A simple question which I doubt many people will answer correctly, and many people may disagree on, but check out the facts as most of the documentation is available and was released under the 20 year rule.
Please don't let the topic degenerate into a slanging match.
Many people claim Thatcher closed the pits, others claim Scargill closed the pits, but the real question here is who benefitted from the closure of the pits, and why????????
Thatcher didn't close the pits, Scargill did and this is easily verified by documentation released under the 20 year rule which showed Thatcher conceded to over 50% of his demands after the first week of the strike, and to 98% of his demands after the second week of the strike. This raises a simple question, if Thatcher conceded to 98% of Scargill's demands after a fortnight then why wasn't the strike called off and why did Scargill continue? reaching a figure of 50% of your demands was relatively unheard of, but not unknown; and 98% of demands met was unheard of in the history of union negotiations.
Anyone in mining knows you cannot stand a working coal mine as it degrades to the point where they become uneconomical, and Scargill knew this but continued on with the strike.
If we go back to our original question of who benefitted from the closure of our pits and why; we have a revealing answer which is the EU, and why is even more crucial.
Prior to Thatcher becoming Prime Minister Labour ratified considerable amounts of EU clean air legislation which in isolation seemed irrelevant on its own, but conspired together to limit how we could generate electricity as it worked against coal through emissions from combustion, this was the first phase. Emissions standards were continually tightened and Labour had allowed the EU to do this without a vote or even consultation with the UK.
Thatcher came to power and saw that for the first time in history the UK was in danger of losing its ability to be self sufficient in energy generation and conspired to prevent this happening.
Now we have our answer, it was the EU who wanted the closure of the UK pits so they could take control of the UK and they knew the only way they could achieve this was by taking away our self sufficiency in energy. Coal gave us a cheap and consistent source of steam for electricity generation, it could give us town gas as it had for years until natural gas came in.
More importantly recent break through's meant the UK could produce oil, petrol, diesel, and oil based products from coal meaning with coal we could be self sufficient in energy. Thatcher countered this by preparing several plans to benefit the coal mining industry by using coal as the contingency plan to retain the self sufficiency of the Uk's energy.
More importantly Thatcher invested £80M into research to use coal in other areas and these were to produce oil based products from coal, and using coal for fuel which went into the development and production stages.
Here alone we can state categorically that Thatcher was very pro coal and it was key to her ability to retain the self sufficiency of the UK's energy.
If we take this a stage further she did have another plan to close uneconomic mines, but this was a small part of a larger plan which was to develop three super complexes to produce coal in even greater quantities than ever before. Her plan was simple, begin work on these super complexes and move men from old or nearly exhausted pits to them to keep continuity of employment and to keep the mining skills and experience within coal mining so they weren't lost. And yes, I did see these plans and the energy report she commissioned so can confirm it as true, and they are now available online.
Now we have a definitive answer to our question, to control the UK the EU had to have control over our energy to hold our politicians to ransom to make them play ball with the EU agenda.
Now we need to look at the EU agenda, since the 1950's meetings had taken place between several European countries to plan a way of integrating European countries into one European super state, when we joined the Common Market in 1971 this was the first part of their plan. Their ultimate plan was to create a world Government with just three super states which would be Europe, The Americas, and Pacific, there would be just one world Government for the entire world and three regional Parliaments.
No individual country would survive or even exist.
This can be confirmed by people reading "Agenda 21" and before people dismiss it as crackpot lunacy I suggest you read it and see just how much of their plan has already been undertaken, you will be surprised and shocked if you read it.
Now we come to the miners strike of 1984, we don't know who actually started it and possible never will, did Scargill start it and the EU came on board, or was Scargill the puppet of the EU and they started it through him. We have worked tirelessly in this area and can confirm much of the intelligence reports which showed the strike fund was receiving massive inputs of cash and to understand this we have to look at financial transactions.
Cash transfers are now nearly all electronic and even back then all large cash transfers are electronic as no actual cash changes hands, its all about accounting, debit and credit if you like. It works simply, Bank A amends their accounts as a debit to the tune of £1M for example, and bank B as the recipient credits their account to the tune of £1M and bank B is better off to the tune of £1M.
All electronic transfers are traceable, but during the miners strike the UK security forces immediately looked for electronic transfers and found none, and believe me if anyone can find them the security services can. This leaves only one possibility, that cash was coming as cash from abroad in bags and the only way to do this was in diplomatic pouches as these are untraceable and cannot be touched by immigration, the police, or even the security forces, hence "diplomatic immunity".
At that time all the major corporations around the world with access to that amount of cash, of which there are very few, have had their accounts audited and showed no abnormalities which leaves only one possibility. Only the EU has never had its accounts audited, they are the only organisation which can lay its hands on £millions of Sterling without anyone knowing, and have numerous member states with diplomats who can courier it to the UK totally undetected.
We followed this line of enquiry and to date we can confirm that the EU sent over nearly £90M in cash to the strike fund, proof if proof were ever needed.
We can take this a step further, why has the EU got its own Parliament, constitution, Diplomatic Status, and even its own passports when it isn't even a country, its an amalgamation of member states.
So there we have it, it was the EU who benefitted from the demise of the UK coal industry, it was the EU who funded it to a large extent, and now the UK is dependent on the EU for a large proportion of our energy requirements.
[tweak]Subject matter changed to mixed case.[/tweak]