Click here for more information …

In an appalling yet sadly not unexpected decision, Keir Starmer the Director for Public Prosecutions, announced yesterday that no one would face charges over the death of Ian Tomlinson.

Tomlinson, a newspaper vendor, was on his way home on 1st April last year, when he fell foul of what can only be called a gang of police, ostensibly there to ’serve and protect’ the public during the G20 protests, and all too eager to mete out agression to any who crossed their path.

Anonymous for a very long time, PC Simon Harwood was caught on video striking Tomlinson and causing him to fall to the ground. Mr Tomlinson died later.

Harwood, in keeping it seems, with many police that day, had elected not to wear identifying insignia. This in itself made revealing him a very difficult task, and one cant help but wonder whether this wasn’t a large part of the motive for so doing.

He and his cohorts apparently steadfastly said nothing despite whatever limp attempts were going on within the police service to discover the culprit, and even after the video footage had come to light Harwood waited a further three days before coming forward to superiors.

The issue here is not merely one of the unnecessary death of a simple working man, although god knows that’s bad enough. It cuts to the core of our drift into a fascist police state, where despite video evidence and multiple witnesses, this officer it seems will not now even face a trial.

What message does this send to the rest of us? That we can forget about any kind of justice wherever misdeeds by the police are concerned. And perhaps more worryingly, what kind of message does it send to the police? Who will now surely look this as even greater Carte Blanche to dispense their own justice as the whim takes them, without a care that they will ever have to answer for their actions.

Clarity of the issue of the insignia and indeed the standing orders of the officer/s commanding that day are paramount. Who ordered that officers should attend without shoulder flash ID? Who ordered the Kettling? Who was in command?

The only chance we have of getting any of these vitally poignant questions answered is in court, under oath and cross-examination.

Accordingly then we MUST press hard for a volte face from the egregious Mr Starmer and DEMAND that PC Harwood stands trial for Mr Tomlinson’s death. Because otherwise, along with Tomlinson’s demise may well be the death of justice in this country and the birth of the Police State proper.

Justice for Ian Tomlinson: Petition

To:  The Director of Public Prosecutions

On the 1st April 2009 London played host to the G20 summit of the world’s most powerful nations. Regardless of whether or not you support the notion of Globalism, the right to peaceful protest should be entrenched in a lawful, peaceful and fair society, and until recently we had thought this was so in our British Isles.

The demonstrations against the G20 brought together people from all walks of life who simply wanted to show their opposition to the trend towards profit at any costs, riches for the few at the expense of the many. During most of the day those protests were good natured and friendly.
As the day wore on into evening however, the mood changed. The police began donning riot gear, despite little in the way of trouble beyond the suspiciously public few who had openly begun smashing bank windows, seemingly for the sole benefit of the assembled press.
The police then proceeded to ‘kettle’ the remaining protesters, a practice of hemming people in without the means to leave, and without access to water or toilet facilities. It has been said that this is a deliberate means by which to provoke an angry response to which the police can then react, thereby justify the heavy police presence and ‘robust’ policing.

Ian Tomlinson was not part of the demonstration in any way, and was simply making his way home through the area. He was assaulted by a police officer who, in the following days refused to come forward and admit his part, until video evidence emerged giving the lie to his silent denial of involvement. Despite this it was a further three days before the officer finally made himself known to superiors.
It’s interesting to note that he, in common with many of those policing the event, apparently were not wearing identifying insignia that day.
Mr Tomlinson died later that day.

Following his death there have been no less than three separate post mortems. The First, carried out by Home Office Pathologist Dr Freddie Patel, can be said to be unreliable even if only because of concerns that Mr Patel had blemished his own reputation: Following Mr Tomlinson’s death Mr Patel was removed from the Home Office register of accredited forensic pathologists pending an inquiry, amid concern into whether he has breached regulations.
It also emerged that the Metropolitan police alerted the Home Office to concerns about Patel’s performance in four suspicious death cases in 2004.

The second post mortem, carried out soon after the first at the behest of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, concluded that Mr Tomlinson died of internal bleeding, a verdict in keeping with the claim that his death was as a direct consequence of the assault on him.
The third was carried out on the orders of the legal team representing the officer seen in the video assaulting Mr Tomlinson.
Tellingly the results of this Post Mortem have not thus far been made public.

Today, 22nd July 2010, Keir Starmer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions has announced that no police officer will face any charges in connection with the Death of Ian Tomlinson, as he feels there is, �…no realistic prospect of a conviction.�

Well Mr Starmer that is unacceptable.
In a free, democratic and open society no one should be above the law, and so we the people DEMAND that the officer concerned be brought before a Court
and his guilt or innocence established openly, honestly and lawfully before a jury of his peers.

Sincerely,

Please sign the petition here Justice For Ian Tomlinson Petition and help spread the word far and wide.

Peace

Jonathan

The Texas Land Office and Texas Water Commission successfully used ‘oil eating’ microbes to clean up large oil spills in just weeks. Microbes hunt down and eat the toxic oil and leave only a biodegradable waste that is non-toxic to humans and marine life. Marshland and beaches were pristine again in just weeks—not years like the Exxon Valdez spill. This is the answer to save the seafood industry and all the precious creatures we are about to kill.

When it comes to selling chemicals that claim to treat H1N1 swine flu, the pharmaceutical industry’s options are limited to two: Vaccines and anti-virals. The most popular anti-viral, by far, is Tamiflu, a drug that’s actually derived from a Traditional Chinese Medicine herb called star anise.

But Tamiflu is no herb. It’s a potentially fatal concentration of isolated chemical components that have essentially been bio-pirated from Chinese medicine. And when you isolate and concentrate specific chemicals in these herbs, you lose the value (and safety) of full-spectrum herbal medicine.

That didn’t stop Tamiflu’s maker, Roche, from trying to find a multi-billion-dollar market for its drug. In order to tap into that market, however, Roche needed to drum up some evidence that Tamiflu was both safe and effective.

Roche engages in science fraud

Roche claims there are ten studies providing Tamiflu is both safe and effective. According to the company, Tamiflu has all sorts of benefits, including a 61% reduction in hospital admissions by people who catch the flu and then get put on Tamiflu.

The problem with these claims is that they aren’t true. They were simply invented by Roche.’

Read more…

A bill proposed by the British government and now making its way through parliament would impose the most burdensome and intrusive regulation on homeschooling in the English-speaking world.

“This bill is breathtaking in its scope and reflects a perverse level of suspicion towards parents who home-educate their children,” says HSLDA Staff Attorney and Director of International Relations Michael Donnelly. “If this bill were to pass, it would be the most restrictive and overbearing law in the English-speaking world. It places total discretion in the hands of local educational officials to determine whether or not they will ‘register’ a home education program and would require criminal background checks for parents before they could begin homeschooling their own children.”

Read more…

Special Report by Guy Leven-Torres

29th October 2009

Let me tell you about William. He is a very bright child and comes from a nice home. William is extremely polite, courteous and a very normal healthy child. William has a friend called Zoe. She is Asian but William and Zoe are inseparable in the Surrey school they go to near Bagshot.

However last week, Zoe and William had an argument in which William used the term  ‘Zoe Bin Laden’. Zoe is not a Moslem but a Thomasian Christian, one of the oldest Christian sects in the world alongside the Copts in Egypt..

(Saint Thomas is credited with introduction of Christianity in India in 52 AD[3]. Most of the Christians in India are converted from Hindu or Muslim. 70% of Indian Christian Population is Dalit, who like many other Hindu converts have even after conversion continued with their caste system. According to the 3rd century text Acts of Thomas, (written in Syriac), when the apostles were in Jerusalem and divided the world among them, it was decided that Saint Thomas would go to India. Saint Thomas then arrived in North West India, and baptized King Gondophares and his brother, thereby heralding the beginning of Christianity in India.[11] However, the Acts of Thomas may be apocrypha, and may not be a historical account, and its characters may have been influenced by the Indo-Parthian Kingdom that existed in north-western India).

Zoe’s mother, Maria, received a phone call about ‘a very serious matter indeed and it could not be discussed on the phone and the Police might be involved, subject to our discussions today- that is if you come right now?’ William’s mother Carol also received a phone call about ‘a very serious matter’.

Almost panicking, both mothers rushed to the local school. I have changed the locations because the matter is still being investigated. Be content that it is somewhere in Surrey close to where I live. I know both women personally and both are well educated and well balanced. At the school they were almost frogmarched into the presence of the School Manager who sat behind a desk accompanied by a Police Officer- in fact I learned later there were two of them.

William’s mother  was already there but her son had been isolated in a special room away from all other children. The school refused to allow his mother access to him. She complained but was only allowed to see a very frightened and tearful little boy after she had been ‘interrogated’ (in her own words) by the officers and the Manager.

Zoe’s mother was made to wait while William’s mother was seen first. It was obvious the school were interested in William’s mother’s attitudes and that of his father, a car dealer. Eventually she was asked to wait outside and Zoe’s mother was asked to go in, where it was explained that the ‘very serious matter’ concerned her daughter being called ‘Zoe Bin Laden’.

Trying not to laugh, Maria asked why should such a trivial childish bit of name calling result in such excessive behaviour by the school? The Manager replied that the school took racist incidents very seriously. The Police were not officially involved at that moment dependent upon their ‘preliminary inquiries.’

Maria asked the School Manager if this was ‘some kind of prank or perhaps a surprise birthday gram’ as it was her 43 birthday? It soon dawned upon her that the school was quite serious.

Maria is rather fiery by nature and does not suffer fools gladly. She like a lot of Indians is quite plain spoken.

‘Are you telling me that my daughter’s best friend is being accused of racism?’

‘Yes!’

‘Are you sick in the head Head Mistress- two five year old children for heaven’s sake? A child cannot differentiate between one race and another- he probably heard it on the radio or TV! Please tell me this is not a wind up?’

‘No it is not!’

Maria demanded to see her daughter immediately and despite refusals, the child was eventually brought to her. She took her daughter’s hand and removed her from the school. She told the school that she had no intention of returning her and that she would continue to play with William. The school said she could not do this and that matters might be made worse if she did so.

She asked if they were threatening her?

‘No but we might have to bring in the social services!’

It was then that she noticed her friend and William’s mother in the room with a crying child.

She entered the ‘quiet room’ where little William was incarcerated. The Manager tried to stop the friends having contact.

Mary told the woman to ‘shut up’ and went into see Carol and William. The little boy crying like mad hanging on to his mother for life and clearly terrified said, ‘I didn’t mean to be naughty mummy and auntie Carol, please tell the teacher that! Please mummy … I didn’t mean to be nasty to Zoe!’

The women immediately took the children despite protests of the school- the Police were clearly embarrassed apparently when it was clear the school was exagerating- and the women left the school. Neither William or Zoe will be returning.

Yesterday, both mothers received letters from Social Services to make an appointment to see the families concerned and both are now ‘under investigation’. The school also wrote a letter to Zoe stating that William’s remarks would ‘remain on his school record’.

In English Law a child under 10 years is incapable of committing a crime.

This is the UK 2009.

Disgusting!

Guy

‘The wives, husbands and other family members currently employed at the tax-payers’ expense plan to apply for jobs with other MPs as a way of dodging the guidelines expected to be recommended by Sir Christopher Kelly next month.

Sir Christopher, the chairman of the committee on standards in public life, has been tasked with drawing up tough new rules to stop MPs abusing their allowances and expenses after the Daily Telegraph exposed widespread wrong-doing earlier this year.’

Read more…

The top climate science advisor to the German government has proposed that everyone on the planet should have a personal CO2 budget and be forced to pay a tax if they exceed it, adding that westerners have already exceeded their allocations and should pay climate reparations to poorer countries.

This is not just another tax being rammed through using the phony pretext of global warming, it’s the entrée for complete government tracking and control over your personal life. This is the “inventory” that Nancy Pelosi called for during her visit to China in May.

On May 28, the Associated Press reported that Pelosi told a Chinese student that in order to cut back on CO2 emissions, “Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory.”

German climate scientist Joachim Schellnhuber is pushing for the same thing – the nanny state on steroids.

How will a personal CO2 budget be enforced? Every plane ticket you buy, every time you fill up at the station, every mile of every journey you make will be fed into a centralized government database, creating a leviathan matrix system to catalogue every aspect of your personal behavior. Exceed your personal carbon budget and you’ll be hit with a hefty fine, with the majority of the proceeds no doubt going straight to the huge international banking interests that own the carbon trading market, mainly N M Rothschild & Sons, as well as people like Maurice Strong and Al Gore.

This CO2 tax will bankroll the very same globalist interests, specifically groups like the Club of Rome, that resolved decades ago to invent hysteria surrounding climate change in order to advance their agenda for global government.

Read more…

Prof Julian Le Grand, the architect of a clutch of New Labour policies such as baby bonds, is calling for marriage to be the legal “default” setting for new parents.

Without having to undergo a public ceremony or take any vows, they should simply be regarded as married in law as soon as the child’s birth is registered, Prof Le Grand, Tony Blair’s former Downing Street health adviser, said.

Those who later decide to separate would have to go to court to seek a divorce in exactly the same way as a couple who had married formally in church or a register office.

The London School of Economics professor, who is also chairman of Health England, argued that the idea would make family units more secure.

Ann Widdecombe, the Conservative MP, rejected it as “ludicrous” and warned that it could spell the death of marriage.

The academic has attracted controversy in the past with calls for smokers to be forced to buy permits before they can buy cigarettes and the introduction of separate supermarket checkouts for alcohol to put people off buying drink.

Read more…

‘A baby was placed into care and is facing adoption after a psychologist misdiagnosed the mother’s mental state. The child has been in foster care for six months even though experts have said that the mother posed no immediate risk. A psychologist told Ipswich County Court this week that she had inaccurately assessed the mother as having factitious illness, formerly known as Munchausen’s by proxy.

 That assessment resulted in Suffolk County Council putting the baby on the childcare protection register. The diagnosis was based on accusations that the mother had made up illnesses for her son from another relationship, which she denied. The diagnosis was changed after a psychiatrist said that there was no evidence that the mother had fabricated anything about her son.’

Read more…

BRITAIN appears to be evolving into the first modern soft totalitarian state. As a sometime teacher of political science and international law, I do not use the term totalitarian loosely.

There are no concentration camps or gulags but there are thought police with unprecedented powers to dictate ways of thinking and sniff out heresy, and there can be harsh punishments for dissent.

Nikolai Bukharin claimed one of the Bolshevik Revolution’s principal tasks was “to alter people’s actual psychology”. Britain is not Bolshevik, but a campaign to alter people’s psychology and create a new Homo britannicus is under way without even a fig leaf of disguise.

The Government is pushing ahead with legislation that will criminalise politically incorrect jokes, with a maximum punishment of up to seven years’ prison. The House of Lords tried to insert a free-speech amendment, but Justice Secretary Jack Straw knocked it out. It was Straw who previously called for a redefinition of Englishness and suggested the “global baggage of empire” was linked to soccer violence by “racist and xenophobic white males”. He claimed the English “propensity for violence” was used to subjugate Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and that the English as a race were “potentially very aggressive”.

In the past 10 years I have collected reports of many instances of draconian punishments, including the arrest and criminal prosecution of children, for thought-crimes and offences against political correctness.

Countryside Restoration Trust chairman and columnist Robin Page said at a rally against the Government’s anti-hunting laws in Gloucestershire in 2002: “If you are a black vegetarian Muslim asylum-seeking one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you.” Page was arrested, and after four months he received a letter saying no charges would be pressed, but that: “If further evidence comes to our attention whereby your involvement is implicated, we will seek to initiate proceedings.” It took him five years to clear his name.

Page was at least an adult. In September 2006, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, Codie Stott, asked a teacher if she could sit with another group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu. The teacher’s first response, according to Stott, was to scream at her: “It’s racist, you’re going to get done by the police!” Upset and terrified, the schoolgirl went outside to calm down. The teacher called the police and a few days later, presumably after officialdom had thought the matter over, she was arrested and taken to a police station, where she was fingerprinted and photographed. According to her mother, she was placed in a bare cell for 3 1/2 hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence and then released without charge. The school was said to be investigating what further action to take, not against the teacher, but against Stott. Headmaster Anthony Edkins reportedly said: “An allegation of a serious nature was made concerning a racially motivated remark. We aim to ensure a caring and tolerant attitude towards pupils of all ethnic backgrounds and will not stand for racism in any form.”

A 10-year-old child was arrested and brought before a judge, for having allegedly called an 11-year-old boya “Paki” and “bin Laden” during a playground argument at a primary school (the other boy had called him a skunk and a Teletubby). When it reached the court the case had cost taxpayers pound stg. 25,000. The accused was so distressed that he had stopped attending school. The judge, Jonathan Finestein, said: “Have we really got to the stage where we are prosecuting 10-year-old boys because of political correctness? There are major crimes out there and the police don’t bother to prosecute. This is nonsense.”

Finestein was fiercely attacked by teaching union leaders, as in those witch-hunt trials where any who spoke in defence of an accused or pointed to defects in the prosecution were immediately targeted as witches and candidates for burning.

Hate-crime police investigated Basil Brush, a puppet fox on children’s television, who had made a joke about Gypsies. The BBC confessed that Brush had behaved inappropriately and assured police that the episode would be banned.

A bishop was warned by the police for not having done enough to “celebrate diversity”, the enforcing of which is now apparently a police function. A Christian home for retired clergy and religious workers lost a grant because it would not reveal to official snoopers how many of the residents were homosexual. That they had never been asked was taken as evidence of homophobia.

Muslim parents who objected to young children being given books advocating same-sex marriage and adoption at one school last year had their wishes respected and the offending material withdrawn. This year, Muslim and Christian parents at another school objecting to the same material have not only had their objections ignored but have been threatened with prosecution if they withdraw their children.

There have been innumerable cases in recent months of people in schools, hospitals and other institutions losing their jobs because of various religious scruples, often, as in the East Germany of yore, not shouted fanatically from the rooftops but betrayed in private conversations and reported to authorities. The crime of one nurse was to offer to pray for a patient, who did not complain but merely mentioned the matter to another nurse. A primary school receptionist, Jennie Cain, whose five-year-old daughter was told off for talking about Jesus in class, faces the sack for seeking support from her church. A private email from her to other members of the church asking for prayers fell into the hands of school authorities.

Permissiveness as well as draconianism can be deployed to destroy socially accepted norms and values. The Royal Navy, for instance, has installed a satanist chapel in a warship to accommodate the proclivities of a satanist crew member. “What would Nelson have said?” is a British newspaper cliche about navy scandals, but in this case seems a legitimate question. Satanist paraphernalia is also supplied to prison inmates who need it.

This campaign seems to come from unelected or quasi-governmental bodies controlling various institutions, which are more or less unanswerable to electors, more than it does directly from the Government, although the Government helps drive it and condones it in a fudged and deniable manner.

Any one of these incidents might be dismissed as an aberration, but taken together - and I have only mentioned a tiny sample; more are reported almost every day - they add up to a pretty clear picture.

The Australian

‘Parents fighting in the family courts for contact with their children are being denied access to their personal files by a corrupt system, a leading parental rights campaigner has said. Alison Stevens, head of Parents Against Injustice, has called for Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, to force social services and individual courts to comply with the Data Protection Act.

She said: “Local authorities have to send the requested files within 40 days… but they are often not following public law guidelines. It’s corruption within the system. They are playing God, and there must be some reason why – perhaps to hide things they have got wrong in the cases”.’

Read more…

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes has given perhaps his most dire warning yet, saying that the Obama administration is preparing to stage terror attacks, declare martial law and cancel the 2012 elections, which is why they are demonizing their political enemies as criminals and terrorists.

Keyes is best known for his performance during the 2000 Republican presidential debates, when he was accredited by many media outlets as being the clear winner during a series of debates with George W. Bush and John McCain.

“It’s obvious that they will stop at nothing,” Keyes told attendees of a reception in Fort Wayne, adding, “We may wake up one day and there’s a series of terrorist attacks, the economy is paralysed….martial law will be declared everywhere in the United States and it won’t end until the crisis ends.”

Read more…

Two out of three Britons back the idea of compulsory community service for young people, a poll has found.

A civic programme would find useful work for millions who would otherwise face mass unemployment in a deepening recession, many believe.

The survey also uncovered widespread fears that the energies and talents of jobless teenagers and twenty-somethings need to be harnessed to avoid the danger of rioting and unrest.

senior police chief has already admitted that officers are preparing for a ’summer of rage’ as victims of the credit crunch take to the streets to demonstrate against banks.

Superintendent David Hartshorn, who heads Scotland Yard’s public order unit, said bonus-paying banks had become ‘viable targets’. He added: ‘Suddenly there is the opportunity for people to mass protest.’

The poll was conducted by Prospect magazine to gauge support for a plan backed by influential Labour MP Frank Field for a ‘national citizenship programme’.

Under the scheme, everyone would have to spend a year between the ages of 16 and 25 in low-paid community work, either in schools, children’s centres and residential homes or on housing or parks projects.

The poll, carried out by YouGov among 2,270 people, found 64 per cent supported the compulsory citizenship work idea.

Among those aged between 18 and 30, the scheme still had the support of 52 per cent.

More than a third feared riots similar to those experienced by Greece in December.

And nearly three quarters agreed with the statement that there will be mass unemployment ‘for many years to come’.

Daily Mail

‘A leaked internal report has revealed systematic abuses by Euro MPs of parliamentary allowances that enable them to pocket more than one million pounds in profits from a single five-year term, writes Jonathan Oliver. The auditor’s confidential report, suppressed by the Brussels parliament, discloses the extraordinary frauds used by MEPs to siphon off staff allowances funded by taxpayers.’

Read more…

The Middle East peace envoy will receive the Dan David Prize for “his exceptional leadership and steadfast determination in helping to engineer agreements and forge lasting solutions to areas in conflict”.

The award is presented by the Dan David Foundation, which is based at Tel Aviv University. Previous recipients include former US presidential candidate and environmental campaigner Al Gore and playwright Tom Stoppard.

A spokesman for Mr Blair said the money will be donated to the former Labour leader’s charity for religious understanding.

Mr Blair is an envoy of the international Quartet on the Middle East peace process, which comprises the US, European Union, United Nations and Russia.

His entry as a Dan David laureate on the prize’s website hails him as “one of the most outstanding statesmen of our era”.

Read more…

At the very least, you might expect Labour MPs to pay attention while they strip this country of its freedoms. But apparently we have gone beyond that stage. Of the eight or nine Labour members on the select committee discussing the Coroners and Justice Bill, three were using the opportunity to go through their correspondence.

The air was heavy with obscure points, but the room was comfortable and the light good, allowing Alun Michael, Russell Brown and Brian Iddon to put in an hour or two on the piles of letters and documents in front of them.

Only when the matter of secret inquests was raised and Conservative MP Henry Bellingham observed by way of a prologue that an issue of freedom was at stake did Michael and Brown look up. Bellingham said he had spent time out of parliament between the 1997 and 2001 elections and that he was shocked when he returned to see what Labour was doing to constitutional rights and civil liberties.

Read more…

‘It was supposed to be one of John Prescott’s flagship new towns designed to ease Britain’s housing crisis, creating homes for 10,000 people, with its own schools, shopping centre, library and sports centre.

But because of planning delays and the economic crisis, only a handful of houses have been built and just three people have moved in.

One thing it does have, though, is a headteacher who is being paid about £60,000  a year to run a school with no buildings and no pupils.’

Read more…

A United Nations human rights treaty that could prohibit children from being spanked or homeschooled, ban youngsters from facing the death penalty and forbid parents from deciding their families’ religion is on America’s doorstep, a legal expert warns.

Michael Farris of Purcellville, Va., is president of ParentalRights.org, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association and chancellor of Patrick Henry College. He told WND that under the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, or CRC, every decision a parent makes can be reviewed by the government to determine whether it is in the child’s best interest.

“It’s definitely on our doorstep,” he said. “The left wants to make the Obama-Clinton era permanent. Treaties are a way to make it as permanent as stuff gets. It is very difficult to extract yourself from a treaty once you begin it. If they can put all of their left-wing socialist policies into treaty form, we’re stuck with it even if they lose the next election.”

The 1990s-era document was ratified quickly by 193 nations worldwide, but not the United States or Somalia. In Somalia, there was then no recognized government to do the formal recognition, and in the United States there’s been opposition to its power. Countries that ratify the treaty are bound to it by international law.

Although signed by Madeleine Albright, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., on Feb. 16, 1995, the U.S. Senate never ratified the treaty, largely because of conservatives’ efforts to point out it would create that list of rights which primarily would be enforced against parents.

The international treaty creates specific civil, economic, social, cultural and even economic rights for every child and states that “the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” While the treaty states that parents or legal guardians “have primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child,” Farris said government will ultimately determine whether parents’ decisions are in their children’s best interest. The treaty is monitored by the CRC, which conceivably has enforcement powers.

According to the Parental Rights website, the substance of the CRC dictates the following:

• Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.

• A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.

• Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.

• The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.

• A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.

• According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.

• Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.

• Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.

• Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.

• Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.

Read more…

Millions of families could be barred from taking holidays abroad under a proposal to ration flights.

Gordon Brown’s ‘environment tsar’ is calling for limits on how many plane journeys travellers can take each year.

Lord Turner suggested that Britons might have to cut back on their overseas breaks.

He said the Government should urgently consider imposing individual restrictions to help reduce pollution caused by planes.

Lord Turner, chairman of Parliament’s climate change committee, said: ‘We will have to constrain demand in an absolute sense, with people not allowed to make as many journeys as they could in an unconstrained manner.’

His remarks will anger business and tourism groups, as well as infuriating those who make regular trips abroad

Read more…

“When the time comes finally to destroy the papal court…we shall come forward in the guise of its defenders…By this diversion we shall penetrate to its very bowels and be sure we shall never come out again until we have gnawed through the entire strength of this place.” (Protocols of the Elders of Zion-17)

At the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington Thursday, Tony Blair confessed he didn’t talk about God while in office so he wouldn’t be considered a “nutter.”

But now the convert to Roman Catholicism can declare that religious faith is at the heart of global affairs. In a “sermon” Thursday, he mentioned God 31 times and proclaimed: “In surrendering to God we become instruments of his love.”

President Obama endorsed the charade: “My good friend Tony Blair - who did it first and perhaps did it better.”

Obviously Blair’s role is to usurp Christian leadership and expose religious belief to ridicule. Along with another phony, George W. Bush, Blair caused the death and maiming of an estimated one million Iraqi civilians. They’re sociopaths, not Christians.

The public is not deceived. One reader commented:  “Since he has so much blood on his hands, he thinks by turning to religion all will be forgiven. Sad fool.”

But the ruse does work. Another reader commented: “When I hear that this man is a Christian, it makes me proud to be an atheist.”

Blair is a UN Middle East Peace Envoy. This is what the “instrument of God’s love” had to say about Israel’s massacre of women and children in Gaza: “What has happened has been very shocking and very sad - the scenes of carnage - but that is war, I’m afraid, and war is horrible.”

(And, Satan must have his due.)

During his tenure in office, Blair, a closet Catholic, legalized gay marriage and adoption and, with false flag terrorism, turned the UK into a police state disdained by the whole world.

Read more… 

‘Growing up in an Antipodean society proud of its rich variety of expletives, I never heard the word bollocks. It was only on arrival in England that I understood its majesterial power.

All classes used it. Judges grunted it; an editor of the Daily Mirror used it as noun, adjective and verb. Certainly, the resonance of a double vowel saw off its closest American contender. It had authority.

A high official with the Gilbertian title of Lord West of Spithead used it to great effect on 27 January. The former admiral, who is security adviser to Gordon Brown, was referring to Tony Blair’s famous assertion that invading countries and killing innocent people did not increase the threat of terrorism at home.

“That was clearly bollocks,” said his lordship, who warned of the perceived “linkage between the US, Israel and the UK” in the horrors inflicted on Gaza and the effect on the recruitment of terrorists in Britain. In other words, he was stating the obvious: that state terrorism begets individual or group terrorism at source.

Just as Blair was the prime mover of the London bombings of 7 July 2005, so Brown, having pursued the same cynical crusades in Muslim countries and having armed and disported himself before the criminal regime in Tel Aviv, will share responsibility for related atrocities at home.

There is a lot of bollocks about at the moment.’

Read more…

A Union Flag at a police station was replaced by a gay rights flag in a move that has triggered a fresh row over political correctness.

The rainbow flag was hoisted outside Limehouse police station in East London to mark Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender history month in February.

Metropolitan Police rules state that only the Union Flag and its own flag can fly from force buildings.

Sir Paul Stephenson, the new Met commissioner, angrily ordered the flag to be taken down after being told of the controversy it had caused.

One officer said: ‘I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw it.

‘The police are playing politics again. I can understand the need to show acceptance to people of all sexualities  -  but the Union Jack should never be taken down.’

A Scotland Yard spokesman said the decision to display the rainbow flag for the first day of LGBT history month had been taken by the borough commander, Chief Superintendent Paul Rickett.

But he added: ‘The Met policy is that only two flags should be flown: the Union Flag or the Met flag. The commissioner reaffirmed that he expects all staff to adhere to this policy.

Read more…

To: The Rt Hon. Peter Mandelson esq;

When Gordon Brown brought Peter Mandelson home from Brussels three months ago and appointed him Business Secretary, the move was hailed as a masterstroke.

But as the recession deepens, the Prime Minister must surely be starting to regret the presence of this ocean-going, chateau-bottled, 24-carat Euro-fanatic at the helm of British industrial policy.

Yesterday this unelected peer surpassed even himself by coming forward with the strong hint that British workers protesting outside the Total oil refinery on Humberside ought to look for jobs abroad.

‘UK companies can operate in Europe’, intoned His Lordship, ‘and European companies can operate here.’

Caroline Flint, Minister for Europe, was even less subtle. ‘It is important to remember’, she declared, ‘that open European Labour markets also allow British firms and workers to take advantage of contracts and opportunities elsewhere in the EU.’

At least Miss Flint and Lord Mandelson deserve to be commended for their brutal honesty. They genuinely believe in the free market across Europe. They are therefore frank enough to boast that there is no such a thing as a British job - only European jobs. But Mandelson, who as a member of the Lords has no constituents to keep his feet on the ground, is terribly out of touch.

He is one of the most gilded members of the European elite. For him moving across European borders is therefore a matter of first- class travel, Mediterranean yachts, five- star hotels, huge salaries and lavish expense accounts.

It’s a different story altogether if an unemployed oil worker from Humberside goes to Europe in search of a job - as Mandelson suggests he should. He finds himself living in squalid accommodation in a country he doesn’t know, where people speak a language he doesn’t understand.

Read more…