Skip to main content

For "lobbying" read "corruption"

The mainstream media are currently in a feeding frenzy about "lobbying".  Lobbying is where an individual or group gain access to a politician to put forward their viewpoint.  As individuals we can go to our local constituency surgeries and talk directly to our MPs.  However, groups such as Unions and large businesses generally demand access to those ministers and civil servants who can take decisions.

A classic example of big business "lobbying" might be where a couple of US Investment banks have made serious mistakes with their bets against the value of gold that could seriously undermine the financial system.  Having failed to lobby the US government they might turn their attention to the UK and gain access to the Chancellor and Prime Minister.  Persuaded of the rectitude of the US Bank positions the Prime Minister might give the go-ahead to sell the UK gold reserves, announcing the sale well ahead of the actual auction to lower the price of gold and get the US Banks out of trouble. (More about Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan)

This "lobbying" in the previous example would only become corruption if the Prime Minister was subsequently given a £2m a year post, involving little work, at one of the US Banks and the Chancellor got promised that he would be Prime Minister.

Although Tony Blair was, and is, in it up to his neck, David Cameron is infamous as well and seems unable to stop being infamous, unlike Blair who was born coated in Teflon.

It turns out that most big business "lobbying" is actually corruption.  Whenever big business is involved money changes hands - what else does big business do except deal in money?  Big business has public organisations like the CBI to deal with general business politics so approaches by individual companies and banks must be assumed to be corrupt.

Another, perhaps bigger, danger than corruption by individual businesses is corruption by the secretive Big Business Groups such as Bilderberg, The Trilateral Commission and the US Council for Foreign Relations.  These are "lobbying" groups that invite politicians along to meet their corrupters in an intimate atmosphere with the heads of media groups in attendance to provide an assurance of secrecy.  These groups have management committees, an inner circle, that sets the agenda for corrupting (lobbying) politicians globally so that Multinational Corporations can prosper.  They are so powerful because their members control much of the world's mainstream media as well as most of the world's money.

Mandelson and Osborne at 2011 Bilderberg
These business groups have a large library of pet politicians and can muster significant firepower on the global stage.  The EU Referendum is a good example of the groups in action.  Multinationals make their cash through international trade so were mortified about the EU Referendum. Some of the members of these groups during the EU Referendum were:

Ken Clarke - member of the inner circle of Bilderberg and vice president of the "European Movement", an organisation that created both the EU and the Bilderberg Group. 

Keir Starmer - member of the Trilateral Commission, now Labour leader.

Rona Fairhead - Bilderberg, Chair of the BBC Trust ensuring pro-EU BBC

Peter Mandelson - Bilderberg, EU Commissioner, a Director of StrongerIn

Michael Heseltine - Bilderberg, President of the European Movement

George Osborne - Bilderberg, Chancellor during EU Referendum

Zanny Minton Beddoes - Bilderberg, Editor in chief of Economist

Martin Wolf - Bilderberg, Editor in chief of Financial Times

and so on and so on.

The Multinationals almost succeeded.  The support for free and unfettered international trade with the EU swung from a lost cause to very nearly a victory for the multinationals in 2016.

Opinion polls showed Remain had a chance after 2015.

These groups hold secret meetings and appoint members to do their dirty work deniably.  What do the members get in exchange for their service?

Firstly they get utter protection from the mainstream media - if the BBC or Economist reports on these groups it is always in glowing terms, telling us that gatherings of plutocrats and elected politicians are totally harmless and those who criticise such things are conspiracy theorists who should take the tin foil off their heads. If corruption happens via these groups it is permanently hidden from media coverage.

Secondly they get pay offs.  Osborne got £650,000 pa as a consultant for BlackRock working for 1 day a week.  David Milliband was paid off (for Lisbon?) with the CEO role at "International Rescue", which became a CIA front co-opted after the Bay of Pigs fiasco to rescue Cubans.  Rona Fairhead sits in the House of Lords despite being at the centre of the (still ongoing) EU Corporation Tax scandal.  All totally harmless of course.  Blair must have received over £20m from JP Morgan by now.

Although the Referendum was not won by the Multinationals they almost swung it, the vote moving from a lost cause for Remain to neck and neck over 3 years.  Having the head of the BBC on their side must have helped.

Cameron should have stuck to getting advantage from Bilderberg or, like Starmer, from the Trilateral Commission, because these groups could protect him, unlike Greensill.

The real danger begins when politicians are corrupted by foreign powers.  Michael Heseltine is a member of China's 48 Group Club, as were  Tony Blair, Jack Straw, Alex Salmond, Peter Mandelson and Ken Livingstone.  Cameron's first move after leaving office was to set up an Anglo-Chinese fund which seems to have been mainly used to remunerate "directors" - for contracts for nuclear power stations?

Now that China has a sovereign wealth fund worth trillions of dollars in offshore tax havens many Multinationals may in truth be Chinese so the back-handers and favours that they dish out to our politicians after they leave office may be threatening our national security.

Two or three times a year the Multinationals hold a bring and buy sale for politicians and senior media people and anyone who draws attention to this being lobbying is called a conspiracy theorist even though it is clearly and obviously lobbying.  The oligarchs and plutocrats who run these jamborees did not vote for the politicians, most do not even live in the same country, yet for a few strategically placed millions and the offer of sleeping board memberships they can pull the strings on £trillion economies.  That is what's known as leverage!

So what can be done?  First of all the "lobbying" scandals should be called by their proper name: corruption or attempted corruption.  Secondly the attendance at, or connection with, secretive groups of multinationals and bankers by politicians and public servants should be a criminal offence.  These groups only exist to provide protection from exposure for corrupt behaviour.  Thirdly government ministers should be given pensions that are sufficient to live well and banned from accepting employment on the boards of large companies and organisations for 10 years because this is how they are paid for their favours to Big Business.

14/4/2021

Bilderberg attendance list 2015:

The list above is just attendees at the meeting.  The Trilateral Commission European membership overlaps that of Bilderberg. Here is the page with Starmer's name:

 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H

The Falklands have always been Argentine - Las Malvinas son Argentinas

"The Falklands have always been Argentine" is taught to every Argentine child as a matter of faith.  What was Argentina during the time when it "always" possessed Las Malvinas?  In this article I will trace the history of Argentina in the context of its physical and political relationship with "Las Malvinas", the Falkland Islands.  The Argentine claim to the Falkland Islands dates from a brief episode in 1831-32 so it is like Canada claiming the USA despite two centuries of separate development. This might sound like ancient history but Argentina has gone to war for this ancient claim so the following article is well worth reading. For a summary of the legal case see: Las Malvinas: The Legal Case Argentina traces its origins to Spanish South America when it was part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio del Plata.  The Falklands lay off the Viceroyalty of Peru, controlled by the Captain General of Chile.  In 1810 the Falklands were far from the geographical b

The Report on Racism

The " Report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities " has just been published.  The Commissioners were nearly all from BAME backgrounds and have produced a robust and fair Report. The Report identified a class divide in which the cycle of advantage maintains a section of the population in wealth and leaves the large bulk of the population in relative poverty.   The wealthy class is largely white British but the poorer class consists of large numbers of white British and other ethnic groups.  This class divide causes a bias in the crude statistics on disadvantage so that majority, poor white British are labelled as "white supremacists" etc. when it is the small wealthy class that actually creates the disparity that causes this analysis. The most striking finding is that different ethnic groups had very different experiences and outcomes.  Educational outcomes demonstrate this at a glance: Red text added for this article Most ethnic groups had better outcome