Today’s first letter addresses the burning problem of EU censorship which will affect us all should our government simply adopt it, as they have adopted so many pernicious EU Directives over the decades. This is what Brexit is about, and not the trade and customs “issues” driven by daily new Project-Fear bleatings from remoaners! Without Free Speech there won’t be any Brexit, there won’t be Democracy.
We at UKIP Daily, together with our fellow editors at Kipper Central and other UKIP-supporting blogs and websites, will pool our resources and mount a campaign on this blatant attack on Free Speech. We hope that the UKIP Leadership will support us in this:
It seems that the EU has now approved the Internet Censorship Bill/Article 13/ Meme Ban. But as seen below, the attack on freedom of speech started a while ago.
The Advocate-General of the European Court of Justice gave a legal opinion (in case C-274/99) on 19 October 2000 that criticism of the EU, its institutions or its leading figures was akin to blasphemy.
As Jefferson said “When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear government, there is tyranny.”
Now that the 1972 Act is being repealed, the government does not have to follow EU regulations.
But many in Westminster were in favour of more Press control, post Leveson. Will they perhaps find it convenient to let this regulation through?
The PM herself was against the further erosion of free speech and it would be reassuring if she would confirm that the UK will not be adopting EU regulations for Internet Censorship.
Respectfully, Roger J. Arthur
Next, a letter by our contributor Jerry Wright to the editor of the Evesham Journal – perhaps this encourages readers to write similar letters to their local paper should there be a similar bias against Brexit letters in their publications. We quote Jerry’s letter in full:
“24th June 2018 –
More letters from remainers moaning about the “dire” consequences of BREXIT and leaving the EU. Most noticeable is the total lack of facts to support their complaints. David Powis claims that no amount of reasoned argument convinces the Brexiteers of the damage that will be caused by leaving the EU. So, could Mr Powis and the rest your moaning remainers please give me, and all your other readers, what advantages they see for staying in the EU which over-ride the facts that:
1 The EU could be costing our economy over £185 billion/annum
2 Using that figure it is reasonable to suggest that since 1973 the total cost to our economy, of being in the EU, could be in the order of £8 to 9 trillion.
3 The EU customs union costs every household in the UK up to an extra £1,000/annum
4 Trading with the EEC/EU since 1973 has cost the UK a deficit (loss) of well over £1 trillion
NB Trading with the rest of the world from 1973 to 2014 has earned the UK a SURPLUS (profit) of £245 billion
5 The EU has a liability for state pensions for the next generation of workers of well over 30 trillion euros. There is no doubt that our youngsters would be saddled all their working lives to help support this massive sum if we stayed in the EU.
6 Since 1973 we the UK taxpayers have currently given the EU over £400 billion in nett budgetary payments. Lost for ever. What could that have done for our NHS, police, defence etc., and for our total national debt of nearly £2 trillion?
7 The UK has a liability of about £1 trillion to EU institutions such as the EIB, ECB etc., which, if called in, would add another £1 trillion to the national debt. It is therefore imperative we leave now.
I await with interest to see their reasoned responses.
J G Wraith”
Finally, our contributor Mr King sent us the following letter:
no deal is better than a bad deal. So what would be a bad deal?
One that leaves us paying money into the EU, subject to EU regulations, with open borders and unable to negotiate our own trade agreements.
That is not what 408 constituencies voted for but some who are asking for another referendum don’t seem to grasp that and want to leave us with a bad deal.
They also seem not to have registered the fact that the 1972 EC Act was been repealed by the Withdrawal Act and that another referendum will not change that, because of course it would only be advisory.
Respectfully, Mr. King