A Phoenix of Liberty Rises

I’m back. It’s been a few years. I’ve been here and there, compiled even more research and have much to put on here for you. Conclusions I have reached that I have to share. I will be going to places I maybe shouldn’t be going to, but I’ll keep pushing it until you tell me to stop.

It’s going to be a little while until I hit my stride, I have lots of comments to approve, spam to clear, templates to reset, links to gather, I need to organise.

I’ll give you more personal thoughts in coming posts.

Thanks for reading.

And as far as the system is concerned? THIS IS WAR.

Saudi Arabia – 47 year old man’s marriage to 8 year old girl legal

Isn’t Islam wonderful… for paedophiles.

JihadWatch

To do otherwise would be to cast aspersions on Muhammad’s example — a "beautiful pattern of conduct," per Qur’an 33:21 — in marrying Aisha when she was six and consummating the marriage when she was nine. Meanwhile, the girl can petition the court for a divorce… when she reaches puberty!

An update on this story. "Saudi judge upholds man’s marriage to 8-year-old," by Mohammed Jamjoon for CNN, April 12:

(CNN) — A Saudi mother is expected to appeal a judge’s ruling after he once again refused to let her 8-year-old daughter divorce a 47-year-old man, a relative said.

Sheikh Habib Al-Habib made the ruling Saturday in the Saudi city of Onaiza. Late last year, he rejected a petition to annul the marriage.

The case, which has drawn criticism from local and international rights groups, came to light in December when Al-Habib declined to annul the marriage on a legal technicality. His dismissal of the mother’s petition sparked outrage and made headlines around the world.

The judge said the mother, who is separated from the girl’s father, was not the legal guardian and therefore could not represent her daughter, the mother’s lawyer, Abdullah al-Jutaili, said at the time.

The girl’s husband pledged not to consummate the marriage until the girl reaches puberty, according to al-Jutaili, who added that the girl’s father arranged the marriage to settle his debts with the man, who is considered "a close friend."

In March, an appeals court in the Saudi capital of Riyadh declined to certify the original ruling, in essence rejecting al-Habib’s verdict, and sent the case back to al-Habib for reconsideration.

Under the Saudi legal process, the appeals court ruling meant that the marriage was still in effect, but that a challenge to the marriage was still ongoing.

The relative, who said the girl’s mother will continue to pursue a divorce, told CNN the judge "stuck by his earlier verdict and insisted that the girl could petition the court for a divorce once she reached puberty."

The appeals court in Riyadh will take up the case again and a hearing is scheduled for next month, according to the relative.

Child marriages have made news in Saudi Arabia in the past year.

In a statement issued shortly after the original verdict, the Society of Defending Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia said the judge’s decision went against children’s "basic rights."

Marrying children makes them "lose their sense of security and safety," the group said. "Also, it destroys their feeling of being loved and nurtured. It causes them a lifetime of psychological problems and severe depression."

But Muhammad did it, and therein lies the obstacle to reform.

Zuhair al-Harithi, a spokesman for the Saudi Human Rights Commission, a government-run group, told CNN that his organization was fighting child marriages.

"Child marriages violate international agreements that have been signed by Saudi Arabia and should not be allowed," al-Harithi said.

Child marriage is not unusual, said Christoph Wilcke, a Saudi Arabian researcher for the international group Human Rights Watch, after the initial verdict.

There’s no mention from CNN of why child marriage is so persistent.

"We’ve been hearing about these types of cases once every four or five months because the Saudi public is now able to express this kind of anger, especially so when girls are traded off to older men," Wilcke told CNN.

Britain on the Brink

THE FILM THEY DONT WANT YOU TO SEE! Since 1973 British politicians have been giving away control of your life to Brussels in secret…until now. This video exposes the corruption in the EU.

Rise of the female bankrupt

Mail Online

The number of women declared bankrupt has risen nearly fourfold in just six years.

They now make up almost four out of ten cases, with women under the age of 35 most likely to suffer financial collapse

This means that six years ago women made up 30 per cent of bankrupts, but by last year that had risen to 38 per cent.

Moving towards ‘equality’ eh.

Women are now going bankrupt at the rate of 60 a day. The rapid rise of female financial failure is likely to be linked both to overspending when credit was easy and the vulnerability of growing numbers of women who do not have the backing of marriage and family.

By marriage I think they mean husbands. By family I think they mean fathers.

‘More women are racking up unmanageable debts as they now feel more under pressure to maintain lavish lifestyles,’ a spokesman for price comparison website MoneyExpert.com said.

Under pressure from who?

‘They want to spend it like the Beckhams but don’t have the income to sustain their debts.

Quite simply, they are choosing to live beyond their means which funnily enough wouldn’t really be possible in a capitalist society (one dominated by capital, not credit/debt). You cannot spend what you don’t have. This crisis is twofold, not only do they want to live such lifestyles, they also do not want to live within their means because the restrictions they must live under will make them realise how poor they really are, which if we all did, would drive down living costs, improving the quality of life.

‘Increasingly they have to borrow more to get on the property ladder – and if they live alone there’s no one else to share the burden.’

Independent girlies.

He suggested that too many women had used too many credit cards and ‘lived ahead of their income’.

Accountancy firm Wilkins Kennedy said it had dealt with a rise in numbers of female bankrupts and believed bankruptcy among women would match levels among men later this year.

Speculation by Labour ministers that women are especially vulnerable to being laid off in the recession were dismissed last month by the Office for National Statistics.

It said women are losing jobs at half the rate of men, and are protected because more women than men work in the public sector.

Firstly, why the hell are Liebour ‘ministers’ speculating something that doesn’t exist? Secondly, the public sector is f**king teeming with women, like xenomorphs in ‘Aliens’. It is totally disproportionate, but that’s another subject. In relation to this however, in this socialist shithole, as the wealth creating private sector continues to contract, the wealth destroying public sector is continuing to expand, so the divide will continue to grow, and with more money coming out than going in (like the women in this article) you can see where the government is dragging this nation into.

It really is as simple as it looks. As my dad says, ‘don’t spend what you don’t have’. Under capitalism, you literally CAN’T spend what you don’t have so this issue with debt swallowing everybody up (including those who save) is highly improbable, as opposed to the current central banking dominated debt system in which it is not only inevitable, it is designed to collapse.

(2 – 5) + (2 – 5) +… will always result in accumulating debt. Those in debt are slaves to those who issue the credit. What makes it worse is that people choose to go into debt. They choose to become slaves to try and live another life, which ironically, they end up paying for with their life (body + time = life).

The difference here (and in the U.S.) is that the corporatist state is using this as an excuse to loot those with capital, redistributing it to those in debt, which of course goes directly to the creditor, which are usually owned by the same oligarchy that has orchestrated this (imposed the central banks) in the first place.

Wakey wakey people.

"Denial is the most predictable of all human responses, but rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have destroyed it"  — Architect, Matrix Reloaded

Do not ask for whom the bell tolls……

Old Holborn

It tolls for thee, yeoman of the land of Magna Carta.

Whilst you slumbered last night, and in the many months before, the sinister shape of Directive 2006/24/EC crept into your lives and stole your freedom and your privacy.

Would it have made any difference if this burglar had worn a striped jumper and carried a bag marked ‘swag’ – probably not, for you slept soundly, happily believing that if you voted for a new government – when someone else got round to organising an election, when someone else handed out leaflets, when someone else hired a loud speaker and toured your streets – if you put your cross on a different name, you could go on with your cosy life, untroubled.

You were quite happy to believe that it really wasn’t your concern.

You ‘tutted’ over that ‘racist mob’ the BNP. You ‘clucked’ at the alarmist stories in the Daily Mail. You ‘grumbled’ when you found your litter bin installed with a tracker device. Then you went on and re-mortgaged your house, marvelled at your good fortune, ran up your credit card, bought a new car, bought those ridiculous shoes that you couldn’t walk in, and settled down to watch reality TV. You may even have turned on the computer and read some of the blogs, ‘clucked’ again at the comments, and departed, never bothering to leave your point of view.

Never standing up to be counted. It wasn’t really your concern.

Someone else would sort it out for you. Someone else would make a fool of themselves, demanding smaller government, demanding to be left alone to organise their own life, supporting the Libertarian Party, being seen as a ‘conspiracist’.

Today it’s too late.

Today 52% of the population is dependent on retaining a Labour government for the very food in their bellies. Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.

Today the government spend 43% of your wages on supporting, amongst other things, that 52% of the population.

Today the government has hung a debt of £33,000 round the neck of each of your children.

Today, Directive 2006/24/EC means that the government will be monitoring every e-mail you send, every friend you make on the ubiquitous Facebook, every mobile phone call you make, every time you log onto this or any other web page.

You can’t even ‘tut’ and ‘grumble’ amongst yourselves in private any more.

Now who will stand up to be counted?

False rape Conviction

You don’t see that everyday.

Before I quote the article, I want to provide a little background research on sentencing for rape, as to provide some context. The following is taken from www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk, from ‘Rape Advice’, available here as a pdf, unless otherwise indicated.

Firstly, the definition of ‘rapist’ does not seem to apply to women.

Section 142 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 sets the definition of rape as follows;

Rape of women and men

For section 1 of the [1956 c. 69.] Sexual Offences Act 1956 (rape of a woman) there shall be substituted the following section—

“1 Rape of woman or man

(1) It is an offence for a man to rape a woman or another man.

(2) A man commits rape if—

(a) he has sexual intercourse with a person (whether vaginal or anal) who at the time of the intercourse does not consent to it; and

(b) at the time he knows that the person does not consent to the intercourse or is reckless as to whether that person consents to it.

(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.

(4) Subsection (2) applies for the purpose of any enactment.”.

In fact, the rape section of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (c.69) is entirely male specific, except in the event of incest where the law is equally applied. In the Rape Advice document, there is advice to further entrench male-only rape;

In   its   consultative   report 1,   the   Home   Office   Sex   Offences   Review recommended that the statutory definition of rape should be extended to include any penetration   by   the   penis   of   the   anus,   mouth   or   genitalia.

So according to the Act, as women don’t have a penis (and they are not male) that must mean they cannot rape, right?

The section on Male Rape makes no mention of female criminality either, one would think it was written by feminists. In regards to average sentence lengths;

As can be seen from the sentencing statistics summarized at Annex A to this paper, the  average  sentence for an adult offender  sentenced  to  immediate  custody  for rape in 2000 was 7 years 4 months (7 years 6 months on a not guilty plea and 6 years 10 months on a guilty plea). The majority of sentences (57%) fell within the range 5-10 years,  but  25%  of  offenders  received  sentences  of  under  5  years,  and  17%  were sentenced   to   more   than   10   years   (including   10%   whose   sentence   was   life imprisonment).

The document highlights the circumstances of a life sentence for repeat offenders.

37.       The Panel also agrees with the Court of Appeal’s description, in  Billam, of the circumstances in which it will be appropriate to consider a life sentence. A defendant who has a previous conviction for rape or another ‘serious offence’ will be subject to an automatic sentence of life imprisonment under section 109 of the Powers of Criminal

So in summary, the average length for rape is 7 years 1 month. Repeat offenders get an automatic life sentence. That is what a man is expecting to get if he is found guilty of rape, something that can happen based on no more evidence than hear-say from a woman. (A consequence of abuse industry campaigning to push up the number of convictions for rape, remove the ancient requirement of burden of proof, or necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit.) With proof being no longer needed, and a long list of false rape accusers getting no sentence whatsoever, even being protected by law, the feminists are getting what they want. Now to the article.

Estranged wife jailed for falsely accusing husband of sex attack

A man has told of the pain and humiliation he endured when his estranged wife falsely accused him of rape.

Anthony Scoones, 27, spoke out after Gemma Scoones was jailed for a year for perverting the course of justice.

One year, of which she’ll do less than half. I think they have to use the charge of ‘perjury’ because there is no charge of ‘false rape’.

He described how he was arrested at his home  -  he was watching TV in bed when police arrived  -  and spent 16 hours in a cell.

His clothes were taken for forensic examination and he was left naked so that DNA samples could be taken.

Mr Scoones said: ‘I wasn’t just stripped of my clothes, but of my dignity. I was stood there naked, with two police officers at one side of me and a doctor at the other side, having swabs taken from all over my body.

‘It was humiliating and degrading. I don’t blame the officers for investigating, but it is a heinous crime to be accused of and I’m still having nightmares now.’

To add to his ordeal, even some people he thought of as friends doubted his innocence.

The rape accusation was part of an ‘acrimonious separation’ from his 26-year-old wife.

Durham Crown Court heard that she told police Mr Scoones followed her home from a shop, forced his way into the house and raped her in a downstairs toilet.

She claimed she was hurt but had not been able to call police immediately because he threatened to petrol-bomb her house.

It was only after discrepancies emerged in a police interview with her that Mr Scoones was told he was in the clear and his ex-wife was charged with committing an act intended to pervert the course of justice.

Jailing Scoones, who had pleaded guilty, Recorder Neil Davey told her: ‘The course you embarked on was one of sheer wickedness.’

Mr Smith said: ‘She was upset and this built up in her as time went on. She accepts there was a degree of planning and she considered her actions for  several weeks.’

Premeditated. Kudos to the Police for actually investigating it and not just throwing the poor man to the wolves. But this isn’t the first time this has happened. Here are a few more from the Endofmen archives.

Another false rape claim, results in ‘modest’ sentence

A binge-drinking mother has been jailed after falsely accusing an innocent taxi driver of raping her.

Joanne Rye, who kept up the lie for 20 months, was told by a judge her behaviour was despicable and was handed an eight-month prison sentence.

Another man falsely accused of rape – To ‘teach him a lesson’

Women makes false rape claim – Jailed for ONE YEAR

Jailed: The ‘evil’ 21-year-old who seduced soldier and then accused him of rape

Man hangs himself after being falsely accused of raping women and children

Repeat offender, life sentence, remember?

Woman who falsely cried rape FIVE times – Gets SUSPENDED sentence

False rape accuser given 4 months

Another False Allegation of Rape – victim serves almost 7 years.

This is obviously just the tip of the iceberg. Here are some articles regarding the rise of false rape/ abuse accusations.

False Rape Accusations May Be More Common Than Thought

Half of all Rape Charges May Be False

In the UK today you can be accused of abuse on almost no evidence and without any proper witnesses to support the story

An alarming national trend: False Rape Allegations

UK Govt to give lessons in ‘spotting terrorists’

The Mail Online is running an article regarding the training of members of society in ‘terrorist spotting’, presumably so they can inform our omnipotent protectors, the State.

Sixty thousand British civilians are being trained by the Home Office to spot terrorists, Gordon Brown revealed yesterday.

Huge numbers of staff on rail networks, at shops, public buildings and major sports venues have been picked out by MI5 and the police for the special training – teaching them to watch for ‘suspicious behaviour’ and respond swiftly to an atrocity.

Apart from the fact that a ‘nation of informers’ is reminiscent of other deeply unhealthy societies, this seems like typical big government overkill. People need training in this? In regards to terrorism and Islam, just read the Quran, in chronological order if you want the real context of Mohammed (at the beginning with few believers and many enemies, and the end when he had an army and mucho power). Oh and remember to keep in mind the use of Abrogation.

Regarding terrorists as a whole, terror is defined loosely as the use of terror (fear) for political ends. In the event of multiple groups desiring such, it would only be logical to focus on the one which ‘creates the greatest fear’ and enacts the ‘greatest political change’ as they would, by definition, be the greater terrorist and thus the greatest threat.

The United Kingdom currently has 60 million residents (more like 80 million unofficially). What group has the greatest access to mass media, to the statute making process, the economy, the schools, the borders, the local authority, the courts, the security services etc?

Who is continually telling you to fear? To accept changes in your life which restrict your freedom? To impose more rules and regulations on you and to tell you how to think?

Which one is more likely to kick down your door for no real reason, to steal your children from you and tell them how to think?

Which one is closer to total power over you and your family?

Which one is the greatest threat to your life and liberty?

Considering this, I think it they are pretty easy to spot once you see the signs. You could look here for a start.

Divide and rule, the NuLabour way…

Came across this post from the Devil’s Kitchen, thought I’d share it.

Devil’s Kitchen

It’s one of the oldest strategies in the book: divide and rule. And few governments in living memory have been so adept at it as NuLabour: it has been at the heart of many of their policies. They have divided the peoples of the Union; they have divided, through QUANGOs and censuses emphasising differences, black, brown and white peoples of the Union. Through jealousy they have divided rich and poor.

"Fear not," says the government, "for the state—and only the state—can save you!" And then they proceed to divide some more. Devolved governments (but with little power), harsher sentences for "racist" crimes, and the stealing of more money from "the rich" to hand out as gifts to the poor.

The brilliant bit about this tactic, as applied by NuLabour, is that it encourages people to think of each other group not as fellow human beings, but as people below or different from them. "They aren’t a person like I am, they are just a toff/darkie/Muslim/Scot/Sassenach/Taff/idiot, etc."

And so people get angry and demand solutions, they demand concessions for their own particular group and guess what?—the state can help you, friend, for the state is the friend of everyone. The state is the righter of all wrongs, the great arbiter, the generous donor of largesse. And as each group is appeased so the jealousy and resentment of the others are inflamed and they demand special treatment for themselves and more shoddy treatment for "those others".

And so it is that the government have been able to put through some disgusting laws, by aiming them at groups that the other groups dislike. 42 days detention without trial?—well, it’ll only apply to terrorists, and they’re all Muslims or at the very least darkies, eh?

The scrapping of double jeopardy, habeas corpus and trial by jury?—well, that’ll only apply to the eeevil criminals (no matter that they have yet to be proven such). Oh, and the darkies, of course. And the poor.

The confiscation of your assets before you are even found guilty, or reversing the burden of proof for the confiscation of assets? Well, that’ll only apply to drugdealers and the like.

And none of these people are really human, are they? Not like me.
And that’s how they get us; that’s how they pass those laws. And, they say that they won’t use them except in the most exceptional circumstances, and only against those people who aren’t really human.

Read the full article here.

Warning To The West (from an ex-Muslim)

Citizen Warrior

The following is an email we received from a former Muslim. We are reprinting it with his permission:

I was born and raised as Muslim. My name is Abdul Rahman. My whole family is still Muslim. I know the Islamic brain very well. I have lived and breathed with them. I am an insider. I left Islam when I understood Islam is a sick and evil religion. Muslims can fool the gullible West but can’t fool us, the ex-Muslims. On this basis I write the following.

Fighting terrorism is easier than fighting the evil teachings of Islam. These evil teachings are already inside the West. Muslims do not need Osama Bin Laden or Zarqawi to lead them. Their inspiration for violence comes directly from the Quran and from Islamic history. One small independent group of Muslims in the West can create havoc.

Ali Sina, of FaithFreedom.org, thinks he can bring down this 1400 years old religion in his lifetime. Is he dreaming? How can you defeat an enemy who has the following agenda? Also remember that the greatest strength of Muslims is that they do not read any site or books that talk against Islam. Most Muslims do not even read the Quran in their own language.

Who will tell you the truth about Islam? Muslims? Of course not. Muslims can’t even see the evil in Islam. The West? The gullible West has no clue. Then who? Ex-Muslims and ex-Muslims only can expose Islam to the West.

Muslims believe Islam will rule the world, very soon. They are committed to it. The constitution for the new Islamic Republic of EU and USA is under construction. Welcome to the 21st Century Islamic Warfare. To the infidels of the West, Muslims say: We will fight the infidel to death. And they mean it.

Read the rest of this post here.

Free speech only for Islamic supremacists

Note, that this is the same Choudary scumbag who states that ‘only Muslims are innocents’ (Killing of Non-Muslims is Legitimate) and hot on the heels of Geert Wilders being banned for wanting to speak honestly about Islam.

Religion of Peace march

Religion of Peace march

JihadWatch

“The startling move comes just days after processions celebrating St George were banned for being racist” and “despite a previous demonstration in which some of his supporters chanted: ‘Bomb the UK.'” All in the name of “diversity.”

“Hate preacher get OK to run sharia law demo,” by Tom Savage and Ross Kaniuk for the Daily Star, February 28:

HATE preacher Anjem Choudary will march in London today calling for Britain to adopt Islamic Sharia law.The startling move comes just days after processions celebrating St George were banned for being racist.

Choudary was given the green light yesterday despite a previous demonstration in which some of his supporters chanted: “Bomb the UK”.

Publicity for the march, in the East End, carries 41-year-old Choudary’s personal mobile number and says the aim of the campaign is to “emulate the Prophet and his companions, by calling for Islam and speaking out against the oppression of man-made law”.

Bet Choudary can’t wait till his band of muhajirun becomes strong enough, so they can begin emulating Muhammad’s Medinan phase, that is, full blown jihad — complete with British plunder and concubines. Too bad for him, though: he probably has to wait a few more years for that to be possible.

It says that Britain is full of “disbelievers” who are involved in prostitution, gambling, alcoholism and worshipping other gods.The publicity says women are welcome to join the march but they must walk at the back of the procession as “strict segregation will be enforced”.

The demo comes 18 months after three of Choudary’s supporters were jailed for soliciting murder in a London protest against cartoons of the prophet Mohammed published in Denmark.

That was when some demonstrators chanted “Bomb the UK” and “Europe, you will pay with your blood”. Organiser Choudary was fined.

Today’s march won permission after a council withdrew funding for a St George’s Day parade in the Midlands – on the grounds that it was “racist”.

Parade founder Mark Cowles, 40, of West Bromwich, said yesterday: “I can’t believe Choudary’s event can go ahead.

“The British establishment is trying to take away the British voice but other cultures choose to force their way of life on us.”

UPDATE (from Robert Spencer): This march took place as scheduled. Pamela has details and video here.

More: Banned cleric Omar Bakri addresses conference at London primary school;

Omar Bakri, the radical cleric banned from Britain, has addressed a conference at a primary school in London in which he called for the country to become an Islamic state.

Who has attacked our freedoms more?

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror (imposing fear), especially as a means of coercion.

Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those acts which (1) are intended to create fear (terror), (2) are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack), and (3) deliberately target (or disregard the safety of) non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence or war.

Which one of these has been worse for Britain and YOU.

Terror stalks the land

Your lost liberties – listed

DNA samples from 1.1milion children held on register as Labour ‘plots database by stealth’

Blair’s ‘frenzied law making’ : a new offence for every day spent in office

Lisbon Treaty Treason

Show me your papers – Now official British policy

Welcome to Soviet Britain

Stalin’s Britain – citizens to spy on each other for the state

UK – Endemic surveillance state

Marching towards a police state

Summer of rage ‘fears’ – UK

Something that doesn’t exist is being promoted via the media. Why? Well for me, it is just another problem-reaction-solution. Get protests going, get agent provocateurs involved to escalate the situation, bring the Army onto British soil and use the Civil Contingencies Act to cancel elections and establish a dictatorship. Note the propaganda in this piece.

Yahoo

More than a third of voters believe the Army will have to be brought in to deal with a “summer of rage” on British streets as the recession bites, a poll showed.

They never polled me. Where did this poll come from?

The widespread fear of serious unrest was disclosed as a senior police officer warned activists were planning unrest and could find rioters easier to recruit because of the credit crunch.

Superintendent David Hartshorn, who heads the Metropolitan Police’s public order branch, said known activists were planning a return to the streets centred on April’s G20 summit of world leaders in London.

And intelligence shows they may be able to call on more “footsoldiers” than normal due to the unprecedented conditions – which have led to youth violence in Greece and mass protests elsewhere in Europe.

Um, yes, where they had cops dressed up as ‘activists’ and burn and smash stuff up. Allegedly this has happened in the UK recently, and here is a quote from the former Italian president regarding dealing with student protests; “use agent provocateurs to start riots and then have the police “beat the shit out of the protesters”

YouGov polling for Prospect magazine found 37% thought such “serious social unrest in several British cities” was certain or likely – although a slim majority (51%) disagreed.

That isn’t a slim majority, and we have no details regarding numbers polled, their loyalties etc, so the poll doesn’t really mean much, it does however offer an opportunity to sway public opinion by claiming to represent it

And a clear majority (64%) also favoured forcing the under-25s to do a year of full-time, modestly-paid community service such as working with the sick and elderly or helping with environmental projects.

Riiiight, like Obama’s youth core? No that isn’t socialist at all is it.

Labour MP Frank Field told Prospect the main political parties should join forces to develop the idea. He said: “The time has come to look at this idea. A new bipartisan commission should be established to look into how it could be done, perhaps led by figures as respected as David Blunkett or David Davis.”

Although the biggest support for a compulsory scheme was among the older generations, a majority of 18-30 year olds (52%) also gave it their backing.

So… They want to take taxpayers money, and expand the state even more by employing the young to serve the government. Fuck off.

Gordon Brown‘s spokesman said: “The Prime Minister’s view on this is that of course he understands people’s concerns and he also understands that people are angry, for example about the behaviour of some of the banks. That’s why he is absolutely determined that the Government does everything possible to deal with those concerns and help people and businesses get through what is a global recession.”

Yes but people are mainly pissed off at the government, at these greedy self centered wankers and their complete lack of care for the People or the principles of freedom. The actions of the government has precipitated this disgusting state of affairs, the goal of which has always been to destroy Britain as a sovereign nation, permanently, as per the instruction of their Bilderberger masters and their plans for a one world socialist dictatorship government. Remember, this wasn’t incompetence or whatever excuses they want to spew. It was calculated.

Supporters of European Union growth are like communists of the Soviet-era – Czech President

Daily Mail

Czech President Vaclav Klaus today compared supporters of greater European Union integration to Soviet-era communists.

As leader of the Czech Republic he holds the EU’s rotating presidency, but that did not stop Mr Klaus kicking aside diplomatic niceties to tell EU lawmakers their parliament intervened too much in people’s lives.

The controversial Lisbon Treaty, meant to streamline the bloc’s creaking institutions, would only make things worse, he said.

In his attack, delivered at the European Parliament in Brussels, he branded the EU an undemocratic and elitist project comparable to Soviet dictatorships that forbade free thought.

He added: ‘Here in the European Parliament there is only one single alternative, and those who dare think about a different option are labelled as enemies of European integration.’

His speech provoked boos from many lawmakers, some of whom walked out, but applause from a minority of nationalists.

The state can watch you, but you can’t watch the state…

Daily Mail

For rank hypocrisy, look no further than the Government’s inconceivable decision to make it a criminal offence – punishable with a jail term of up to 10 years –  to take a picture of a policeman.

Everywhere we go, the police – under instruction from Ministers – are watching our every move.

There are more than four million CCTV cameras in the UK, the largest number in the world. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras follow our every car journey, and officers are now routinely deployed at major public gatherings with cameras on their helmets.

Police are even beginning to insist that pubs – as a condition of being granted a licence – install CCTV cameras to watch their regulars having a drink.

Our movements are also being tracked using our genetic fingerprints, long after we have left the scene. Hundreds of thousands of people never convicted of any offence now have their DNA stored on the Government’s Big Brother database – the largest in the world.

Yet do the police (or at least their Government masters) mind us watching them in return? Absolutely not. That would never do.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000 has been used to stop a staggering 62,584 people at railway stations. Another 87,000 were questioned under separate ‘stop and search’ and ‘stop and account’ legislation.

One schoolboy was even held as a terror suspect for taking photographs of a railway station during a school geography field trip.

Of course, we should not be surprised that the defence for this latest draconian step is counter-terrorism.

Remember, throughout HISTORY, governments have used fear as a pretext for imposing the worst kind of tyranny/ slavery on the population. That is what is happening, nothing less, and if you want more information, read Ian Parker-Joseph’s blog.

Police State: New secret Stasi department set up by ACPO

Section 44 statistics

Gestapo and SOCA – how similar?

Search Gestapo…

This is not a joke. This is deadly serious…