ms Fiona (Lab) (East Lothian)
Voted Aye: Offord, Dr Matthew (Con) (Hendon)
Voted Aye: Ollerenshaw, Mr Eric (Con) (Lancaster & Fleetwood)
Voted No: Onwurah, Ms Chi (Lab) (Newcastle upon Tyne Central)
Voted Aye: Opperman, Mr Guy (Con) (Hexham)
Voted Aye: Osborne, RH Mr George (Con) (Tatton)
Voted No: Osborne, Ms Sandra (Lab) (Ayr Carrick & Cumnock)
Voted Aye: Ottaway, Mr Richard (Con) (Croydon South)
Voted No: Owen, Mr Albert (Lab) (Ynys Mtn)
Did not vote: Paice, RH Mr James (Con) (South East Cambridgeshire)
Did not vote: Paisley, Mr Ian (DUP) (North Antrim)
Voted Aye: Parish, Mr Neil (Con) (Tiverton & Honiton)
Did not vote: Patel, Ms Priti (Con) (Witham)
Voted Aye: Paterson, RH Mr Owen (Con) (North Shropshire)
Voted Aye: Pawsey, Mr Mark (Con) (Rugby)
Voted No: Pearce, Ms Teresa (Lab) (Erith & Thamesmead)
Voted Aye: Penning, Mr Mike (Con) (Hemel Hempstead)
Voted Aye: Penrose, Mr John (Con) (Weston-Super-Mare)
Voted No: Percy, Mr Andrew (Con) (Brigg & Goole)
Voted No: Perkins, Mr Toby (Lab) (Chesterfield)
Voted Aye: Perry, Ms Claire (Con) (Devizes)
Voted Aye: Phillips, Mr Stephen (Con) (Sleaford & North Hykeham)
Voted No: Phillipson, Ms Bridget (Lab) (Houghton & Sunderland South)
Voted Aye: Pickles, RH Mr Eric (Con) (Brentwood & Ongar)
Voted Aye: Pincher, Mr Christopher (Con) (Tamworth)
Voted Aye: Poulter, Dr Daniel (Con) (Central Suffolk & North Ipswich)
Voted No: Pound, Mr. Stephen (Lab) (Ealing North)
Voted No: Powell, Lucy (Lab) (Manchester Central)
Did not vote: Primarolo, RH Dawn (Lab) (Bristol South)
Voted Aye: Prisk, Mr Mark (Con) (Hertford & Stortford)
Voted Aye: Pritchard, Mr Mark (Con) (The Wrekin)
Did not vote: Pugh, Dr. John (LD) (Southport)
Did not vote: Qureshi, Ms Yasmin (Lab) (Bolton South East)
Voted Aye: Raab, Mr Dominic (Con) (Esher & Walton)
Voted Aye: Randall, RH Mr John (Con) (Uxbridge & South Ruislip)
Voted No: Raynsford, RH Mr Nick (Lab) (Greenwich & Woolwich)
Voted Aye: Reckless, Mr Mark (Con) (Rochester & Strood)
Did not vote: Redwood, RH Mr John (Con) (Wokingham)
Voted No: Reed, Mr Jamie (Lab) (Copeland)
Voted No: Reed, Mr Steve (Lab) (Croydon North)
Voted Aye: Rees-Mogg, Mr Jacob (Con) (North East Somerset)
Voted Aye: Reevell, Mr Simon (Con) (Dewsbury)
Voted No: Reeves, Ms Rachel (Lab) (Leeds West)
Voted Aye: Reid, Mr Alan (LD) (Argyll & Bute)
Did not vote: Reynolds, Ms Emma (Lab) (Wolverhampton North East)
Voted No: Reynolds, Mr Jonathan (Lab) (Stalybridge & Hyde)
Voted Aye: Rifkind, RH Sir Malcolm (Con) (Kensington)
Voted No: Riordan, Mrs Linda (Lab) (Halifax)
Voted No: Ritchie, Ms Margaret (SDL) (South Down)
Voted Aye: Robathan, RH Mr Andrew (Con) (South Leicestershire)
Voted No: Robertson, Mr Angus (SNP) (Moray)
Voted Aye: Robertson, rh Hugh (Con) (Faversham & Mid Kent)
Voted No: Robertson, Mr John (Lab) (Glasgow North West)
Voted Aye: Robertson, Mr Laurence (Con) (Tewkesbury)
Voted No: Robinson, Mr Geoffrey (Lab) (Coventry North West)
Voted No: Rogerson, Mr. Dan (LD) (North Cornwall)
Did not vote: Rosindell, Mr Andrew (Con) (Romford)
Voted No: Rotheram, Mr Steve (Lab) (Liverpool Walton)
Voted No: Roy, Mr Frank (Lab) (Motherwell & Wishaw)
Voted No: Roy, Mr. Lindsay (Lab) (Glenrothes)
Voted No: Ruane, Mr Chris (Lab) (Vale of Clwyd)
Voted Aye: Rudd, Ms Amber (Con) (Hastings & Rye)
Voted No: Ruddock, rh Dame Joan (Lab) (Lewisham Deptford)
Did not vote: Ruffley, Mr David (Con) (Bury St Edmunds)
Voted Aye: Russell, Sir Bob (LD) (Colchester)
Voted Aye: Rutley, Mr David (Con) (Macclesfield)
Did not vote: Sanders, Mr Adrian (LD) (Torbay)
Voted Aye: Sandys, Ms Laura (Con) (South Thanet)
Voted No: Sarwar, Mr. Anas (Lab) (Glasgow Central)
Voted No: Sawford, Andy (Lab) (Corby)
Voted Aye: Scott, Mr Lee (Con) (Ilford North)
Voted No: Seabeck, Ms Alison (Lab) (Plymouth Moor View)
Voted Aye: Selous, Mr Andrew (Con) (South West Bedfordshire)
Voted No: Shannon, Mr Jim (DUP) (Strangford)
Voted Aye: Shapps, RH Grant (Con) (Welwyn Hatfield)
Voted Aye: Sharma, Mr Alok (Con) (Reading West)
Voted No: Sharma, Mr Virendra (Lab) (Ealing Southall)
Voted No: Sheerman, Mr Barry (Lab) (Huddersfield)
Voted Aye: Shelbrooke, Mr Alec (Con) (Elmet & Rothwell)
Voted No: Shepherd, Sir Richard (Con) (Aldridge-Brownhills)
Voted No: Sheridan, Mr Jim (Lab) (Paisley & Renfrewshire North)
Voted No: Shuker, Mr Gavin (Lab) (Luton South)
Did not vote: Simmonds, Mr. Mark (Con) (Boston & Skegness)
Did not vote: Simpson, Mr David (DUP) (Upper Bann)
Voted Aye: Simpson, Mr Keith (Con) (Broadland)
Voted Aye: Skidmore, Mr Chris (Con) (Kingswood)
Voted No: Skinner, Mr Dennis (Lab) (Bolsover)
Voted No: Slaughter, Mr Andy (Lab) (Hammersmith)
Voted No: Smith, RH Mr Andrew (Lab) (Oxford East)
Did not vote: Smith, Ms Angela (Lab) (Penistone & Stocksbridge)
Voted Aye: Smith, Miss Chloe (Con) (Norwich North)
Voted Aye: Smith, Mr Henry (Con) (Crawley)
Voted Aye: Smith, Mr Julian (Con) (Skipton & Ripon)
Voted No: Smith, Mr Nick (Lab) (Blaenau Gwent)
Voted No: Smith, Mr Owen (Lab) (Pontypridd)
Voted Aye: Smith, Sir Robert (LD) (West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine)
Voted Aye: Soames, RH Nicholas (Con) (Mid Sussex)
Voted Aye: Soubry, Ms Anna (Con) (Broxtowe)
Did not vote: Spellar, RH Mr. John (Lab) (Warley)
Voted Aye: Spelman, RH Mrs Caroline (Con) (Meriden)
Voted Aye: Spencer, Mr Mark (Con) (Sherwood)
Voted Aye: Stanley, RH Sir John (Con) (Tonbridge & Malling)
Voted Aye: Stephenson, Mr Andrew (Con) (Pendle)
Voted Aye: Stevenson, Mr John (Con) (Carlisle)
Voted Aye: Stewart, Mr Bob (Con) (Beckenham)
Voted Aye: Stewart, Mr Iain (Con) (Milton Keynes South)
Did not vote: Stewart, Mr Rory (Con) (Penrith & The Border)
Voted No: Straw, RH Mr Jack (Lab) (Blackburn)
Voted Aye: Streeter, Mr Gary (Con) (South West Devon)
Voted Aye: Stride, Mr Mel (Con) (Central Devon)
Voted No: Stringer, Mr. Graham (Lab) (Blackley & Broughton)
Voted No: Stuart, Ms Gisela (Lab) (Birmingham Edgbaston)
Voted Aye: Stuart, Mr Graham (Con) (Beverley & Holderness)
Voted No: Stunell, rh Sir Andrew (LD) (Hazel Grove)
Voted Aye: Sturdy, Mr Julian (Con) (York Outer)
Voted No: Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry (Lab) (Bradford South)
Voted No: Swales, Mr Ian (LD) (Redcar)
Voted Aye: Swayne, RH Mr Desmond (Con) (New Forest West)
Voted Aye: Swinson, Ms Jo (LD) (East Dunbartonshire)
Voted Aye: Swire, RH Mr Hugo (Con) (East Devon)
Voted Aye: Syms, Mr Robert (Con) (Poole)
Voted No: Tami, Mr Mark (Lab) (Alyn & Deeside)
Voted No: Tapsell, RH Sir Peter (Con) (Louth & Horncastle)
Voted No: Teather, Ms Sarah (LD) (Brent Central)
Voted No: Thomas, Mr Gareth (Lab) (Harrow West)
Voted No: Thornberry, Ms Emily (Lab) (Islington South & Finsbury)
Voted Aye: Thornton, Mike (LD) (Eastleigh)
Did not vote: Thurso, Mr John (LD) (Caithness Sutherland & Easter Ross)
Voted No: Timms, RH Stephen (Lab) (East Ham)
Voted Aye: Timpson, Mr Edward (Con) (Crewe & Nantwich)
Voted Aye: Tomlinson, Mr Justin (Con) (North Swindon)
Did not vote: Tredinnick, Mr David (Con) (Bosworth)
Voted No: Trickett, Mr Jon (Lab) (Hemsworth)
Voted Aye: Truss, Ms Elizabeth (Con) (South West Norfolk)
Voted No: Turner, Mr Andrew (Con) (Isle of Wight)
Did not vote: Turner, Mr Karl (Lab) (Kingston upon Hull East)
Voted No: Twigg, Mr Derek (Lab) (Halton)
Voted No: Twigg, Mr Stephen (Lab) (Liverpool West Derby)
Did not vote: Tyrie, Mr Andrew (Con) (Chichester)
Voted No: Umunna, Mr Chuka (Lab) (Streatham)
Voted Aye: Uppal, Mr Paul (Con) (Wolverhampton South West)
Voted Aye: Vaizey, Mr Edward (Con) (Wantage)
Voted Aye: Vara, Mr Shailesh (Con) (North West Cambridgeshire)
Voted No: Vaz, RH Keith (Lab) (Leicester East)
Voted No: Vaz, Ms Valerie (Lab) (Walsall South)
Voted No: Vickers, Mr Martin (Con) (Cleethorpes)
Voted Aye: Villiers, RH Mrs Theresa (Con) (Chipping Barnet)
Voted No: Walker, Mr Charles (Con) (Broxbourne)
Voted Aye: Walker, Mr Robin (Con) (Worcester)
Voted Aye: Wallace, Mr Ben (Con) (Wyre & Preston North)
Voted No: Walley, Ms Joan (Lab) (Stoke-on-Trent North)
Voted Aye: Walter, Mr Robert (Con) (North Dorset)
Voted No: Ward, Mr David (LD) (Bradford East)
Voted Aye: Watkinson, Dame Angela (Con) (Hornchurch & Upminster)
Voted No: Watson, Mr Tom (Lab) (West Bromwich East)
Voted No: Watts, Mr Dave (Lab) (St Helens North)
Voted Aye: Weatherley, Mr Mike (Con) (Hove)
Did not vote: Webb, Mr Steve (LD) (Thornbury & Yate)
Voted No: Weir, Mr Mike (SNP) (Angus)
Voted Aye: Wharton, Mr James (Con) (Stockton South)
Voted Aye: Wheeler, Ms Heather (Con) (South Derbyshire)
Voted No: White, Mr Chris (Con) (Warwick & Leamington)
Voted No: Whiteford, Dr Eilidh (SNP) (Banff & Buchan)
Voted No: Whitehead, Dr Alan (Lab) (Southampton Test)
Voted Aye: Whittaker, Mr Craig (Con) (Calder Valley)
Voted Aye: Whittingdale, Mr John (Con) (Maldon)
Did not vote: Wiggin, Mr Bill (Con) (North Herefordshire)
Voted Aye: Willetts, RH Mr David (Con) (Havant)
Voted No: Williams, Mr Hywel (PC) (Arfon)
Did not vote: Williams, Mr Mark (LD) (Ceredigion)
Voted No: Williams, Mr. Roger (LD) (Brecon & Radnorshire)
Voted Aye: Williams, Mr Stephen (LD) (Bristol West)
Voted No: Williamson, Mr Chris (Lab) (Derby North)
Voted Aye: Williamson, Mr Gavin (Con) (South Staffordshire)
Did not vote: Willott, Ms Jenny (LD) (Cardiff Central)
Voted No: Wilson, Mr Phil (Lab) (Sedgefield)
Voted Aye: Wilson, Mr Rob (Con) (Reading East)
Voted No: Wilson, Mr Sammy (DUP) (East Antrim)
Voted No: Winnick, Mr David (Lab) (Walsall North)
Voted No: Winterton, RH Ms Rosie (Lab) (Doncaster Central)
Voted No: Wishart, Mr Pete (SNP) (Perth & North Perthshire)
Voted No: Wollaston, Dr Sarah (Con) (Totnes)
Voted No: Wood, Mr Mike (Lab) (Batley & Spen)
Did not vote: Woodcock, Mr John (Lab) (Barrow & Furness)
Did not vote: Woodward, RH Mr Shaun (Lab) (St Helens South & Whiston)
Voted No: Wright, Mr David (Lab) (Telford)
Voted No: Wright, Mr Iain (Lab) (Hartlepool)
Voted Aye: Wright, Mr Jeremy (Con) (Kenilworth & Southam)
Voted Aye: Wright, Mr Simon (LD) (Norwich South)
Did not vote: Yeo, Mr Tim (Con) (South Suffolk)
Voted Aye: Young, RH Sir George (Con) (North West Hampshire)
Voted Aye: Zahawi, Mr Nadhim (Con) (Stratford-on-Avon)
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
More babies were born in the UK in 2011-12 than any year since 1972, says the Office for National Statistics, as reported by the BBC.
In all, 813,200 UK births were recorded in the year, said the ONS, contributing to population growth that was, in absolute terms, the highest in the European Union.
ONS estimates say the population of the UK grew by 419,900 to 63.7 million between June 2011 and June 2012.
There were 254,400 more births than deaths and 165,600 more people coming to the UK than leaving.
There were 517,800 migrants from overseas while 352,100 people left the country.
Population growth is highest in London with the South-East of England coming in second. Channel 4 has a useful map showing where population growth is highest.
After the low birth-rate a decade ago, births are on course to emulate the nineteen-eighties in around three years and to outstrip the sixties by 2020.
The difference is, in the sixties and eighties it was people of British origin having the babies. Now, that demographic group are averaging below 2 children per woman of child-bearing age, while all the headline-grabbing stuff is coming from immigrants whose cultures still celebrate fecundity.
One Simon Ross, of anti-growth pressure group Population Matters, was reported widely, not least in the Daily Mail (which also has an interesting population chart by age).
He whined: ‘Our growing population is the root of many of our most pressing problems, including a lack of housing, pressure on services and development threats to our countryside and green spaces.
‘These, together with consequent infrastructure investments and transport issues are increasing costs for everyone. Measures by the Government to limit net migration are to be welcomed. However, the Government should also promote the benefits to individuals and society of smaller families.’
That is actually nonsense. The greater pressure on housing is coming from allowing families to split up so nonchalantly through divorce on demand. Services and transport do not stand still. They increase with population. There is no benefit to society from smaller families. A more informed opinion came from Jonathan Portes, director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
He said: “The medium to long-term benefits are substantial. The people who are being born now or the immigrants who are coming here now will help pay for our pensions and public services in the future.”
The danger is not increased population as such but the way our population is being skewed towards a particular religious group.
Dr Leon Moosavi of Liverpool University says the Muslim population in the UK grew from 1.5 million in 2001 to 3.0 million in 2011, from 2% of the total population to something between 4% and 5%. And they are not slowing down yet. If anything, those Muslims born here are even more culturally Islamic and productive of the next generation than their parents.
Vincent Cooper, writing for The Commentator, argues that on present population trends, Muslims will be in a majority in the UK by 2050. Many of our cities will suffer that fate a lot earlier. Ten years before that, the tipping point at which Muslims will form a majority in the House of Commons will arrive.
But let us not blame individual Muslims, let alone Muslim women, for having more children than the current 1.8 norm. They are simply doing what God designed their bodies to do. They are doing what Christians should be doing: Working hard and increasing in a land where they feel like the underdogs.
Centuries ago, before the time of Christ, the people of Judah were carried off to Babylon. What did the Prophet Jeremiah urge them to do? Sit around moping? Watch the skies for their deliverance? No, he told them to build, to plant, to increase and to pray:
Jer 29:4 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon; 5 Build ye houses, and dwell in them; and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them; 6 Take ye wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that ye may be increased there, and not diminished. 7 And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the LORD for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace.
What did the Lord Jesus tell his followers to do before his return? ‘Occupy till I come.‘ (Luke 19:13)
Our society has a death-wish. We kill our own children, we encourage families to fracture, we whisk children off into ‘care’ to be abused by paedophile rings, we celebrate sexual license, pornography and perversion, even allowing the practitioners of the latter to pretend to ‘marry’.
But the secularists who have engineered our present debauchery have a very short time in which to celebrate. Like every civilisation which has ploughed this furrow before, we shall go down the rubbish-chute of history, being taken over within a generation by a stronger, monogamous culture. That culture, on current trends, will be Islam.
If only it would be Christianity. But that depends on the Church finding some confidence in historical, traditional, red-blooded Christianity. The very future of the United Kingdom depends on whether Christian men will stand up to be counted.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
The highly-portable Russian-made Konkurs anti-tank missile is being supplied, ironically, to the Syrian Sunni Islamist rebels.
An unnamed Middle Eastern state has supplied Syrian rebels with 250 sophisticated Soviet-made anti-tank missiles, most of which were given to radical Islamist militias fighting President Bashar Assad, according to a report published in London-based Arabic daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat on Tuesday.
According to the report, the unidentified state made its first delivery of 9M113 Konkurs missiles to the rebels a week ago via Turkey. The Konkurs antitank missile, ironicaly supplied by Russia, has a maximum range of four kilometers and a hit probability of 90 percent. Egypt, Iran and Turkey are the only known operators of the missile system in the Middle East.
The information has come from The Times of Israel. The weapons would not have come from President Assad’s Shia Muslim ally, Iran.
Meanwhile, Israel National News has reported that France and Belgium have joined Saudi Arabia in supplying the Free Syrian Army with weapons.
The news comes as world leaders have been gathering on the shores of Loch Erne in Northern Ireland as the G8 summit. President Putin is determined that President Assad should remain in power in any settlement, but the Western powers, including William Hague, the UK Foreign Secretary, and President Obama are supporting the rebels, who include militant Al-Qaeda elements and other hard-line Sunni activists dedicated to exterminating both the Shia Muslims and Syria’s 10% Christian minority, who have enjoyed freedom under the Assad regime.
President Obama has said he will arm the rebels, thus prolonging the Syrian civil war. The US has taken particular umbrage at the alleged small-scale use of chemical weapons by President Assad’s side, as if it is somehow preferable or more gentlemanly to blow opponents to pieces with mortars than suffocate them by Sarin.
However,Leaked emails from a UK weapons company appear to show that Washington was involved in a plan to supply the rebels with chemical weapons whose use could then be blamed on Assad. In addition to that, reports of atrocities on both sides have put paid to the idea that the rebels are benign and restrained.
The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has argued that Britain will have no means of preventing UK weapons ending up in the hands of “al Qaida-affliated thugs” if it supplies arms to the Syrian rebels, Boris Johnson warned.
Writing for the Daily Telegraph the London mayor put himself at the head of the growing opposition at Westminster to any move by David Cameron to arm the rebels, saying Britain could not end the conflict by “pressing weapons into the hands of maniacs”. The Archbishop of York has agreed.
However the scale of the opposition among MPs of all parties means Mr Cameron – who has promised a Commons vote on any move by Britain to arm the rebels – will almost certainly find his path blocked if he tries to follow suit.
The London Mayor described an incident in Aleppo where a 15-year-old boy was taken away and beaten and then summarily executed by Islamist rebels for making a joking reference to the Prophet Mohammed.
“Odious, twisted, hate-filled thugs; arrogant and inadequate creeps, intoxicated by the pathetic illusion of power that comes with guns; poisoned by a perversion of religion into a contempt for all norms of civilised behaviour,” he wrote.
“They are fighting not for freedom but for a terrifying Islamic state in which they would have the whip hand – and yet there is no dodging or fudging the matter: these are among the Syrian rebels who are hoping now to benefit from the flow of Western arms .
“How is it supposed to work? How are we meant to furnish machine guns and anti-tank weapons to one set of opposition forces, without them ending up in the hands of men like the al Qaida-affiliated thugs who executed a child for telling a joke?
“This is not the moment to send more arms. This is the moment for a total ceasefire, an end to the madness.
“We can’t use Syria as an arena for geopolitical point-scoring or muscle-flexing, and we won’t get a ceasefire by pressing weapons into the hands of maniacs,” he argued.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
‘London’s Country Estate’ is how the 5-Star Grove Hotel describes itself
The world’s top politicians, industrialists and bankers will decide this weekend how the world will be run.
The ‘Bilderberg’ group is meeting at the Grove Hotel in Watford from 6th to 9th June 2013 under the chairmanship of Henri de Castries, Chairman and CEO of AXA, to plan and plot world events. Whatever these wealthy people decide, and their plans do not always work out, it will be designed to benefit them first and the rest of us a long way behind.
There is an especially large contingent from the UK this year:
Marcus Agius, Former Chairman, Barclays plc
Helen Alexander, Chairman, UBM plc
Ed Balls MP, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
John Bell, Regius Professor of Medicine, University of Oxford
Peter, Lord Carrington, Former Honorary Chairman, Bilderberg Meetings
Kenneth Clarke MP, top Bilderberg insider
Sherard Cowper-Coles,Business Development Director, International, BAE Systems plc
Ian Davis, Senior Partner Emeritus, McKinsey & Company
Robert Dudley, Group Chief Executive, BP plc
Douglas J. Flint, Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
Stuart Gulliver, Group Chief Executive, HSBC Holdings plc
Simon Henry, CFO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
John, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, Former Diplomat
Peter, Lord Mandelson, Chairman, Global Counsel; Chairman, Lazard International
John Micklethwait, Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
David Omand, Visiting Professor, King’s College London
George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer
Simon Robertson, Partner, Robertson Robey Associates LLP; Deputy Chairman, HSBC Holdings
Martin Taylor, Former Chairman, Syngenta AG
Peter R. Voser, CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
Shirley, Baroness Williams of Crosby
Martin H. Wolf, Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
Wright, DavidVice Chairman, Barclays plc
There is apparently a new spirit of openess in Bilderberg, after years of utmost (and widely breached) secrecy, but do not expect to see too much of what is decided and how in the press, despite the presence of journalists among the delegates. Everything is under ‘Chatham House Rules’ and no comment is attibuted to anyone. Bilderberg say: ‘There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued.’
The Bilderberg Group has had a website for a couple of years now. How open they are may be judged from the fact that they put up this year’s delegates list then took it down in a panic. That was not before it was picked up and circulated all around the world. You can see the full list here. They say: ‘About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields.’ (More delegates, and historical lists.)
Apparently, ‘the privacy of the meetings, … has no purpose other than to allow participants to speak their minds openly and freely’. ‘Bilderberg is a small, flexible, informal and off-the-record international forum in which different viewpoints can be expressed and mutual understanding enhanced’.
According to Bilderberg, despite having no agenda, they will be discussing (my comments in brackets):
• Can the US and Europe grow faster and create jobs? (and make money for the bankers)
• Jobs, entitlement and debt (and making money for the bankers)
• How big data is changing almost everything (you just can’t keep Bilderberg secret anymore)
• Nationalism and populism (they don’t like those two for sure!)
• US foreign policy (what new wars should we expect?)
• Africa’s challenges (how best to exploit the continent and promote abortion and sodomy)
• Cyber warfare and the proliferation of asymmetric threats (protecting themselves)
• Major trends in medical research (don’t expect too much Christian morality to intrude)
• Online education: promise and impacts (not sure how they will exploit that)
• Politics of the European Union (Help! The Euro dream is falling apart)
• Developments in the Middle East (they love ‘democracy’ and wars make money)
• Current affairs (preparing the way for the Antichrist? Just a guess!)
Pray that all plans for globalism and world domination are thwarted. Pray this Psalm:
Psalm 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.
10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Only the Muslims are doing what their bodies were designed to do and having lots of children
A Lords committee has warned that the UK is “woefully underprepared” for the social and economic challenges of an ageing society, according to a BBC news report last week.
Drawing on figures from the Office for National Statistics, the committee predicted “a series of crises” in public service provisions.
If current trends continue, then between 2010 and 2030 there will be a 50% rise in the number of over-65s while the number of over-85s will double. Since this is not being balanced by a rise in Britain’s younger population, officials are concerned that we could be accelerating into a situation where we are unable to offer proper care to the elderly.
“As a country we are not ready for the rapid ageing of our population,” said Lord Filkin, the Labour peer who chaired the committee. “Our population is older now and will get more so over the next decade. The public are entitled to an honest conversation about the implications,” he said.
Baroness Greengross, chief executive of the International Longevity Centre UK and a crossbench member of the House of Lords, expressed similar concerns: “Our society is in denial of the inevitability of ageing. We have put off the difficult decisions for far too long.”
Underlying Issues
There are a number of reasons for this demographic shift, including the fact that improved medicine allows people to live longer. That is not a problem and should be treated as a blessing. The real problem, which is not being addressed in any of this discussion, is that we are not having enough children.
Business and feminism have worked together in a pincer movement to drive women into the work place.
Over the years Christian Voice has drawn attention to some of the underlying causes of the declining birth rate. This includes economic policies that have made it increasingly difficult for parents to support children. Despite benefits available to struggling parents, the cumulative effect of the debt-spending required to sustain our welfare state has resulted in a decrease in the purchasing power of the pound. The devaluing of the currency has made it increasingly difficult for parents to support more than a couple children, if even that. Even middle class families are finding it increasingly difficult to bring up their children because of crippling taxation.
Christian Voice has also frequently drawn attention to the many social programs that implicitly discourage marriage. (See our article from last year ‘The Cost of a Permissive Society.’)
Another key factor has been the way business and feminism have worked together in a pincer movement to drive women into the work place. As a result, many women are waiting until later in life to have children, only to find that their biological clock has stopped ticking.
Only the Muslims are doing what their bodies were designed to do and having lots of children. However, this is creating its own demographic problem, as we warned in our report ‘Islam Growing at Astronomical Rate in the UK.’
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Members of the European Parliament are considering setting up a website aimed at presenting children with a “playful” presentation of the EU.
The plan, which would seek to instil in children positive feelings about the EU, was highlighted by the Express today. The paper condemned the project as ‘sinister Soviet-style propaganda.’
EU institutions already spend over £2billion a year on ‘communications’ in a desperate bid to improve their failing public image.
The same paper warned in another article today that “knowing the mindset of the European Union, with its passion for control, for expanding its remit, for trampling on national sensibilities in pursuance of its dream of a superstate, one can guess which way a proposed website for children will lean.”
When asked about these plans to target children, UK Independence Party deputy leader and MEP, Paul Nuttall, said, “Our children need to be protected from this type of political propaganda because they are vulnerable and easily manipulated. Of course, that is the reason they are being cynically targeted by the European Parliament.”
He added “We have seen a profusion of cartoons, comics, schoolbooks and videos from the EU which are aimed at our children and are obvious propaganda.
“People should be aware of this and prevent this stuff coming into their homes and their children’s school. Political propaganda on vulnerable kids is a form of child abuse.”
This is not the first time the EU has targeted children in an attempt to preserve its declining public image.
We warned last year about EU attempts to indoctrinate school children after EU official, Judith Schilling, said, “everybody has now picked up the idea that we will never succeed in convincing people about the value of being a member of the European Union if we do not start early enough with the young people, before they form prejudices and are misinformed by other sources.”
Meanwhile, the issue of EU membership is becoming so contentious that it could split the Tory party. It emerged yesterday that Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister and a Europhile, is saying that giving the people of Britain an ‘In-out’ referendum would be “madness” even though the Lib Dem general election manifesto had promised an in-or-out EU referendum. (See picture below.)
An EU report due to be voted through the EU Parliament later this year, they say, would see all marriages and civil contracts conducted in any EU country become legally binding in all other member states. Under the Berlinguer Report, a couple who are not permitted to marry in their home country could travel to another member state in order to wed, knowing that on their return home they would have to be regarded as married.
Paragraph 40 of the Report would mean that any member state would have to grant ‘all social benefits and other legal effects’ such as legal recognition, tax breaks and benefit entitlements to a married couple, even if such a marriage did not exist in their own legal system.
Mr Nigel Farage, leader of UKIP, said: “Now we know why David Cameron has launched this highly contentious and disruptive legislation, apparently out of the blue.
“If a couple were to marry in Belgium, Spain, Portugal or Sweden where same-sex marriage is possible, the EU will say that they have to be given the same legal rights in whichever member state they then chose to live – even if that state itself opposes the introduction of same-sex marriage. In essence the Berlinguer Report seeks to establish an EU-wide right to same-sex marriage.
“It’s no surprise that the Prime Minister has kept quiet about this, even at the expense of cohesion in his own party. He has a hard enough time trying to force his own backbenchers to swallow both his dedication to keeping Britain in the EU and his wish for the state to interfere in the definition of marriage. To suggest that the two issues are in fact interconnected would have caused complete uproar.”
However, according to one website, the Berlinguer Report has already been voted on by the European Parliament, in November 2010, and has no legislative status. It is still part of the continuing libertarian process, of course. However, another document, a two-and-a-half-page ‘roadmap,’ will be adopted in November 2013. In dry language it speaks of ‘the importance of facilitating mutual recognition of civil status’ across the EU. It is this document, itself building on the Berlinguer Report, which will lead to a legislative initiative from the EU Commission, the seat of power. If David Cameron has already redefined marriage by that time, he will no doubt be all for other states recognising Britain’s sham ‘gay marriages’.
Christian Voice views the European Union as a godless, corrupt, pretentious, expensive, bureaucratic, oligarchic expression of Antichrist. But it has tried to end the misery of bent cucumber phobia, a dibillatating disorder which affects dozens of people every year…
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
David Cameron. Counting votes, or mis-counting the public sector defecit?
David Cameron has taken a gamble with his EU referendum promise but today stands accused of lying on the extent of the public debt.
The Prime Minister yesterday said he would seek to renegotiate the United Kingdom’s position in the European Union and put the results to the people with an ‘In with revised terms’ or ‘Out’ question by 2017 – assuming he is re-elected.
However, in answer to a question from the BBC’s Nick Robinson, Mr Cameron was somewhat hazy on what would happen if his re-negotiations did not reach his aspirations. Indeed, no-one knows what criteria he has set down by which to measure success.
Christian Voice believes Britain’s membership of the EU to be incompatible with her majesty’s coronation oath and the UK’s consequent constitutional position as a nation under Almighty God in Jesus Christ. We also see the EU as expensive, meddling, bureaucratic, oligarchical, corrupt, inefficient and pretentious. So we shall watch the political debate with interest.
Following Mr Cameron’s speech, the Conservative Party ran a party political broadcast last night in which Mr Cameron said: ‘So though this government has had to make some difficult decisions, we are making progress. We’re paying down Britain’s debts.’
‘David Cameron’s policy is to increase Britain’s debt by 60 per cent, more than any European country. To increase it more over five years than Labour did over 13 years. Just yesterday, we learned the national debt had hit £1,111 billion and it’s heading to £1,400 billion.
‘By no stretch of the English language can this be described as “paying down Britain’s debts.” What Cameron said is not an exaggeration. It’s a straight falsehood, and one that demeans his office. He has previously used different language, saying that he is “dealing with the debt”.’
Mr Nelson says that people interviewed for the broadcast were asked to guess ‘how much the deficit is going down by’. He says: ‘They guess low figures – 2 per cent, etc – and are then told that it’s actually 25 per cent. Then they say how impressed they are with the Tories. Have you spotted the trick? No normal person knows what “deficit” means, nor should they.’
‘Public sector current budget deficit was £15.8 billion in November 2012; this is a £1.0 billion higher deficit than in November 2011, when there was a deficit of £14.8 billion.’
Figures like that do not seem to imply a 25% reduction.
The Public Sector Finances for the end of December 2012 were released by the ONS two days ago (22/01/2012). They reveal that Government borrowing under the Coalition is rising year-on-year by every indicator:
• Public sector net borrowing was £15.4 billion in December 2012; this is £0.6 billion higher net borrowing than in December 2011, when net borrowing was £14.8 billion.
• Public sector current budget deficit was £13.0 billion in December 2012; this is a £0.5 billion higher deficit than in December 2011, when there was a deficit of £12.5 billion.
• For the period April to December 2012, public sector net borrowing (excluding the capital payment recorded as part of the Royal Mail Pension Plan transfer in April 2012) was £106.5 billion; this is £7.2 billion higher net borrowing than in the same period the previous year, when net borrowing was £99.3 billion.
In Tables 1 & 2, the ONS show that Public Sector Net Debt (PSND ex) has not decreased, as Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg appear to be claiming, but has risen in the financial year to date from £1,010 billion at 31st December 2011 to £1,111 billion at 31st December 2012, as Mr Nelson said. That is an increase of 10.1%, up from 66% to 71% of Gross Domestic Product.
Borrowing one’s way out of a recession is Keynsian economics, named after the promiscuous homosexual economist John Maynard Keynes. We know that government debt is paid back by our children and grandchildren. No such considerations bothered Keynes. ‘In the long run we are dead’, he said.
In contrast, financial security is said in Deuteronomy to be a blessing from God to an obedient nation:
Deut 15:5 Only if thou carefully hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all these commandments which I command thee this day.
Deut 15:6 For the LORD thy God blesseth thee, as he promised thee: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee.
The United Kingdom is both borrowing from other nations and international bankers and allowing other nations to rule over us.
Moses was told to appoint ‘able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness’ as rulers (Exod 18:21). If Her Majesty the Queen followed that principle, the available pool of ministers would, on present evidence, decrease sharply.
Post script. In contrast to Government profligacy, households are making considerable headway clearing their debts, with the amount owed on personal loans dropping to its lowest level in 14 years, according to a report from the Britiah Bankers Association.
The total balance owed by consumers on all personal loans fell to £34.5billion in December, the lowest figure seen since August 1999 and almost half its pre-financial crisis peak. See: thisismoney.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
It’s not just Britain. Elsewhere in the world, libertarian politicians are trampling over popular opinion to legislate ‘gay marriage’.
last Sunday week, half-a-million people marched through Paris in support of real marriage. demanding that President Francois Hollande withdraw the enabling bill and hold a national debate before any change in the definition of marriage.
Government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, who is also women’s affairs minister, said nothing had changed. The plan to submit the reform bill in parliament late this month and pass it by June would go ahead undisturbed, she told Europe 1 radio.
“The government is totally determined to achieve this reform, this historic progress that is not the victory of one camp over another but progress for the whole society,” she said.
Christiane Taubira – changing civilisation
“We take note of the demonstration (but) this will be discussed in parliament and not in the street.”
Interior Minister Manuel Valls told the daily Le Monde: “We always thought the turnout would be strong and it was … All the more reason to stay focused on the goal of passing the law.”
Daniel Liechti of the Conseil National des Évangéliques de France said the protest showed a new role for religion in public life in France, a constitutionally secular country.
In New Zealeand, a select committee of MPs is currently assessing submissions from the public on Labour MP Louisa Wall’s Marriage Amendment Bill, but only after MP’s voted by 80 votes to 40 in favour of it last August (2012). Submissions closed in October with proponents and opponents said to be equally numbered.
The select committee is due to report back to the House by 28 February 2013 recommending whether the bill should be passed, and it may suggest amendments to the bill. No-one expects the select committee to object to the bill.
It will be interesting to see how the French and NZ Governments address the issues of consummation and adultery. If these are changed due to the inability of a homosexual couple to achieve them, they are changed for all marriages.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
Education Secretary, Michael Grove, condemned the decision as “indefensible.”
A Yorkshire council today admitted it made a mistake in removing children from foster parents because the couple were members of the UK Independence Party. (Read the Times article about it here.)
The children, a baby girl, a boy and an older girl, were removed from the foster couple by the Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council in South Yorkshire following allegations from social workers that the parents’ political affiliation was at odds with the children’s European backgrounds. (The Ukip party favours Britain’s complete withdrawal from the EU.)
The social worker in the case alleged that UKIP is a racist party and that the children’s “cultural and ethnic needs” might be compromised by the foster parents. However, the council admitted that the South Yorkshire couple, a qualified nursery nurse and a former Royal Navy reservist, were good foster parents and provided proper care to the children.
The children had been with the foster parents for about eight weeks. During this time they were encouraged to share their own folk songs and speak their native language, which the foster parents were attempting to learn.
The Council’s admission of error occurred after Education Secretary, Michael Gove, condemned the decision as “indefensible” last weekend, leading to an investigation of the Council’s behaviour.
In a statement earlier today, council leader Roger Stone commented that “Membership of UKIP should not bar someone from fostering. The council places the highest priority on safeguarding children, and our overriding concern in all decisions about the children in our care is for their best interests.”
Labour leader, Ed Miliband also criticized the Council’s totalitarian actions. He was joined by Michael Grove, who heads the Government department responsible for children’s services. Mr Grove promised to investigate what happened and to “deal with” the situation. He commented that
“Rotherham’s reasons for denying this family the chance to foster are indefensible. The ideology behind their decision is actively harmful to children. We should not allow considerations of ethnic or cultural background to prevent children being placed with loving and stable families…. Any council which decides that supporting a mainstream UK political party disbars an individual from looking after children in care is sending a dreadful signal that will only decrease the number of loving homes available to children in need.”
The couple have still not received the children back, nor have they been given a public apology. The wife told The Daily Telegraph: “We feel that we have personally been slandered and we would like a public apology from Rotherham. We would also like something in the form of a letter stating that they have got it wrong in this case and that it will not be on our records that we have had children removed from our care.We just want a clean slate.”
Unfortunately, this is not the first time that social workers and local councils have used their power as leverage over parents whose views are not politically correct. Last June we reported on the story of Toni McLeod, who has taken up residence in Ireland to try to escape the tentacles of Durham County Council. Durham council is attempting to gain custody of Mrs. McLeod’s baby because of her allegedly anti-Muslim views.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Antony Jenkins, Chief Executive of Barclays, is giving cash to Stonewall as they call their opponents ‘bigots’
Two banks and a leading firm of accountants are sponsoring a homosexual group as it goes about its annual name-calling exercise.
Barclays Bank, Coutts Bank and Price Waterhouse Cooper (PWC) are named as sponsors of Stonewall, the ‘gay rights’ lobby group, on an advertisement for this year’s awards dinner, which includes an award for ‘Bigot of the Year’.
The homosexual group’s awards dinner takes place at the Victoria and Albert Museum on Thursday 1st November 2012 and is likely to be the focus of a street witness.
The Earl of Home, Chairman of Coutts, which is sponsoring the Stonewall awards
But Stonewall are not satisfied with congratulating those who have advanced their cause. They have to insult their opponents.
So among the awards is an anti-award called ‘Bigot of the Year’ intended to insult and vilify people particularly opposed to the gay rights agenda. Those shortlisted this year are Christian politician Alan Craig, the Ugandan Ethics and Integrity Minister, Simon Lokodo, Lord Maginnis, Cardinal Keith O’Brien and Archbishop Philip Tartaglia.
Previous ‘nominees’ and ‘winners’ have included the Bishop of Hereford, Rt Rev Anthony Priddis, Northern Ireland politician Iris Robinson, journalist Jan Moir, Chris Grayling MP, the Earl of Devon, Lillian Ladele, Frederick Forsyth, A.A. Gill of The Sunday Times, Rt Rev Arthur Roche, hotelier Susanne Wilkinson, Melanie Phillips, Scottish entrepreneur Sir Brian Souter, Bill Walker, MSP and Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice.
In response, Alan Craig said: “The Bigot of the Year Award is a vicious name-calling Stonewall annual event that reflects more on the donor than the recipient.
Philip Powell is Chairman and Senior Partner of Price Waterhouse Coopers, sponsors of the Stonewall awards.
“By attempting to bully, intimidate, humiliate and generate hatred of individuals through the award, Stonewall fully justifies the Gaystapo tag which I gave the organisation and for which apparently I have been nominated.”
Mr Craig continued: “Nonetheless if I win the award over the other candidates and if Stonewall invite me, and permit me without harassment to offer a proper acceptance speech, I plan to attend their awards dinner and ceremony”.
Alan Craig’s gauntlet is unlikely to be taken up. In previous years Stonewall have never found the courtesy or the courage to invite to their dinner any of those shortlisted for ‘Bigot of the Year’.
Stephen Green added: ‘Bullies never like it when someone stands up to them. Or perhaps social intercourse is just not one of Stonewall’s strong points.’
Last year, the Nationwide Building Socety gave £60,000 to Stonewall for the dinner (which did not stop the greedy lobby group from charging £180 a ticket) and they gave £5,000 as a prize to the ‘Community Group of the Year’. Nationwide have pulled out of sponsoring any more Stonewall events following adverse publicity.
In an email, Mark McLane, Barclays Director of Global Diversity and Inclusion, said:
‘As part of what is a positive longstanding relationship with Stonewall we were approached to see if we would be willing to sponsor a category for the 2012 Awards, which we agreed to do – the Sports Personality of the Year – on the understanding that the awards are a celebration of diversity and positive impact in our communities.
‘I have recently been made aware of the inclusion of a ‘Bigot of the Year’ category in the awards. Let me be absolutely clear that Barclays does not support that award category either financially, or in principle and have informed Stonewall that should they decide to continue with this category we will not support this event in the future. To label any individual so subjectively and pejoratively runs contrary to our view on fair treatment, and detracts from what should be a wholly positively focused event.’
To date, Coutts and PWC have refused to condemn the ‘bigot’ award’.
Stephen Green said: ‘Barclays have not yet pulled out of Stonewall’s event this year despite their welcome condemnation of the ‘bigot’ award. They are in our view still associated with Stonewall’s name-calling. But the refusal of Coutts and PWC to condemn the ‘bigot’ award is quite staggering.’
Some years back, we were on the mailing list of the Lucis Trust. They claim to be in touch with ‘the Ascended Masters’ (that’s demons to you and me) and to be working for ‘World Goodwill’ and ‘the planet’. They observe ancient witchcraft festivals and enthuse over the phases of the moon and ‘spiritual energy‘.
The Lucis Trust actually has consultative status as an NGO at the United Nations. Lucis Trust has an international board of trustees. They have been said to include John D Rockefeller and Robert McNamara, but there are no well-known names today. The Lucis Trust Website lists the names of the current trustees. These broadly agree with the ones listed by the UK Charities Commission. The trust spent £495,300 according to its last accounts.
The Lucis Trust was founded by the theosophist Alice Bailey, a disciple of occultist Madame Helena Blavatsky. There is more on Alice Bailey hereas well as some strange stuff about an investment bank. Bailey wrote of the one we call Satan:
‘For it is he who was the “Harbinger of Light,” bright radiant Lucifer, who opened the eyes of automaton (Adam) created by Jehovah, as alleged; and he who was first to whisper, “In the day ye eat thereof, ye shall be as Elohim, knowing good and evil” — can only be regarded in the light of a Saviour.’
That is Luciferianism in a nutshell, turning Christian theology on its head. The Almighty becomes the bad guy and Lucifer the altruistic bringer of enlightenment.
The Lucis Trust logo symbolises the rising of Lucifer as the morning sun
We also found a glowing reference to the Gates Foundation on the Lucis Trust website. Appropriately, it was in a 2010 report on a conference about money, which the Lucis Trust like (a lot). They talk about ‘the divine circulatory flow’ of money. Naturally, that’s mainly when it comes to them. And it appears that is exactly what money from Gates has done. Strangely, the current webpage omits what we found in a previous gushing version about their donors:
‘Today there is a small but influential minority of responsible and wealthy citizens and organizations who are taking action and showing great leadership in alleviating the current sufferings. The ones we may have heard about are Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, George Soros, John D. Rockefeller, Henry Ford Foundation, Andrew Carnegie Endowment, as well as many others. These philanthropic efforts are certainly making constructive and positive impacts as well as setting a necessary example to other wealthy billionaires on how money can be channeled towards constructive means to help rebuild a better civilization, restore the divine circulatory flow and heal and uplift people from the scourge of poverty, war and disease.’
United Religions Initiative
Bill Gates, George Soros and the Lucis Trust World Service Fund are all said to have financed the United Religions Initiative. Unsurprisingly, that was an interfaith movement with UN links. It was founded in 1995 by Episcopalian Bishop William Spring.
Apart from Gates, Soros, Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie are key players developing the doctrine of one-world government. They are also spreading the immorality of abortion and sodomy mainly in Africa and Asia. Warren Buffet’s donation of $3.17 billion to the Gates Foundation earlier in 2017 was widely reported. Another sizeable donation in 2012 made Gates the world’s biggest donating foundation, outstripping both Ford and Rockefeller. Warren Buffett is in favour of higher taxes and big government. Additionally, he is pro-abortion, just like Bill and Melinda Gates.
Warren Buffet said of eugenics and abortion giant Planned Parenthood: “If by some magic we could make every child born in this country a wanted child, we would have incredibly fewer problems in all areas of society. The closest thing we have to that magic is Planned Parenthood.” William H Gates Sr, Bill Gates’ father, was head of Planned Parenthood.
Bangladeshi ambassador
A brief and revealing summing-up of the 2010 Lucis conference is here. It was addressed by Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury. He was the Bangladeshi ambassador to the United Nations before taking up a post there as UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries. He is therefore a UN insider. The other speaker was one Barbara L. Valocore.
Steve Nation is on the boards of both the Lifebridge Foundation and Lucis Trust UK and is Co-Convenor of the Council of the ‘Spiritual Caucus at the United Nations’
Who is she? She is ‘a long-time student of the Ageless Wisdom‘ and President of the Lifebridge Foundation, Inc. That’s a New Age group, a little like the UK-based Findhorn Foundation. It is based near Rosendale, a town 80 miles up the Hudson river from New York. Lifebridge give grants (promoting their ‘holistic vision’) to groups advocating the environmentalist New Age agenda. One recipient has been the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers. Lifebridge see all creation as alive. Thy even carry a report by biologist Rupert Sheldrake on a summer-solstice conference asking if the sun is conscious. They share two trustees, activist Steve Nation, and his ‘partner’ Barbara Valocore, with the Lucis Trust.
The Lucis Trust organised a Festival for the New Group of World Servers from 21st to 28th December 2012. This happens once every seven years. It is always an important target for our prayer, particularly the culminating full moon. Appropriately enough, the key event was held at the Lifebridge Sanctuary:
‘For the Festival Week, the Rosendale World Service Group will be hosting a gathering at Lifebridge Sanctuary for the duration of the Week (December 21 – 28). The gathering will feature service meditations in support of the New Group of World Servers and study from the Alice Bailey books concentrating on the needs of humanity during this critical time of transition.
‘There will be a public gathering in observation of the Solstice (focused on the New Group of World Servers) for the local community, as well as a public meditation meeting for the full moon. The group staying at the Sanctuary will be meditating during the actual time of the full moon.’
Last month we published a report on the Gates Foundation, focusing on how it has been promoting a type of ‘soft eugenics’ under the pretence of ‘family planning.’
We’ve just updated the article with some additional information and links, so do be sure to visit the updated report ‘Bill Gates and the New Malthusians.’ The article seeks to answer the following questions:
Why would the Gates Foundation commemorate the 100th anniversary of the The First Eugenics Conference, which was built on racist principles that motivated the Nazis?
Why is money from the Gates Foundation (via, the United Nations Population Fund) being used to fund coercive sterilization, contraception and abortion campaigns?
What is Bill Gates relationship to social engineers like Thomas Malthus, who hoped to decrease the surplus population by killing the poor?
Why is the Gates Foundation partnering with a group that supports China’s one-child-only policy?
What is the connection in Melinda Gates’ mind between promoting contraceptives and fostering economic growth?
What is the sinister reality behind Bill Gates’ equation CO2=P x S x E x C CO2?
What is the connection between vaccinations and population control?
Why does the Gates Foundation support an organization that secretly sterilized thousands of women against their will in the ‘90s?
To learn the answers to these and other questions, click on the link below:
