Ruled By Muppets

As Richard North notes:

As it does on such occasions, the juvenile media is going into gushing overdrive at the "launch" of the Queen Elizebeth II in Rosyth, the latest in the saga of Britain's aircraft carrier programme, set to deliver one operational platform with no aircraft to fly until 2020.

Naturally any acknowledgement of EU involvement goes entirely unmentioned:

...but then one recalls that the main purpose of our carrier is to fulfil our commitments to the European Rapid Reaction Force (ERRF). It is considered to be a shared resource, as part of the 2010 Headline Goal

...when you delegate your foreign policy to a supranational entity, as in the EU, and then gauge your defence requirements to servicing that posture, it was always on the cards that we would end up with an unbalance defence capability, fielding equipment that had no role in projecting our own national interests.

One could suspect a conspiracy of silence regarding the EU but then when the BBC refers to the Royal Navy's new aircraft carrier as a "boat" we can't help come to the conclusion that many of today's journalists are just simply thick muppets:

...the BBC risked the wrath of some of the British navy's most senior officers after describing HMS Queen Elizabeth, which will be official named by the Queen today, as a "boat".

Business reporter Justin Rowlatt was swiftly correctly by Admiral Lord West, the former First Sea Lord, who phoned the programme to point out the slip - prompting a speedy correction.

My father-in-law who was part of the last crew on HMS Belfast before it was decommissioned would be in deep despair at the lack accuracy by the BBC regarding "boats" and "ships".

And nor is this "muppetary" unique to matters military. This morning the Telegraph had an article "England has become a nation of losers again" with a picture underneath of the Scottish tennis player, Andy Murray. The oldest comments say it all. The Telegraph have now amended their headline...

 

...which raises a couple of questions, why wasn't an obvious mistake spotted from the outset and can the commenters below the piece now invoice the Telegragh for doing their sub-editing for them?

We Will Remember Them

Today is when we remember those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice in defending this nation of ours.

Yet it is also with personal sadness that I can no longer bring myself to watch the coverage of the service at the Cenotaph – to watch politicians laying wreaths, politicians who have continuously betrayed those who have served this country. A betrayal illustrated in Christopher Booker’s column today:

The last occasion when our services were still able to operate in full accord with their proud traditions was the retaking of the Falklands in 1982, only made possible in the nick of time thanks to an array of ships which our cost-conscious defence secretary, John Nott, already planned to scrap. His successor, Michael Heseltine, as a fervent Europhile keen to integrate our defence industry with Europe, set in train the process whereby our helicopter industry came to be owned by the Italians and landed us with the Eurofighter project, a hugely expensive aircraft initially designed to fight a Cold War that soon afterwards came to an end.

In the Nineties, integration with Europe proceeded apace under Michael Portillo, who discussed with the French setting up a joint “carrier force”. But it really blossomed with Tony Blair’s St Malo agreement with France in 1998, leading the following year to the Helsinki Accords. Their intention was to set up a “European Rapid Reaction Force”, to which each EU country would make its own contribution, with Britain’s to centre on those two huge aircraft carriers only now taking shape.

After years of mismanagement under Blair, pouring billions into one botched MoD project after another, under this Government the betrayal has continued. Our demoralised Armed Forces have been deprived of ships, aircraft and men fit for any purpose they might be asked to serve until, as a monument to that betrayal, we are left with little more than those two half-built monster carriers and no aircraft to fly from them. Just as apt might be the fact that we now, thanks to a process Mr Heseltine set in train by flogging off Royal Ordnance, have to rely on the French to provide the nuclear triggers for the American missiles that make up our “independent” deterrent.

Instead of bowing their heads as they lay their wreaths, they should hang them in shame.

Priorities Eh?

L/Bdr Parkinson, 27, lost both his legs and suffered brain damage in a Taliban bomb blast in 2006.

After a gruelling rehabilitation process he has learned to walk on two prosthetic legs and has devoted himself to raising money for military charities.

Diane Dernie, his mother, said the honour left her son "absolutely over the moon". She said he was only informed yesterday morning.

Conversely:

Former Strictly Come Dancing judge Miss Phillips will receive a CBE. She said: ‘I am very pleasantly surprised but mostly absolutely thrilled and delighted to receive such a wonderful honour.’

Also receiving a CBE is artist Miss Emin, who made her name with controversial pieces such as a tent decorated with the names of all of her lovers.

The 49-year-old first courted notoriety in 1997 when she appeared on a live TV discussion about the Turner Prize drunk and swearing.

The same year she exhibited ‘Everyone I have Ever Slept With 1963-1995’ a tent appliquéd with names at Charles Saatchi’s Sensation exhibition and then was nominated for the Turner Prize in 1999 with her My Bed installation.

It divided critics, but made her one of the most famous, and well-paid, living artists in the UK.

In descending order of seniority of honours (my emphasis):

• Knight Grand Cross or Dame Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (GBE)
  
• Knight Commander or Dame Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (KBE)
   
• Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (CBE)
  
• Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (OBE)
     
• Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (MBE)

It speaks for itself.

UK To Share Nuclear Deterrent With French

I blogged back in August about the desire of the EU to have a common defence strategy in response to reports on Britain and France possibly sharing warships. (Incidentally The Talking Clock has a video on EU battlegroups).

Today the Financial Times has a piece on the continuation of this process - the astonishing possibility of effectively sharing our nuclear deterrent (my emphasis):

An agreement being negotiated by the UK and France would see British nuclear warheads serviced by French scientists and break with half a century in which neither country has collaborated on its independent deterrent.

Ahead of a summit in three weeks, the governments are close to agreeing that Britain would use a French laboratory to help maintain and service its 160 nuclear warheads, officials in both countries say.

Naturally the FT doesn't mention the EU aspect of this (it usually sits in Guardian territory on all matters EU), but it continues:

Britain and France run completely different deterrent systems with all details kept secret. The scheme would give Britain access for the first time to France’s Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique, which maintains about 300 warheads in the French force de frappe.

In effect, the CEA would service UK nuclear warheads, raising concerns among politicians in both countries about whether their governments were maintaining an independent deterrent.

Too right it would raise concerns. The FT then quotes a French Defence Analyst who doesn't appear to be bereft of glee:

François Heisbourg, a French defence analyst, said sharing warhead research would assume “that the British break their very special relationship with America in that field”. This would require considerable “confidence on the US part”.

Given Cameron's poor military history knowledge, he probably will fail to understand the significant of this.

What is clear is that the pace of EU integration is not akin to that under Labour but has instead been accelerated. Not a surprise to anyone who has followed Tory EU policies for any length of time.

The Other Big Story...

...of the day apparently is whether William Hague is gay or not. Guido has been running with innuendo laden posts for a couple of days now, which have been 'repeated' in the media and even Iain Dale has waded in.

You know what? I couldn't give a stuff if the dome-headed, beer guzzling silly cap-wearing foreign secretary is gay or not; what he does in his private life is up to him. What is important is that he's foreign secretary at the very time we are giving up our armed forces to the French.

But no, the only priority it seems for the 'big hitters' in the UK blogosphere, is someone's sexuality. Sometimes I wonder if the citizens of the UK don't deserve to live in a sovereign democratic nation.

It's Nowt To Do With Cuts

The Sun is reporting this morning:

BRITAIN and France are preparing to reveal unprecedented plans to share the use of their aircraft carriers in a controversial step to maintain military power in an era of cost-cutting.

David Cameron and President Sarkozy are expected to outline the proposal in a November summit, which will lead to British and French flagships working together and protecting the interests of both countries.

Leaving aside the political implications such a move would have for the coalition, this story (if true) would merely be a continuation of what has been happening for years.

The EU has long sought a common defence strategy ever since Monnet's proposals in 1950 for the European Defence Community, and this desire for a 'European Army' has continued apace since the Maastricht treaty.

Agreements on Anglo-French naval co-operation were signed in 1996, the army 1997 and the air force in 1998. In 1996 Tory defence minister Michael Protilio agreed with his fellow defence ministers to set up the Western European Armaments Organisation under the Western European Union (a defence agreement now defunct due to Lisbon) to work for closer co-operation on EU defence procurement.

Tony Blair went even further in St Marlo in 1998 when he offered up the British Armed forces on a plate to be a key part of a New European Defence force, which would act outside of NATO:

Saint Malo was the site of an Anglo-French summit which lead to a significant agreement regarding European defence policy. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac stated that "the [European] Union must have the capacity for autonomous action, backed up by credible military forces, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so, in order to respond to international crises".

Geoff Hoon then signed a 'framework agreement' in 2000, which outlined the guidelines on how to harmonise the the military requirements and have a common command structure. All of this was leading to a common European Defence Agency which was established in 2004.

It was precisely because of this integration that the MoD disbanded or merged 19 historic regiments, so that new 8000 man brigades could be set up in order to fit in with ERRF requirements.

Even the two replacement carriers for the Navy already under construction, at a cost of £5.2billion, are being partially built by the French firm; Thales, who are building an identical one for the French navy. Again requirements of the ERRF.

As ever though none of this gets mention, and so cuts becomes a convenient cover for the Europhile Tories coalition.

Brown's handshake cock-up

While in Afghanistan, Brown attempts to shake hands with British troops but it doesn't quite go according to plan, as they were already saluting:



It seems remarkably similar to an incident with another Western Leader earlier this year:



I don't think it was a deliberate snub for Brown on behalf of the troops, but more of an indication of how completely clueless Brown is when it comes to our Armed Forces.

Hattip: Guido