Secret Squirrel Comments On Ever Rising Gasoline Prices.

Secret Squirrel has noticed the ever increasing price of gasoline and commences to consider what is the actual reason for such an increase......it's the oil companies,they're calling the shots,they're pulling the strings, in Congress, in The Senate, those of the President.Whenever they increase the price of gasoline, they increase their profits taken from a finite captive audience, in the hippee terms of the Sixties, "It's a corporate rip off!"Price gouging and it's relative price fixing have
unquestionably been applied successfully in concert with each other and in concert with The Oil Companies, and The "President(read also an influenced and lobbied Congress/Senate).The biggest oil companies have stifled competition to raise
prices and make record profits,and unquestionably they have knowingly, and with the collusion of members of Government,through various forms of influence and influential ,shall we say, lobbying,affected a price gouging,price fixing regimen of function,the status quo.

Whenever gas prices spike, calls mount to increase oil production in the United States. Then experts point out that this won't make a dent in gasoline prices. And politicians ignore them and keep calling for more oil drilling. Today President Obama went along with these calls by announcing plans to expand drilling in Alaska, and speed new exploration offshore,which doesn't have much relevance as,face it, gas consumption,yours, is basically fixed isn't it.....you only need and use so much,not more than you need,or use. Obama agrees to speed drilling, but don't expect it to help gas prices,it means nothing. ... Increasing drilling won't decrease gas prices for reasons mentioned,gas prices rise,profits rise, gas prices drop,profits drop. Yes there has been a steady rise of gasoline prices.When it's noticed, and mentioned, it drops a few cents and sits a bit..........then it increases again repeating the pattern, so in 1997 it was $1.23 per gallon, and now is about $3.05,in 2011.

Well there is supposed to be the law,the economic laws,the law of supply and demand, increased demand lowers prices for a commodity, but noticeably, America doesn't follow this LAW, indeed what with the oil companies the reverse is really true. You see, as gas consumption is really fixed in America, i.e. there is as much use as there is.there is a set market of consumption for a commodity such as gas, it's basically, face it, determined by the amount of cars on the road consuming you
know.If there is an increase it is a fixed calculable increase in consumption and only by that fashion. Increasing price then increase further sales, hence profits. A decrease would lower profits, but if determinable and increase in price would offset. Increase increase increase. One can't fail to notice, as well, that prices rise in virtual concert with all companies,within days of each other, upwards, narry does one keep the price lower to increase profits by increasing sales in quantity...no indeed,it just wouldn't be sporting nor fair to the other companies who raised their prices would it now?

One also sees that when there is a drop in oil prices, the price at the pump remains, and further yet,increases.Obama increasing oil production within the United States has absolutely no bearing on price of gas at the pump in America, it
is set, by the oil companies,and one suspects with governmental collusion. You see the oil companies didn't increase said increases in drilling,the oil companies did, really, and if oil companies had to ask, could he, would he say no........ hhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,speed drilling,drill more, doesn't the oil belong to these oil companies........................or thence it IS the US government controlling things, hence profits,hence price of gas in America.You see if increased production occurs, this has no bearing on increased consumption, as the increased production implies shortage, and there is and are no shortages of gas, there never are.Increasing production of gas does not have bearing on consumption either as you cannot and never ever do consume more than you need.

Let me explain it like this, the seasonal summer drought means I cut my grass less times, I consumed only 2 1/2 gallons of gas this summer, because that's as much as was needed, given a bad summer when I have to cut more, it could be 5 gallons, hence that is my consumption, only what I need..........this is true for all who cut their grass, but as always with actual figures on grass cutting it will vary and level out including ALL of America, hence constant fixed consumption of necessity regardless of available quantity of said gas.The same is true of cars, increase gas prices and some may drive less, yes, consume less, not more, due to cost, then make available more gas, and so what, the price is there,they're not running to consume more since there's more available, they're consuming only what they need,what they actually need.Increasing gas prices will not increase gas consumption, nor will making more gas available cause increased gas consumption since gas consumption is fixed.

In 1978, U.S. gasoline consumption was about 7.4 million barrels per day


http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?product=gasoline&graph=consumption

Source: United States Energy Information Administration

Consumption Thousands of Barrels per Day...(42 US gallons per barrel)


year consumption change

1997 18,666.60 1.82 %
1998 19,097.87 2.31 %
1999 19,403.20 1.60 %
2000 19,883.51 2.48 %
2001 20,077.91 0.98 %
2002 20,186.03 0.54 %
2003 20,404.55 1.08 %
2004 20,867.42 2.27 %
2005 21,166.90 1.44 %
2006 21,472.00 1.44 %
2007 21,642.91 0.80 %

Present day, 2011, consumption is about 22,000.00 so there's been a 4,000 per rise 1997 to present.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption

Motor Gasoline Consumption by Country

Rank Country consumption (Thousand Barrels per Day)
1 United States 9,285.67
2 China 1,285.53
3 Japan 1,023.96
4 Mexico 744.94
5 Canada 724.81
6 Russian Federation 672.05
7 Germany 492.92
8 United Kingdom 410.05
9 Iran, Islamic Republic Of 403.29
10 Saudi Arabia 347.16
11 Australia 331.26
12 Brazil 331.18
13 Indonesia 321.52
14 Italy 288.25
15 Venezuela 269.29

From........


http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&product=gasoline&graph=consumption

and at

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_pop-people-population&date=1997

US Gasoline Consuption Per Year, in Thousand Barrels per Day

Year Gas TB/D Change Population

1997 8,016.84 1.60 % 272,657,000 $1.23/us gallon
1998 8,253.42 2.95 % 275,854,000
1999 8,430.80 2.15 % 279,040,000
2000 8,472.06 0.49 % 282,224,000 $1.60/us gallon
2001 8,610.03 1.63 % 285,318,000
2002 8,847.83 2.76 % 288,369,000
2003 8,934.90 0.98 % 290,810,000
2004 9,105.41 1.91 % 293,655,400 $2.01/us gallon
2005 9,159.26 0.59 % 296,410,400
2006 9,252.53 1.02 % 298,988,100
2007 9,285.67 0.36 % 301,139,947 $2.80/us gallon
2010 312,090,000 $3.05/us gallon
2011 $3.63/us gallon


So from 1997 to present the price per gallon at the pump has tripled,though population rose only 12.6% Public Citizen estimates that Big Oil has taken in a quarter of a trillion in profits under the Bushes. Two-thirds of adults in a recent poll said gas prices had caused them "financial hardship."It just gets worse.

And in 2011...........

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/economy-and-business/Oil-Company-Profits-Surge-120870129.html

Major oil companies like ExxonMobil and Shell are reporting a surge in profits as crude oil prices rise and energy demand grows.ExxonMobil said Thursday that the firm made nearly $11 billion in the first three months of this year, a 69 percent improvement over the same period a year ago.Shell reported more than $6 billion net income for the quarter, a 22 percent gain over the same three month period last year.In the United States, higher energy costs are blamed for slowing economic growth as drivers cope with sharply higher gasoline prices. That is why higher energy prices are becoming a key issue for voters and politicians.

Of course, we realize,don't we, that increases in sales of a quantity of a commodity,such as gasoline, increases profits, but in cases where sales of a given commodity are limited but purchase quantity/necessity,increases in price of sold
commodity,such as gasoline, increases the profits as well.If they now decrease the cost of gasoline, their profits will drop accordingly,something they're loath to do having discovered that by increasing the price of gasoline,say from 1997 levels of
$1.23 per gallon, they're making much more in 2011 selling the same gallon at $3.63. It's been done slowly, but the effect of what they have presented as nickle and dimeing, has had a major effect on your pocket book and also on THEIR profit levels.

Some have woken up to fact that 74% of Americans regard the gasoline price rises as being gouging/price fixing......

http://rt.com/usa/news/gas-price-fixing-investigation/

Here commences the informative informational news content epistle,,,,,,,

US Senate Democratic leaders set a letter to the Federal Trade Commission requesting a formal investigation into whether oil companies have intentionally restricted the supply of gasoline to manipulate consumer prices.Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill made the push for the letter following a meeting on Capitol Hill where executives from America’s major oil companies testified and were questioned on why major oil companies received large tax benefits and subsidies. Many Democrats feel the hand-outs to big oil need to stop, but the industry is defiant.
“At a time when major refiners and oil companies are making record profits and American families continue to struggle with gasoline at record prices the idea that refiners may be manipulating the market to keep prices artificially high goes beyond reproach," said a statement released by Democratic leaders. "It is incumbent upon the Commission to ensure that the American
people are protected from this type of manipulation. Accordingly, we request that the Commission open a full investigation into these allegations of wrongdoing and to determine the impact this behavior, if confirmed, has on regional and national gasoline prices." McCaskill, in her push for FTC intervention, cites a report that shows oil companies are only using 81.7 percent of their overall capacity – a 7 percent decline for last year.“The rise in the price of oil is certainly a driving factor behind the recent rise in gasoline prices, but concerns have been raised that while gasoline use is declining, US gasoline inventories remain below average and refining margins continue to rise. According to information posted by the Energy Information Administration US refiners are using only 81.7 percent of
their capacity, a decline of 7 percent from the same time last year. Moreover, since the beginning of 2011 U.S. refiners have
seen over a ninety percent increase in their refining margins. While some have argued that this increase is due to potential impacts from recent flooding along the Mississippi River, this cannot justify the steady increases in their margins since January of this year,” said the letter to the FTC.

here ends the epistle....

Politicians have realized the price of gasoline is becoming a contentious issue, and offer manipulating prices downwards for electoral gains,recall that 2012 is an election year,but it is the epitome of low-hanging fruit,and once elected, it won't occur, for in doing so, it merely confirms the price gouging,price fixing collusion of members of The House Of
Representatives,The Presidency,and, of course, Big Oil.Sarah Palin wrote a post March 15 headlined the “$4-Per-Gallon President.”,Obama, of course. In her blog, she blamed the president,but actually it is The President, AND The Oil Companies, as it has ever been in the past,so is it now, and ever shall be,and is and would be and also even if she were the President ,everybody's been getting the business......... it's BIG BUSINESS.

Secret Squirrel Sets The Time For All Time.

Secret Squirrel has pondered the many time zones in the world which we suffer from, flying through each necessitates resetting a watch, and finally, also affects the actual date,which creates the International Date line.Well,the time zones have to go, and taking with them the International Date line as a consequence,making things much easier and less confusing.Confused? Read on,consider Simon and Garfunkle sing.........Time,time,time,to see what's become of me........the group Chicago sings...Does anybody really know what time it is, does anybody really care about time? Man sees to have an obsession about time, time for this time for that, time to do this, time to do that. He even makes things difficult for himself concerning time,but if he has or had a maid, I suppose he could make time, I do. Goldie Hawn enlightened us concerning time, in her time, and all in good time, on the American tele program Rowan and Martin's Laugh In on the Educational section of Laugh In (Rowan and Martin)..Goldie Hawn enlightened us in and after this fashion....

here encapsulated from.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b7BGBa6MTI

"There are four time zones in the United States for example when you're having lunch in Chicago it's breakfast time in California.Of course if you're in Chicago you wouldn't feel like breakfast if you're from California because you've just had lunch.However for those living in New York it's dinner time while we're still eating lunch here in California which means the time is totally different as in the menu.All this is caused by the sun which cannot be everywhere you know otherwise it would never be night and we would never know when to eat dinner.Well in my time zone that's all the time I have but maybe in your time zone they haven't finished
yet."

Well explained, and I would certainly have her as my maid.

Taking things further on in proper consideration let us ponder.Having time zones creates problems virtually all the time, for example my cousin Matilda called from Greece,where she was vacationing, and there's a 6 hour time difference between there and where I was at that particular time,while between here,and Greece there is a 2 hour time difference, at the same time that there's the 6

hour difference in what we call the East Coast North American Colonial zone.Besides this virtual and real clash,there are even yet time disputes, say between Greenwich Mean Time which the world is on, and the American Co-Ordinated Universal Time,that of a second give or take,according to them,they,the Americans.Besides these we have Apparent Solar Time,Siderial Time,Mean Solar Time,Ephimeris Time,International Atomic Time,Terrestrial Dynamic Time,Barycentric Dynamical Time,Terrestrial Dynamical Time(which they now insist
on calling Terrestrial Time),Geocentric Coordinate Time,Barycentric Coordinate Time, and all whatever else names they have for time at any particular time.Oh well,let them have their way,whatever,and they can have CUT and the rest of the world can have GMT. All I really want to know is when it is time to do the maid, which I get from her,and when I get to get her, which is known as Time For The Maid,the most important time of the day.

They have different ways and means of measuring time, and things like The Senate Ways And Means Committee which often meets at any particular time, and probably discusses the ways and means of getting to their maids as well,or whatever they choose to call them. But, does it all really matter.You know that as we cross each artificially determined and set time zone, we must adjust our watches, either forwards or backwards as they,whoever,determined,which really doesn't affect nor have to do with my Maid Time,which occurs whenever it does. Now, I once fell asleep on the airplane, and lo and behold, when I woke up, I was in a different time from everybody else, I had time traveled it seems, they were ahead of me in time zones at that time, and I was behind them, but even having a different time, I still got my maid on time. I got used to having time traveled,you know being out of time,for that matter so had everybody else with respect to me, as they could be out of time, at the wrong time and whatever.I didn't matter to them, and they didn't matter to me, what only mattered was when was it time for the maid,and we couldn't affect anything as the maid would decide that.So, time zones don't really matter then do they.

Consider J. G. Ballard's Chronopolis,a short story of his.Chronopolis' - city of time - is an ironic name for a city that has no time,we are told that Newman is in prison for understanding time,Newman is 'serving time' for being obsessed with time ,the reason time was banned in Chronopolis,is because people couldn't stand being organised, and having a specific time to do everything. This was obviously not a good thing for them, as they ended up being too organised - everything was pre- planned. The population was split up into social classes - each of which had their own time zones, clocks, currency and library tickets. Each of these classes had their own colour: 'blue for executives, gold for professional classes, yellow for military and government officials... green for manual workers and so on.". It is easy to see why the people resented this - it is like our society taken to the extreme, where nobody has any free will, and cannot even choose when to watch television - 'your time programmed told you when you could switch on your T.V. set and when to switch off,we could be doomed to years of watching Celine Dion singing, which is the only way she could generatea tele audience in either case, heaven for her hell for all of us... the viewer's economic status obviously determined the choice of
program in Chronopolis, we'd have to pray we had sufficient status not to have to watch Celine Dion.

Eventually the population revolted,(many it seems were subjected to watching Celine Dion,this leading to the banning of time,so that it could never again be time to watch Celine Dion sing.In Chronopolis,there was a character, named Marshall and there he is the keeper of law and order in this chaotic world,of the future past in time. He has spent his whole life winding up as many clocks in Chronopolis as he possibly can (and now has 278 running), all on his own. Yet when Newman arrives, he discovers that they are seven and a half years out. It is ironic that Marshall has spent his whole life trying to bring back time, yet his time is completely distorted.The world of Chronopolis is in fact similar to ours in every single way - except for one point, the absence of time, which makes it completely different.Chronopolis emphasizes the human ability to cope and adjust to different situations - the people of Chronopolis have got used to a world without time, and almost forgotten they ever had it.And good for them too.

Consider the time zones as they are. It is x amount of time here, in Greece the time is X plus 6,they being ahead of us, So it is 6 o'clock here, say, so it is 12 o'clock in Greece at exactly the same time.So to call here or there at anytime, you have to consider the time here and there,or simply not care about it. Why change the time anyway, we could NOT change the clocks as we cross time zones, or even when we think we actually do by calling there, in short, we simply select the time given as in say Greenwich at the specific moment, as in say now, and declare it to be 6,o'clock, and set our clock accordingly, everywhere, and it is 6 o'clock and
time advances as it does and it will from there,everywhere,in short it is the same time at all times everywhere in the world. It is no longer 6 o'clock here, and 12 o'clock there, it IS precisely, 6 O'clock everywhere,and the same goes for all time, 5 o'clock is 5 o'clock everywhere else etc etc etc.Indeed it works out grandly.We keep AM PM,or use the 24 hour representation, call it World Time in either case. So all we have to know is "over there"is it day or night,at what time do we and they eat what, when stores and business are open etc. just like we do here,but concerning their time for things, as we really did before, without the ridiculous
and encumbering calculations required due to the presence of the differing time zones.We would still have and keep firm the anchor of GMT, securely we set all our clocks just once, to the time in Greenwich, GMT Midnight,(New Years always comes at GMT midnight,pm/am), and off we go with a nice standardized, unencumbered sane system of time,everybody's time, all at the same time,
all in time, all keeping in time at the same time.Now, I've fixed your clock and everybody else's,and it's about time too isn't it,and if you'll excuse me, it's time for............. the maid.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP (Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel On National Debts,Money, And Gold.

Secret Squirrel is pondering national debts, and working with the national debts, in short, Squirrel has embarked on philosophical economic considerations of things of economics which are as they are, and may not seem to be as they are but they
are, and what they should be, yet aren't,and even yet might not yet be.To be or not to be,that is the question,economically strong is the completion of it.The United Sates,formerly regarded as being the humungous heavily muscled King Kong of the economies of the world, through the power of the ever almighty printed up fiat paper and ink based currency, has now been found to be some form of strange miniature but seemingly economically possibly killable midget monkey.Of sorts. You see whilst America has debt problems,most major nations,but not all, have been revealed as having massive debt problems,also. In the same vein as America, almost also bankrupt,and as America probably morally so as well, the other major nations are Ireland (94.2% debt versus gdp), Iceland (123.8%), Greece (144%), Spain (63.4%),Italy (118.1%) .Curiously though, lets examine America, which though it prints up money whilly nilly seemed to be in an internal position of not ,at least almost not, being ALLOWED, by it's Congress,to print up more currency for itself to run.It's national debt is placed at 58% of it's GDP, but this is far below the
% GDP debts of many European countries, and those regarded as being stronger economies.America's is 58% of GDP,yet they had a massive crisis.Why ever did they have a humungous crisis, and not those other nations yet more of a crisis.

Well,through it all the massively indebted nation of Canada remained undisturbed at a colossal 84% debt versus gdp, the UK is quiet at 76.5% and so too is France at 83.5%,and Germany at 78%.So,technically,if fiat money printing was linked to debt, the Americans should not be in any kind of a particular problem at all,concerning the per centage of GDP relationship, but strangely it was. What does it all mean?

Well let's confuse the issue by examining things as they are. Now the Australia national debt is at a paltry 22% of it's GDP,shall we say they're THE best of what we can call the Old Order,Old Economic Guard,nations. Now with canada at a whopping 84% debt of gdp,if dollars are equating, shouldn't Australia be allowed to further increase it's "debt" to the Canadian level, and increase dollar values out by 4 times..........great spending spree that'd be for them, and deserved as well,or conversely, shouldn't then a Canadian dollar be 25 cents versus the Australia(or increase to 4 dollars canadian equating to 1 dollar Australian.Well clearly Canada is an utterly inept and economically incompetent failure versus Australia.Wouldn't it be better for the Canadians if Britain gave Canada to the Australians to regulate,run,rule etc...life could be ever so much better..........!!!!!!!!!!Mind you it would still have winter.Now with the UK debt 76.5 % of gdp, and per capita productivity taken in to account,the Aussies rank above UK, and Uk also above Canada like per person per capita debts of respectively,41,39,31 thousands in terms of per capita debt ownership of the individual citizen, not that any citizen would wish to, nor does wish to,own his or her share of their national debt generated by governments regarded generally as being aliens of some sorts to them.So what is a dollar worth?It's not based on any value of gold or any other precious metal. It's not based on a national debt as percentage of GDP system.........obviously it cannot be else all of the above concerning Australia.
Now the USA is at 58% of the GDP debt.

Let's continue in the same vein.So the Aussie dollar ought to be worth 2us dollars to the Aussie dollar........the UK dollar value(even if pounds), 1 Aussie dollar worth 3.50 uk dollar values.But it isn't so is it.Well such is this thing of economics and finances.Now we find the US WANTS the Aussies to raise the value of their dollar versus the US dollar.They claim that by having a lower dollar value versus the Australians they force others to buy more from them,America, and the Aussies more,particularly, from whatever including America.But if the Aussie dollar was higher and got more dollars, the Aussies should be getting more bang for their buck in America, as in the car values in America say.Imagine a $18,000 car average
value, would be and should be accepted in exchange for said car 9000 Aussie bucks, BUT they want 18000 US bucks which at present is at par (or a touch higher cent of two aussie favor)as in equal value.But,they, the Americans, would not give the Aussies 2 US dollars in exchange for 1 Australian dollar,so the Aussies can't spend what they don't have but are entitled to,since when they want it to have it and use it, the Americans won't give it to them. Anyway you look at it,things are confusing,and the Aussies are getting the short end of things.

Things are getting more yet confusing.Imagine now they,the Americans, want to go back to the gold standard.What of things of gold?Under a gold standard, paper notes are convertible into pre-set, fixed quantities of gold.

The gold standard is a monetary system in which the standard economic unit of account is a fixed mass of gold. There are distinct kinds of gold standard. First, the gold specie standard is a system in which the monetary unit is associated with
circulating gold coins, or with the unit of value defined in terms of one particular circulating gold coin in conjunction with subsidiary coinage made from a lesser valuable metal.

Similarly, the gold exchange standard typically involves the circulation of only coins made of silver or other metals, but where the authorities guarantee a fixed exchange rate with another country that is on the gold standard. This creates a de facto gold standard, in that the value of the silver coins has a fixed external value in terms of gold that is independent of the inherent silver value. Finally, the gold bullion standard is a system in which gold coins do not circulate, but in which the authorities have agreed to sell gold bullion on demand at a fixed price in exchange for the circulating currency.The total amount of gold that has ever been mined has been estimated at around 142,000 metric tons. This is less than the value of circulating money in the U.S. alone, where more than $8.3 trillion is in circulation or in deposit (M2 deposits). Therefore, a return to the gold standard, if also combined with a mandated end to fractional reserve banking, would result in a significant increase in the current value of gold, which may limit its use in current applications.economic recessions can be largely mitigated by increasing money supply during economic downturns. Following a gold standard would mean that the amount of money would be determined by the supply of gold, and hence monetary policy could no longer be used to stabilize the economy in times of economic recessionMonetary policy would essentially be determined by the rate of gold production. Fluctuations in the amount of gold that is mined could cause inflation if there is an increase, or deflation if there is a decrease.

In 2001, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad proposed a new currency that would be used initially for international trade among Muslim nations. The currency he proposed was called the Islamic gold dinar and it was defined as 4.25 grams of pure (24-carat) gold. Mahathir Mohamad promoted the concept on the basis of its economic merits as a stable unit of account and also as a political symbol to create greater unity between Islamic nations. The purported purpose of this move would be to reduce dependence on the United States dollar as a reserve currency, and to establish a non-debt-backed currency in accord with Islamic
law against the charging of interest. However, to date, Mahathir's proposed unified gold-dinar currency has failed to take hold.But present holdings in Muslim nations total 1328.3 Tonnes, or US 18Billion.This is interesting, it would be a workable
economy within the global economy, respting on participating nations having faith in their currency,their exchange standard.It magnifies and exposes the concept of the global economy and problem of the day. This idea of his should work,it is a mdoel of a workable economy, and economy in the world as it was, but isn't,it is the gold standard value economy.

The United States used gold as the basis for valuing the U.S. dollar successfully for roughly 180 years before President Richard Nixon embarked upon an experiment to end the practice in the 1970s that has contributed to a number of woes that the country is suffering from now.By restoring the gold standard, the United States would shift away from “less responsible policies” and toward a stronger dollar and a stronger America, he said. “If the dollar was as good as gold, other countries would want to buy it.” Forbes believe the US will return to the gold standard within 5 years.But here we have the starnge term.....buy the dollar......with what, gold they no longer have having cleared out their reserves.....some haven't noitcably the arab countries where it has been cherished and believed in from the beginning of time...but others cleared it out, almost entirely,So,now everybody has to go back to the gold standard?Most nations just spent their time getting away from the gold standard and getting rid of their gold. Why this sudden urge to go back to the gold standard?

Well, let's look at the tables.......

Top 10 Nations by Gold reserves :(tonnes)


Country Dec-09 Mar-09 % of reserves
United States 8113.5 8113.5 68.7
Germany 3407.6 3412.6 64.6
Italy 2451.8 2451.80 63.4
France 2435.4 2487.10 64.2
China 1054.0 1054.00 1.5
Switzerland 1040.10 1040.10 28.8
Japan 765.2 765.2 2.4
Netherlands 612.5 612.5 51.7
Russia 607.7 523.7 4.7
India 557.7 357.7 6.4
All other 26780 26349 10.2
Total 47825.5 47167.2
http://asiancorrespondent.com/29378/top-10-nations-by-gold-reserves/

Well,US holds the maximum gold reserves in the world. At the end of Dec 2009 the US has 8113.5 metric tons of gold in its foreign reserves. 68.7% of America’s foreign reserves are in the form of gold – highest by any country in the world. China on the other hand holds a mere 1.5% of its reserves in Gold. It is a big fan of green back and holds close to $2.5 trillion in foreign exchange, most of it in USD.Australia only holds about 8%,or 79.7tonnes, Canada 2% 3.4tonnes...hardly anything at all really,UK 312.2 tonnes.Europe,less Uk holds 13681 tonnes total,184 billion US.

But there is another stranger side of the coin as it were...let's talk a walk on the wild side, let's follow the left hand path, let's see what's on the dark side...that of things sinister.....

2009

Rank Country/Region Gold production (kilograms)

1 China 320,000
2 Australia 210,000
3 South Africa 210,000
4 United States 205,000
5 Russia 205,000
6 Peru 180,000
7 Indonesia 140,000
8 Canada 95,000
9 Ghana 90,000
10 Uzbekistan 80,000

Now to give an idea of production per year,let's exmine Australia's production.Now with gold at (per Kilo) $56,496.90, given Australian output at 210,000 kilos per annum, this equals in US Dollars, $11,864,394,000 which is 11.864 billion, or .118
trillion.Now One tonne is equal to 1000kg.So Australia's production is 210 tonnes per annum.It would take Australia, keeping all of it's own production, 38 years to equal America's present 8113.5 tonnes of reserves.Australia is a have, a very big have, so too are other seemingly poorer nations, but what then of the have nots?

The United States is in great field position,pretty much all round and about,massive debts or not,and their debt isn't the most massive in the world,Japan is at 225% of it's gdp take note, and plugging along quite nicely,thank you, in spite of it
all,facing no economic crisis what so ever,strangely enough.Yet the US debt,who's dollar is used as a world exchange currency,the world standard currency, has a debt of 14 trillion,at 58% of gdp, the Japanese at 225% of their GDP have a debt ot 9.8 trillion US dollars,the UK has a debt of 9.12 trillion but their is vastly less of it's gdp,only 76.5% of it's gdp to be exact.

China is also in really good field position, the best really within the world,in either case, debt based,fiat money based or gold based economy, but all the other nations with high gold reserves, aren't gold producers.What of the gold producers, would the Australian's then have to produce gold to give to the US for US dollars? But what of the non gold producing nations.

Obviously then the gold producing nations become the king nations of the new economic order over night.Indeed yes,why should they or do they have to sell gold at all, and for how much as well, in exchange for what and what ever also as well. Why shouldn't they not keep their own massively produced gold?Just look at Australia, South Africa, Russia, Peru, Indonesia, the economic colossus they would thence become, and should be,even yet today,but curiously aren't.

Obviously things are very very peculiar in the world of today, the world of money...........

ABBA

"Money Money Money"

I work all night, I work all day, to pay the bills I have to pay
Ain't it sad
And still there never seems to be a single penny left for me
That's too bad
In my dreams I have a plan
If I got me a wealthy man
I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd fool around and have a ball...

Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world

A man like that is hard to find but I can't get him off my mind
Ain't it sad
And if he happens to be free I bet he wouldn't fancy me
That's too bad
So I must leave, I'll have to go
To Las Vegas or Monaco
And win a fortune in a game, my life will never be the same...

Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world

Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world

It's a rich man's world

Secret Squirrel Ponders Mechanisms That Generate A National Debt.

Secret Squirrel ponders the mystery,the illusion of this thing called an economy,the life blood of nations,this thing which generates a vast national debt that each nation simply cannot pay off, a national debt that is as illusionary as the sanctity of that thing called the dollar,that visible invisible piece of paper which nations print up to drive their economy,pay their bills,oil the machinery of capitalism,communism,socialism,that thing called money which nations simply never have enough of no matter how much of it they print,a fact they have just woken up to.

Yes,America has awoken to the fact that it is spending money it does not have, they the citizens have woken up to that, government has woken itself up to that fact, and almost didn't vote yes to print up more money to cover its previous debts INTEREST PAYMENTS,on money it had earlier printed up and spent...........err.........spent in America? Who would notice that? It seems America has been spending all over, all over the rest of the world, in similar fashion to the other nations of the world who are also in massive debt.Yes indeed, they're all spending money they don't have, and printing it up whilly nilly as well.As a matter of fact why just weeks before the American realization of debt came, Obama, it's President, was out and about yelling and screaming about other nations who were in danger of default on their debts, thundering,blundering ever louder than before, at Spain,Ireland,Italy,et cetera and especially at Greece, who somehow all managed to resolve their crisis, then suddenly Obama stepped in it, his own near default debt crisis.Sad is it not.

So in America it,the national debt, is set at $39,000 per person....THE NATIONAL DEBT.....a debt they claim is impossible to pay off.........why? well there seem to be so many in America who can't and won't come up with their 39,000 for the US government to give to the US government, to clear the national debt.why, because no doubt this figure includes the illegal Mexicans.We need them, you need them, turf them out and the numbers of people counted drop, and so then your share of the national debt rises, so, if there are MORE illegal immigrants, your share of the national debt will drop accordingly,so what if we move in to America all of the Mexicans, this'd be another 107,431,230, and YOUR national debt would drop by one quarter, (1.4),to a lower $30,000 approx. On the other hand we're only looking at a paltry $9000 drop, so maybe it's best to leave the Mexicans where they are,and we'd best get Obama to get the ones already in the USA,to send them back.

In the UK population 62,435,709,the national debt is 13,000 pounds per person...now the population of India,which once belonged to England you
know, is 1,210,193,422 , 19.3830332 times that of the UK, so divided by 19 is 643 pounds, give or take so, by readmitting them,the Indians,declaring them to be British,I know,yes, but we must have a use for them at the immediate moment, adding the figures, dividing reduces the national debt per person to that paltry sum,we then turf'em out again, and leave them with their debts to be paid,by whatever means they can or can't,not our problem really, and we have only a debt of 643 pounds per person, 40 146 160 887, 40.1billion or .401 trillion, a vast
reduction...........technique I,Squirrel,call debt transference and India is a convenience so we've made a convenience of them to conveniently reduce our debts,the debts of the UK..............The reabsorbed India could be left as is,where it is.THEN we then simply declare them once more self ruling.Turf'em, and their share of the debt remains THEIR responsibility.We must do this before the Americans find out,you see,India's population is 4 times that of America, if American absorbed India, that would add that amount of people to pay the
national debt and so the debt would divide per person,much easier to pay off,and be about say $9000 per person. So, the Americans could pay off their share, and,turfing them in like fashion,could leave the turfed Indians to pay their share off.Interesting system of reducing national debt, spreading it around somewhat more, thinning it out as it were, but alas and alack, merely wishful thinking.

So what is debt,besides being a huge global worrying amusement?It's stated that the USA has a national debt that is 58% of it's gdp,mind you that's far less than Canada's which is a colossal 84%, but then Australia seems to be best managed at only 22%.China's national debt is at 17.5% but can it be in such a good field position when it owns the US debt,meaning it owns noting, just IOU's on paper, really.

Interesting,the nations have no money, America has no money, but must print up money to pay off the interest on it's debts,and must print up money to operate internally.So, the nation has no money, but we see oil companies making vast profits, other companies making vast profits, and buying up foreign companies world wide,they have money, and the governmnet of America wouldn't allow them to operate if they had no money.Indeed the US even increased it's debts massively in the last years financing, on printed up money, their foreign wars of acquisition of
the arab oil lands, for the oil companies to make more profits.Curious.That's what it does, what they all do, print up money as they need it...no cause for alarm then, only when they threaten not to.Globally it's all really just a giant monopoly game,where each nation gets to add more monopoly money for it to loose(or spend), where ever and on whatever,with no cause for concern unless certain privileged members of the game complain about it at any given time.

So National debt, national debt, all the focus is on national debt.There's more to things than just the NAtional Debt,you know, There are internal debts,within nations,that occur. Take for example,the United States, made up of individual states,and we see,that yet, obviously, there is not one single state that does not have ever increasing debts of their own,as Schwartzenegger showed us by massively increasing California's debt such that everbody noticed this element of things.Let's have a look at America's state debts..........

State .. Total State Debt

.Nebraska .. 30,542,523 14%
.Wyoming .. 45,718,680 6%
.South Dakota .. 222,592,942
.North Dakota .. 230,276,464
.Iowa .. 237,620,624
.Montana .. 381,220,699
.Vermont .. 430,257,920 17%
.Alaska .. 601,385,253
.New Hampshire .. 695,401,875
.Idaho .. 792,995,913
.Maine .. 979,497,643
.Arkansas .. 1,083,543,750
.Utah .. 1,244,703,684
.Tennessee .. 1,467,027,182
.Colorado .. 1,708,414,320
.Delaware .. 1,883,539,616
.Oklahoma .. 1,884,082,550
.Rhode Island .. 1,908,414,708
.West Virginia .. 1,910,765,850
.Nevada .. 2,286,268,525
.New Mexico .. 2,801,481,374
.Indiana .. 3,095,940,466
.Kansas .. 3,281,021,508
.Alabama .. 3,748,131,568
.Missouri .. 4,011,678,600
.South Carolina .. 4,100,556,558
.Mississippi .. 4,363,050,088
.Minnesota .. 4,560,541,324
.Hawaii .. 4,759,779,150
.Louisiana .. 5,228,776,464
.Arizona .. 5,322,792,846
.Oregon .. 6,144,005,142
.Virginia .. 6,164,185,380
.Kentucky .. 6,371,944,901
.Michigan .. 7,636,810,882
.North Carolina .. 7,804,895,488
.Wisconsin .. 8,080,672,046
.Maryland .. 8,589,113,346
.Georgia .. 9,671,943,624
.Ohio .. 11,104,024,490
.Pennsylvania .. 11,974,528,650
.Texas .. 12,886,797,040
.Washington .. 13,908,174,965
.Connecticut .. 15,797,113,120
.Florida .. 20,669,835,435
.Illinois .. 24,232,837,693
.Massachusetts .. 28,504,076,601
.New Jersey .. 31,530,722,919
.New York .. 57,080,584,213
.California .. 66,715,803,520 19%
Grand Total .. 420,166,090,122 (.420 trillion)

(Interesting,this is not a huge figure,basically half of Australia's national debt total,whatever is the United States government spending on?)


The debt figures are in dollars, and the % is a percentage of the GDP debt they themselves have,so states vary in percentage of GDP debt from a low of a mere 6%, to a high of 19%. So these figures each must be added to the national debt,as they do not figure in to the national debt calculation.Wyoming at a population of 532981 has a debt of 4107 per person,the lowest state debt, and the highest is California at 9977 per its population of 37824187.California gets 79 billion from the US government,which is only 40% of what it spends .......so where does the rest come from???Money has to come from somewhere.It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt.

You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exists. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.In short, it's only so much "money" which exists only on paper.It doesn't exist.So why doesn't it exist?It is because the American financial system is based on something called fractional reserve banking.

When you go to your local bank and deposit $100, they do not keep your $100 in the bank. Instead, they keep only a small fraction of your money there at the bank and they lend out the rest to someone else. Then, if that person deposits the money that was just borrowed at the same bank, that bank can loan out most of that money once again. In this way, the amount of "money" quickly gets multiplied. But in reality, only $100 actually exists.The truth is that banks are freer today to dramatically "multiply" the amounts deposited with them than ever before.

But all of this "multiplied" money is only on paper - it doesn't actually exist.The system works because we do not all run down to the bank and demand all of our money at the same time.

According to the New York Federal Reserve Bank, fractional reserve banking can be explained this way....

"If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the initial deposit of $100 into a maximum of $1,000 of money ($100+$90+81+$72.90+...=$1,000)."

A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The
perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors to keep the scheme going.And so too does the banking system.

Nations handling their debts with respect to other nations are really using a pyramid scheme,a non-sustainable business model that involves promising participants payment, services or ideals,which in all reality,they all cannot really make.So much of the "money" out there today is basically made up out of thin air.Again,the banking system works because we do not all run down to the bank and demand all of our money at the same time.The global system works because nobody dares to demand their held debts in actual payment,else it all collapses just as it is a house of cards.Nations are,in fact then, paper tigers,running a huge global pyramid scheme,with banking systems which are in fact vast ponzi schemes.None of it should work, but it does, it's the system.

Secret Squirrel Reduces The United Kingdom's National Debt.

Secret Squirrel has taken note of the United Kingdom's horrific and ever increasing National Debt.But Secret Squirrel has also seen a solution to save the United Kingdom,yes, save, from the horrific debt problem, Squirrel has seen how to actually reduce the United Kingdom's massive debt, created by non MRL governments,yes reduce that massive debt reduce that debt by no less than half, yes, that's right by fifty (50) per cent,rightly,intelligently, and properly and legally.Consider this now,that the Government has clearly said our debt hit £1043 billion April 2011,(1.04 trillion,pounds,yes, still secure pounds, not dollars as highly questionable as the highly suspicious sausages served on Indian Rail),1043 billion pounds, or,again, 1.04 trillion pounds,a debt of say 33000 pounds person on.

Squirrel has researched and has found that Government figures showed that at the end of 2005, government net debt stood at £400bn or .400 trillion......an interesting rise of 643 billion pounds, .643 trillion pounds..........and amounts to an actual doubling from point ground zero when Britain had a national debt of ZERO
pounds,period, and in just 6 (Six) years as well.So what's to be done?What has been done?Well Government has run up this National Debt but evidently through running up a constant debt, and ever increasing it,obviously has no idea what so ever as to paying it off, and most certainly not a single jot of an idea as to reducing it, yes actually reducing. But it is here where Secret Squirrel parts the ways with the Government, Secret Squirrel has the public Government figures, works with them and calculates with them, and with is mind, his brilliant mind.You see, I,Secret Squirrel has found an actual way to VASTLY reduce the National Debt, by utilizing an actual legal and existing method, one which has escaped the ken of our, far from brilliant, Government.Do you know that Secret Squirrel has actually found a way to reduce the National Debt to a paltry 643 billion pounds, or to put it in trillion terms, .643 trillion pounds,or say 16500 pounds per person.How to do it? How to do what the Government's great and brilliant minds can't do? Ridiculously easily, and rightly properly and legally too.

Let us consider,firstly and most legally and importantly,the significance of, England's squatter laws,those of things such as adverse possession,which most directly affects our National Debt reduction solution............for example.......as expounded in the Wikipedia, to be legally precise, at............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

...........Adverse possession is a process by which premises can change ownership. It is a common law concept concerning the title to real property (land and the fixed structures built upon it). By adverse possession, title to another's real property can be acquired without compensation, by holding the property in a manner that conflicts with the true owner's rights for a specified period. For example, squatter's rights are a specific form of adverse possession.

The circumstances in which adverse possession arises determine the type of title acquired by the disseisor (the one who obtains the title from the original owner), which may be fee simple title, mineral rights, or another interest in real property. Adverse possession's origins are based both in statutory actions and in common law precepts, so the details concerning adverse possession actions vary by jurisdiction. The required period of uninterrupted possession is governed by the statute of limitations. Other elements of adverse possession are judicial
constructs......specifically for England and Wales..............it is ...............England and Wales .In England and Wales, adverse possession has been governed by the Limitation Act 1980, the Land Registration Act 1925 and the Land Registration
Act 2002. Different rules are in place for the limitation periods of adverse possession in unregistered land and registered land.

For unregistered land, the Limitation Act of 1980 states that a squatter must remain in adverse possession for 12 years, at which point the paper owner's title to the land is extinguished.

For registered land, adverse possession claims completed before 13 October 2003 (the date the 2002 Act came into force) are governed by section 75(1) and 75(2) of the Land Registration Act of 1925. The limitation period remains the same (12 years) but instead of the original owner's title to the land being extinguished, the original owner holds the land on trust for the adverse possessor. The adverse possessor can then apply to be the new registered proprietor of the land.

The position of a registered landowner was significantly improved by the Land Registration Act of 2002. Where land is registered, the adverse possessor may apply to be registered as owner after 10 years of adverse possession and the Land Registry must give notice to the true owner of this application. This gives the landowner a statutory period of time [65 business days] to object to the adverse possession, and if they do so the application fails. Otherwise, the squatter becomes the registered properietor according to the land registry. If the true owner is unable to evict the squatter in the two years following the first application, the squatter can apply again after this period and be successful
despite the opposition of the owner. The process effectively prevents the removal of a landowner's right to property without his knowledge, while ensuring squatters have a fair way exercising their rights.

Where a tenant adversely possesses land, there is a presumption that he is doing so in a way that will benefit his landlord at the end of his term. If the land does not belong to his landlord, the land will become part of both the tenancy and the reversion. If the land does belong to his landlord, it would seem that it will be gained by the tenant but only for the period of his term......

here ends the wikipedia legal epistle...........

So basically just living in an abandonned property with no efforts to be evicted for a certain period of time,the statute of limitations, entitles the squatter to said occupied property which they occuipied for the a for said mentioned time. That's the law, and is governed by a statute of limitations as stated, and followed.And that's the whole point, England,Great Britain, the United Kingdom, has laws existent and laws which,being properly civilized, it follows,totally,utterly,completely,unquestioningly.Even squatters have those rights, any kind of squatters,citizens and/or not,equality for all,justice for all, according to the rules, to the law, to the very letter of the law. So, where are we going from here to connect to the United Kingdom's National Debt problem?Well consider now this.

It is the law.Did you know, that according to English law,British law, the law of the land, the law of the United Kingdom,that within the United Kingdom,it is possible that outstanding debts over 6 years old may not have to be repaid. Perhaps a rather complicated issue on the surface that needs some clarifying, especially if you have received any paperwork regarding the collection of debts that may have been outstanding for longer than 6 years.The answers can be unearthed by digging into the Statute of Limitations. What exactly is a statute of
limitations to the many of us who speak in laymen’s terms? Wikipedia describes a statute such as this as follows, “A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets forth the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated. In civil law systems, similar provisions are usually part of the civil code or criminal code and are often known collectively as “periods of prescription” or “prescriptive periods.”

The Limitation Act 1980 sets a time limit on how creditor has to take court action against you for unpaid debts. There are different time limits depending on the type of debt you owe. Generally creditors should not pursue you if they have been out of contact for 6 years or more.

So, you cannot simply delay repayments for 6 years and have them written off. The creditor must have neglected to pursue you for the debts for a period of 6 years.You cannot use the statute of limitations if a court order has already found in favour of the creditor. Court orders stand regardless of the amount of time passed.

You can ask for a court order to be “set aside” if it was made after the 6 year limitation applied. So, for example, if you have not been contacted for 7 years and a court order is obtained by the creditor you can go back to the court and ask them to “set aside” the ruling so that you can submit a defense based on the limitation act.

So, let’s try and understand this in the simplest way possible. For example, the United Kingdom hypothetically, owes whatever a sum of money for a debt loan as nations are provided with. A period of time has passed the nation(s) still have not demanded the money repayment, further time still passes and it appears that debt has been all but forgotten,ignored,except for being so many huge figures on paper.

Suddenly, years later they remember that the United Kingdom still owes even yet a significantly huge amount of money but because this certain amount of time has passed (decreed by law, depending on the statute) without proceedings to recover the money being initiated, it as though the United Kingdom no longer owes those nations the money and the debt has there for been wiped out.Action is not taken,by and under and following the United kingdom laws,and so within these time limits then the creditors,the most foul and foreign nations,find themselves out of pocket and with nowhere to turn,the laws of the realm, this realm, this England,this United Kingdom, and the debtor,the United Kingdom,is debt free,the

debt being wiped out,forgiven or whatever term you wish, is gone and does not exist, except that of the now discovered 6 year period, which is the actual figure going back to the from now zero start,restart period, of six (6) years, the paltry figure of 643 billion pounds, or .643 trillion pounds.Via right and proper English laws, the debt of the united Kingdom, has been effectively, literally, in figures quite almost really halved,and legally so as well.

However,there may be some paltry drawbacks you know, as unpaid debts, even if under the Limitations Act, may still cause problems in the future, especially when it comes to credit rating. Even though a debt may not be enforceable, due to the points discussed, this does not mean that it won’t be filed onto our credit history and create an unfavourable credit rating. If this is an undesirable outcome, then the sensible option is to clear the debt in full,if we can, but our debt would then be the much smaller figure of the afore mentioned 643billion pounds.This puts us in much better field position all round compared with nations which don't have and don't or won't intelligently apply these(if theirs),laws........now we'd be twice as better off compared with Australia, and 4 times as better off as compared with the colony of Canada.....America is utterly ridiculous,I was going to try not to mention them,(As of August 3, 2011, the gross debt was $14.34 trillion dollars,if you really must gloat) nor they,the Japanese, but ,if you really must gloat Japan's national debt in dollars is.....12.31 trillion US dollars (7.48 British pounds).THEy don't know how to pay theirs either, lacking the legal ability to do it, nor to legally reduce it.

But,WE,know differently don't we,I,Secret Squirrel,have found the legal means to do so,all that remains is for the British Government, the politicians, to hold their lamps alight, hold the lamp of knowledge high, enlighten their minds,as much as the mind of Secret Squirrel glows, incandescently, but we all know,don't we, that the politicians are possessed of simple,very low wattage and dimly lit, curly bulbs.Do we have hope that they will follow the advice of Secret Squirrel, that they will follow the epistle of Secret Squirrel, that they will follow the legal economic psalms of Secret Squirrel........should they? The MRL would,you should,they should,without question.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel On Obama And The UN Gun Convention.

Secret Squirrel has noticed odd behavior by President Obama with respect to Americans,on an issue of the question of guns existent in the world of today by his wishing to sign a UN international gun treaty that the Senate refused to ratify under former President Bill Clinton.Obama has made no secret that he wants to in effect amend the American Constitution by signing a United Nations civilian gun ban treaty. Somehow I don’t recall a legal way for America’s politicians to attack the Bill of Rights and negate any of them by signing a treaty, but this seems to be what is going to occur through and by something called the United Nations, a group of foreign alien nations, foreign and alien to America. Despots throughout civilized history have never cared about liberty or freedom, and these United Nations are made up of many nations ruled by such, despots,dictators,communists,socialists and what ever have you and whatever you wish to call or describe these foreign
potentates that rule,overrule, and misrule, people.The present Convention which has attracted such controversy, is one United Nations convention having to do,particularly, with THEIR issue of guns existent in the world.

The United States does not and has not,in the past, ratified UN treaties and conventions that do not please it,the it being,interestingly,The Executive Branch(here read,The President),and thence also the Senate.Now any UN convention MAY be attended by The Nation, read, The United States Of America,should the President send a representative. Said representative
thence has, by permission of the PRESIDENT, the ability to sign said Convention.The Senate cannot in itself send a viable representative,nor one that can sign.However, should the Senate disagree with a particular Convention,on which the President has not consulted THEM, they can vote against ratification of the Convention, and they can also, refuse to vote on the Convention, hence stalling it, in the unratified state as well,in short, not acted on.In short, the President,can act on any UN Convention, on any particular issue,without the consent of Senate/Congress.In short, Obama wishes it, a convention which directly goes contrary to The Constitution of The United States itself, THE Constitution he is sworn to keep and uphold, HE,Obama, and through his minion, one Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, would sign a convention,ratify a convention which was contrary to the Constitution of the United States, in direct effect of allowing foreigners to overrule,direct,and (mis)rule,in direct unelected fashion, the lives of the American citizen,ruling in direct opposition to, The Constitution Of The People Of The United States Of America, the American Citizen.

This particular Convention treaty is a direct abdication of the principles of The Constitution of The United States. The treaty calls for tougher licensing requirements. That means everyday, law-abiding Americans will be subjected to even more bogus bureaucracy to obtain a firearm,directed by the most foreign United Nations. It is unfathomable that regular citizens would be treated just like the criminals the treaty claims to protect us from. “The Small Arms Treaty” will hijack and destroy all weapons that are classified “unauthorized.” What exactly classifies a firearm as “unauthorized” is up to unelected bureaucrats at the United Nations. The treaty will ban the trade, sale, and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons. In addition the Obama Administration is calling for an INTERNATIONAL GUN REGISTRY that would pave the way to eventually disarming every American citizen.

The Obama ruling regimen,and United Nations gun agenda, ultimately seeks to take away not only your individual liberties,the individual and Constitutionally guaranteed liberties, but also more importantly, the complete autonomy of the American citizen. It is self evident, that The Obama regimen of rule,of misrule in actuality, simply does not believe that the average American is capable of making their own decisions so Obama wishes foreigners to make them for the American citizen,they the foreigners, Russians,Red Chinese, Libyans, Syrians, Iraguis, Mongolians, Cubans, Haitians,and what ever else have you, and we do have, in the world,comprising the United Nations et all, and whatever.. Just like Obamacare, the bureaucrats want to take away your right to live freely without the government breathing down your neck. The Anti-Second Amendment Delegates at the United Nations want to pass “The Small Arms Treaty.” If this treaty is passed American citizens’ firearms rights will be compromised and the Second Amendment will be obliterated. “The Small Arms Treaty” is being billed as a treaty that will help fight against “terrorism, insurgency, and international crime rings.”However, America has it's own laws with respect to the supply of guns to anyone in particular, foreign nations and what ever et all.Should there be a problem in that regard it is by and through American governmental and policing failures to either be capable, or to enact and act on them internally and properly in the first place.

One does recall where US government,has actually been supplying guns to Mexican drug lords in what ever endeavour they claimed,but supply they did, and were and are responsible for,they did not have to by any means. The treaty is regarded as a
control on the United States supplying guns to foreign lands?Well, then the American government must simply cease from doing just that, supplying guns to foreigners and what ever we have.Curious,why ever can Obama not stop himself from doing just that merely a facade to seize control of ALL FIREARMS owned by law abiding American citizens,Americans must follow laws internally, so too can and does Obama,and any semblance of government he has.

But yet there is so very much more in the treaty. Let's have a look here,What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail? While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to
grasp).

Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

Have no doubt that this plan is very real, with strong Obama administration support. In January 2010 the U.S. joined 152 other countries in endorsing a U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution that will establish a 2012 conference to draft a blueprint for enactment. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged to push for Senate ratification.Obama is resolved to it, even yet,being there, at his direct, willing to enact it,bring it about,enforce it.Obama has not directed America, to be there out of simple curiosity,Obama is intent on reducing America, and Americans such that they become, suzerain,and subject to, foreigners and their enacted rules and laws,far and away above and conflicting with, laws deemed by Americans to be right and proper for they,the American citizens.It is and would be a direct usurpation, by foreigners,of the lives and laws, and Constitution, of the people of The United States Of America.Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has cautioned stating that the U.N. “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real
agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

During his presidential campaign, Barack Obama assured gun owners that he was no threat to gun rights.Hillary Clinton even yet campaigned supporting The Second Amendment.They have both been revealed to be much as the Indian basket, with two faces. So far the Obama administration had publicly steered clear of the issue,no doubt knowing directly, that a direct assault on the Second Amendment and other American Constitutional Rights, and laws of America and Americans,would be political suicide.

However, behind the scenes, Obama and his staff,have done a direct volte face,and have shown not only support for the U.N. Gun Ban,but direct approval, even yet PRE-APPROVAL,directed so by Obama,to a United Nations treaty on small arms sales that will sidestep established American gun rights and the Second Amendment,and others as well.The United Nations has ever been a favorite weapon used by the many left-leaning activist and directly most foreign, nations, their governments,and mostly directly foreign dictatorships, to launch attacks on American interests,and these leftist ideologues have tried to direct and so empower the U.N. to govern our right to fight just wars of liberation,the right to encourage freedom loving peoples to rise up and fight against oppressors and oppressions, and the right to control our own pollution standards,even yet internal to America and The American Citizen. And now this steadily advancing treaty seeks to govern the American,guarenteed,internal to America,the right to bear
arms,the treaty's threat to the right of Americans to buy guns for self-defense and sport.

The definition of "militia" as per Federal US Code:

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms,as passed by the Congress:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all
members of the political community, not an unspecified subset.The term,militia, clearly the people, the American Citizen, We The People.................and this The United Sates Code...

TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311

§ 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

So, as you can see, all law-abiding citizens and soon-to-be citizens are, by legal definition, members of the "militia".

In reading the early State’s Constitutions, it is very clear that they guarantee a right to arms for the common defense of the State, which in actuality means, the common defense of the community against criminals. In today’s society this is called "justifiable homicide" because when an armed citizen kills a felon committing a crime (or wounds him for the police to arrest), that person has done their community a service by helping to keep the streets and environs safe for other citizens. So, if the UN treaty was to be passed, and the American people forcibly disarmed, two things would happen, one, criminals would profit by that action, as they have done in Chicago, for example, and two, the right to self defense and defense of others would be negated, which the UN, nor the Senate, nor Obama himself can do since that Right comes from our Creator.

For example, South Carolina's constitution, written in 1776, states very clearly:

"Hostilities having been commenced in the Massachusetts Bay, by the troops under command of General Gage, whereby a number of peaceable, helpless, and unarmed people were wantonly robbed and murdered... The colonists were therefore driven to the necessity of taking up arms, to repel force by force, and to defend themselves and their properties against lawless invasions and depredations."

As we all well know, the Battle on Lexington green began over gun control, as Redcoats were dispatched to disarm the Minutemen, who were deemed a threat by "the State." Other states followed suit as well:

1. "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state..." Pennsylvania 1777.

2. "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State..." Vermont (1777 and 1786)

3. The people have the "right to bear arms, for the defense of the State". North Carolina 1776.

4. "And whereas it is of the utmost importance to the safety of every State that it should always be in a condition of defense; and it is the duty of every man who enjoys the protection of society to be prepared and willing to defend it; this convention therefore, in the name and by the authority of the good people of this State, doth ordain, determine, and declare that the militia of this State, at all times hereafter, as well in peace as in war, shall be armed and disciplined, and in readiness for service..." NY 1777.

The states then, even New York, recognized the absolute right of an American to keep and bear arms and that the taking up arms to defend freedom against tyranny was appropriate and right. ("The militia of this State (NY), at all times hereafter,... shall be armed and disciplined, and in readiness for service...") the militia WAS the individual citizen and they had the duty to drill to BE ready, on their own time. "I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers..." George Mason. The great patriot Patrick Henry stated: "The great object is, that every man be armed... Every one who is able may have a gun." It must be stated that "defense of the State" was the individual militia members responsibility and in a previous essay on the Second Amendment, it was noted that State’s often passed laws that all citizens shall be armed and those who could not afford a firearm were given one (with the necessary accoutrements) and then they worked to pay off the debt, doing whatever they were told to do by the
magistrate, sheriff, etc! Moreover, that an unarmed citizen was an easy victim of criminals and tyrants was also recognized in their early constitutions.

John Adams wrote, as he defended the British soldiers who had opened fire on a mob of colonists during the Boston Massacre (1770), "Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the
inhabitants had a right to arm themselves at that time, for their defense, not for offense, that distinction is material and must be attended to."

Not to be outdone, the Republic of Texas Constitution, written in 1838, declared: "the right to bear arms in defense of himself and the State." It is quite clear that the word "himself" means the individual, not the collective and it should be noted that Texas took their verbiage from the US Constitution and the Amendments therein. In 1871, the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that an "individual" had the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. In 1842, Rhode Island’s Constitution actually uses the US Constitution verbiage from the Second Amendment itself: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Now liberals have used the term "the people" to point to the collective but nothing could be further from the truth, if one reads the 4th, 9th, and 10th Amendments, which grants the rights therein to the individual.

Take serious and careful note,that as of 2010, 27 states have introduced in their legislatures, bills that would nullify all gun registration laws within the state, and several states have passed laws that allow any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress to regulate, under its constitutional powers.It nullifies Federal regulations based on the fact that some parts of the firearm have their origins outside the state. In other words, a firearm made in Montana, that is sold in Montana, is outside their regulations! As we can clearly see, the mountain of facts support that the State’s Constitutions defend our right to keep and bear arms not only from a legal standpoint from the hand of our Creator.The early state constitutions are strong evidence that the Founders, at the State level, confirmed their intent that the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" was an individual right.

Obama here,clearly, through such actions as he is taking, is intent on,not only directly violating the Constitution of the People of the United States,but also,removing from,We The People, the Militia,and there for also, the governmental right to have one ready, to combat any foreign nations invading, intent of invading, and otherwise terrorizing,We The People, and is removing from We The People, the right and ability to defend The American Citizen, and The Nation Of The United States Of America.

It is therefore incumbent upon liberty-minded people everywhere not only to oppose American involvement in the treaty, but also to oppose the mere existence of such a treaty.President Obama can not try to use the legally binding (on signatory nations) provisions to shift blame to the U.N. for civilian arms banning regulations,the regulations contrary to The Second Amendment, arguing that he has no choice but to follow the treaty,no indeed, he has sent the Secretary Of State, to the convention,and has the direct stated intent, to be a signatory to the convention,it is a direct,purposeful act.

What's to be done?Well, We,The People, must make known our opposition to the actions here of Obama, and Hillary Clinton.So though the majority in our Senate is smart enough to realize that the U.N.’s firearms agenda is unconstitutional, politically suicidal for those who support it, and down-right idiotic.......right? Well,let’s hope so, but not entirely count on it. While a few loyal Obama Democrats are truly in dissension concerning the Convention, many are loathe to vote against treaties that carry the president’s international prestige, causing him embarrassment.

The United States has, in the past attended some UN Conventions, even yet agreed with them, but many HAVE NOT BEEN RATIFIED by the Senate,either voted against, or had votes blocked such that no vote takes place(at least, not at that time, but it CAN be brought out 5,10,15,20 years later or whatever timescale), hence NO ratification. Indeed this is rightand proper,for a President acting outside of the Senate,and/or Congress, acts outside of Government, note in the wishes,nor the best wishes of the people.Clearly a major improvement would be sanctioned actions taking place with the agreement of The Houses,the President presenting The Houses with any laws,agreements etc as PROPOSED, and thence acting on this within the bounds of the UN Conventions, and thence return to The Senate for final approved ratifications.As it is now, The President is acting improperly, exclusively, alone, by himself, without the approval of People, nor Senate/Congress and this is so very totally wrong.What needs be done in this present situation, the Citizen must address his Senator, His Congressman, with his disapproval of any such UN Convention as presently Obama is pursuing,such that they DO NOT RATIFY the Convention,ALSO, they must so address their Congressman/Senator, such that it is made clear to Obama that he should not participate in such a UN Convention as is contemplated to take place in 2012, or future without a structure in place with respect to such actions in Senate/Congress, sanctioning such future proceedings.

Secret Squirrel Comments On The London Riot.

Secret Squirrel has seen videos of the violence taking place in London, the London Riot of 2011,and sees that
London faces a big problem: police can’t figure out how to quell outbursts of violence and stop them from spreading,and there is a virtually total lack of proper riot control equipment. That doesn’t lend a lot of confidence to the city’s ability to ensure safety for the 2012 Olympics,in the very least.They were warned,there were earlier outbreaks of violence,mini riots,the so-called budget cuts violence,“The march was largely peaceful apart from isolated skirmishes between protesters and police, authorities said,” they falsely report. The “largely peaceful” march saw masked thugs going wild in Oxford Circus smashing shop windows and attacking the police. While it was dealt with there was no great rush to secure proper riot gear and formulate a proper riot plan, no indeed,none of any kind.There was time for police management and politicians of the city and the nation, to see rising violence and secure the proper equipment to deal with,prevent, and at least lessen such as what has and is still yet occurring in London,and spreading to yet other cities.

Some blame BlackBerry BBMs and Twitter for facilitating the organization of riots and looting,While Twitter was initially credited with helping to spread the unrest, newspapers and tech blogs are suggesting that the BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) service actually had more of a role, thanks to the privacy of messages exchanged on the network and its popularity with young people. {TechCrunch Europe}no steps were taken to shut down the Blackberry system, (that being in the hands of a foreign entity) but regardless of the communication tools used to communicate,much of the destruction has been caused by groups of a few hundred people or so.Will there be a plan in place to handle simultaneous civil protests, terrorist threats and general crowd related security at the same time? Part of the current problem lies with austerity budget cuts that haven’t seen police jobs spared. There are plans to cut 9,000 of 35,000 police jobs, and emergency responders like firefighters and paramedics face staff cuts as well. When the police are busy protecting firefighters trying to extinguish fires, riots spring up in other areas where there is no police presence.One sees a general lack of what could be called riot gear,one sees sparsley kitted out riot police, and few of them, spread widely apart due to a general lack of numbers. One doesn't see any general riot vehicles such as water cannon equipped trucks, no use of smoke nor tear gas,strangely enough. They've had years to plan,and secure the proper equipment, they could have learned much from the Americans and their riot equipment and planning.

As a matter of fact a curfew was not in fact imposed, no doubt due to a general inability to enforce it in either and every case.Since the 1980s, riot control officers have also used tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets,batons and electric tasers. In some cases, riot squads may also use Long Range Acoustic Devices, water cannons, armoured fighting vehicles, police dogs or mounted police on horses.Netguns are non-lethal weapons designed to fire a net which entangles the target.Netguns have a long history of being used to capture wildlife, without injury, for research purposes. A netgun is currently in development for non-lethal riot control.Stink bombs are devices designed to create an extremely unpleasant smell for riot control and area denial purposes. Stink bombs are believed to be less dangerous than other riot control chemicals, since they are effective at low concentrations. Sticky foam weapons are being tested, which cover and immobilize rioters with a gooey foam.

Low frequency sound cannons are weapons of various types that use sound to injure or incapacitate subjects using a focused beam of sound or ultrasound. Active denial systems (ADS) are a non-lethal, directed-energy weapon developed by the U.S. military. The ADS directs electromagnetic radiation, specifically, high-frequency microwave radiation, at a frequency of 95 GHz, which causes the water in the upper epidermis to boil, stimulating a "burning" sensation in the nerve endings and generating intense pain. Dazzler lasers are directed-energy weapons that use intense light to cause temporary blindness or disorientation of rioters.Amazingly, none of this was seen in London.Officers performing riot control typically wear protective equipment such as riot helmets, face visors, body armor (vests, neck protectors, knee pads, etc.), gas masks and riot shields. At least some of this was seen in London.

The front-line officers in a riot control are often fully armored and carry weapons such as batons, designed to be in direct contact with the crowd. These officers subdue rioters and subsequently allow the less heavily armoured, more mobile officers to make arrests where it is deemed necessary. In face of a greater threat, the riot police will be backed up with other officers equipped with riot guns to fire tear gas, rubber bullets, plastic bullets or "beanbag" rounds.

As a less aggressive step, mounted police may first be sent into the crowd. The might and height offered by the horse are combined with its training, allowing an officer to more safely infiltrate a crowd. Usually, when front-facing a riot, officers slowly walk in a line parallel to the riot's front, extending to both its ends, as they noisily and simultaneously march and beat their shields with their batons, to cause fear and psychological effects on the crowd.
German police deploy an armoured riot control vehicle at a demonstration in Hamburg.

The French CRS's tactics against a long demonstration march is to attack it at several points and chop it into segments, rather than to merely try to block it at its front end.In the United Kingdom, usually when large demonstrations take place that are deemed unstable, the territorial police force responsible for the demonstration in that area will usually deploy Police Support Unit personnel who are trained in riot tactics, along with normal divisional officers. If the demonstration turns violent, police will seal roads and other exits to contain protesters in a single area (known as kettling) to prevent widespread damage and wait until the protesters tire. These tactics were seen during the 2009 G-20 London summit protests and the 2010 student protests in London. Tear gas and other more offensive tactics are used as a last resort. Throughout police will be videoing or photographing protesters for future arrests, "snatch squad" tactics might also be used.However, the efficiency displayed in those events has been completely and utterly lacking in this one.Strange,a sudden total collapse of the riot squad.
Quite obviously The London Police were not, and are not, prepared to handle riots.A very sad and costly situation all round and about, one that must be immediately addressed and rectified.London, and England, is in a sad and sorry state,brought about by lack of planning, and fore sight,failure to heed the warnings of a series of escallating riots.It is said in England that one learns from the mistakes, but here we see mistake after mistake after mistake, leading to this latest mistake, and ever onwards to yet another.If anything the London riots have revealed lack of planning,coordination,general incompetence, and lack of proper equipment to protect the public at large.This is not acceptable.

Secret Squirrel's Plan For Britain, Let's Have Pensioners And Prisoners Swap Places

Let’s put the pensioners in jail and the criminals in a nursing home........

This way the pensioners would have access to showers, hobbies and walks.

They’d receive unlimited free prescriptions, dental and medical treatment, wheel chairs etc. and they’d receive money instead of paying it out.

They would have constant video monitoring, so they could be helped
instantly, if they fell, or needed assistance.

Bedding would be washed twice a week, and all clothing would be ironed and returned to them.

A guard would check on them every 20 minutes and bring their meals and snacks to their cell.

They would have family visits in a suite built for that purpose.

They would have access to a library, weight room, spiritual counselling,
pool and education.

Simple clothing, shoes, slippers, PJ’s and legal aid would be free, on
request.

Private, secure rooms for all, with an exercise outdoor yard, with gardens.

Each senior could have a PC a TV radio and daily phone calls.

There would be a board of directors to hear complaints, and the guards would have a code of conduct that would be strictly adhered to.


The criminals would get cold food, be left all alone and unsupervised.
Lights off at 8pm, and showers once a week. Live in a tiny room and pay £600.00 per week and have no hope of ever getting out.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,(MP,Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel Sees Debate On Capital Punishment As Being Irrelevant.

Secret Squirrel has seen some activity with respect to Parliament carrying on a debate with respect to the restoration of capital punishment, the death penalty, execution for the commission of certain and specific crimes.Well it is all grand isn't it that the issue has been brought up.This is all coming about through a system,introduced but of late, that a petition with 100,000 names on it,will trigger a parliamentary debate on the subject of the petition,regardless of what it is. It's grand,it's grand that a blogger, who goes by the name of Guido Fawkes, is out after Parliament once more, this time with a petition, which, if it
achieves 100,000 signatures, will cause a certain subject, that of the base petition,to be debated before Parliament.Yes, the subject has achieved much notability, notoriety, yet public debate, yes indeed, his specific petition wishes the debate of the issue of the re-instatement of capital punishment to the United Kingdom,his specific,the cure for what ails, being the return of the death penalty for child killers and those who kill on-duty police.Public debate wishes to add those who are serial killers (as whatever number is required to so designate), and still others, broad spectrum re-introduction of the death penalty.

It seems that a certain cure is preferred with respect to say, somebody being released from prison to do it all again, such as say, the Norwegian Woods bomber,shooter,mass murderer,say such as one Dr Harold Shipman,or The Moors Murderers,The Wests,Nilsen,Allit,Sutcliffe,et all or whatever and what have you, walking the earth again, after a few years, a few years of rather expensive and costly incarceration as being a guest of Her Majesty, in one of her extremely comfortable guest houses for the naughty?So capital punishment is to be the cure for the likes of that.Hmmm. Capital punishment?Well,I,Secret Squirrel shall he enlighten you with respect to capital punishment, to some degree, but not in great detail,as you will later see why the attention to the greatest and tinyest of detail is really, all so, very irrelevant.

Historically speaking,capital punishment in the United Kingdom was used from the creation of the state in 1707 until the practice was abolished in the twentieth century. The last executions in the United Kingdom, by hanging, took place in 1964, prior to capital punishment being abolished for murder (in 1969 in Great Britain and in 1973 in Northern Ireland). Although not applied since, the death penalty remained on the statute book for certain other offences until 1998.Down through the ages various forms were used and applied to bring about executions,very novel and interesting methods to say the very least from the earliest on,and thence slowly evolving to the more acceptable methods by modern standards,at least within the realm of The United Kingdom.Prisons evolved as a punishment secondary to execution,the Victorians had prisons, Her Majesty's Prisons,Her Majesty's
Prisons For The Extremely Naughty.The Victorians also had clear ideas about what these prisons should be like. They should be unpleasant places, so as to deter people from committing crimes. Once inside, prisoners had to be made to face up to their own faults, by keeping them in silence and making them do hard, boring work. Walking a treadwheel or picking oakum (separating strands of rope) were the most common forms of hard labour.However these have evolved towards modern times, and now very much really represent themselves as a virtual apartment living environment with priviledges to leave the building not being in the agreement.So, it is now wished to bring about debate on the issue of the re-instatement of capital punishment,execution.

Certain politicians have been expressing themslves on this issue as is here evidenced.............

http://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/9178527.Support_for_online_death_penalty_petition/

Wirral MEP Paul Nuttall has added his name to the e-petition and said: "I am in favour of restoring the death penalty for child and serial killers."I think capital punishment is needed for such heinous crimes and I know that many other people feel the same."

He said a YouGov poll last year found that 74% of people supported the death penalty for murder in some circumstances.And he added: "Generally too much attention is paid to the so called 'human rights' of offenders, what about the rights of victims and their families?"

Tory MP Priti Patel said such a debate was long overdue and that she favoured restoring capital punishment "for the most serious and significant crimes" - a position echoed by party colleague Andrew Turner.

Tory Philip Davies who said he would like to see “all murders” punishable by death.

Here ends the glowing words of several politicians, all to the yes side for various forms of restoration of the death penalty in the United Kingdom.

There have been many polls with respect to the return of the execution penalty,some from November 2009 when a television survey showed that 70% favoured reinstating the death penalty for at least one of the following crimes: armed robbery, rape, crimes related to pedophilia, terrorism, adult murder, child murder, child rape, treason, child abuse, or kidnapping.

However, respondents only favoured capital punishment for adult murder, the polling question asked by other organizations such as Gallup, by small majorities or pluralities: overall, 51% favoured the death penalty for adult murder, while 56% in Wales did, 55% in Scotland, and only 49% in England.And so on it goes,No doubt there shall be some dissenting voices expressing their views on the matter to the contrary in solid Parliamentary debate.Well there shall be much horrendous sucking and blowing,from both sides,the horrific ear splitting thunderous sounds of various political breakings of wind concerning the issue, and whatever issues out with that.Do I sound cynical?Do I sound perhaps, confusing on the issue, as to yeah or naye,does the ayes have it or the no's (eyes or nose)? Well after debate,one suspects there would be a vote on the matter,yes? Let us recall that the issue was last brought up,that the MPs last voted on the issue in 1994 the idea was rejected by 403 votes to 159.Is any such debate outcome, any vote outcome, completely irrelevant, an utter and complete waste of time, a useless gesture being made by politicians?Yes, on all counts, in any and all out comes.

Does this seem to influence you to ponder that I would reject the re-introduction of the death penalty.Would you mind?Do you mind? What is mind? Does it matter?Never mind!No indeed,it all doesn't matter,it IS all so very irrelevant, and a waste of
time,you see, with respect to,or not, to the outcome,from any and all points. Would there be a vote?Should there be a vote? Well, no, because it doesn't matter, for you see there is the fact that the death penalty is illegal in the European Union.You see,on 20 May 1998 the House of Commons voted to ratify the 6th Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibiting capital punishment except "in time of war or imminent threat of war." The last remaining provisions for the death penalty under military jurisdiction (including in wartime) were removed when section 21(5) of the Human Rights Act 1998 came into force on 9 November 1998. On 10 October 2003, effective from 1 February 2004, the UK acceded to the 13th Protocol, which prohibits the death penalty under all circumstances, so that the UK may no longer legislate to restore the death penalty while it is subject to the
Convention. It can only now restore it IF it withdraws from the Council of Europe, as in ONLY IF the United Kingdom,that is Britain,that is England,Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales,WITHDRAWS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION.