Here's another example -
#
to persuade me to retract my resignation from the Conservative Party in
2007:
Thanks xxxxxxxxx P
Hague's been showing signs of instability for some time.
The your referenced article in the Telegraph quoted him:
"It [having a referendum] wasn't in the manifesto of either of the governing parties"
see:
Hague-EU-rebel-MPs-are-just-spraying-graffiti-on-Parliament.html
Yet in the Conservative election leaflet at the EU 'Parliamentary' elections in 2009, it's boldly written:
Three Good Reasons to vote Conservative on 4th June [2009]:
1. To make Gordon Brown change his mind and give us the referendum on the EU Constitution he promised.
Nobody reads party manifestoes before they vote, they rely on election leaflets. I know its a couple of years ago, but the Conservatives seem to use allusion in their writings as a technique to give an impression (in this case that they will hold a referendum) to garnish votes, but believe that by using convoluted usage can deny the implication at any time, Hague is doing this here.
We have known since at least 1971/2 that the Conservatives cannot be trusted, but here we see it confirmed in spades, in fact I believe that they ought to be held to account in a court of law (not that bend judges are going to help).
Posts
