Sunday, 22 March 2009

Liverppol BNP organiser talks to BBC news Northwest over police BNP sacking

Liverpool BNP organiser Steve Greenhalgh today spoke on BBC News Northwest as regards the disgraceful political sacking of the very fine police officer Steve Bettley.

Steve Greenhalgh as usual was honest open and straight to the point as regards his response and opinion to the shameful sacking of police officer Bettley who was and is a pillar of the community in his area. A video of the organiser Steve and his response will be downloaded and be able to be viewed here when the video becomes available off the BBC news website.

Lets get one thing straight Steve Bettley served Merseyside police force with integrity, distinction and without prejudice. Bernard Hogan Howe, chief Muppet and puppet of Merseyside Police is an absolute disgrace along with the Black police federation who would have been banging their drums (I cannot say Bongo drums here because of political correction)wanting Bettleys blood and sacking, a mention of the Independent Advisory Group who I hardly think are independent played their part in the sacking.

Bernard Hogan Howe though has lost the plot and now resembles something out of the Muppet show ( Muppet's have more intelligence than Hogan Howe) Please watch Hogan Howe in performance with his controller Rowlf (Gordon Brown) below. Where one fails miserably to lead (Gordon Brown)
the other idiot (Hogan Howe) follows.

BNP disclaimer...No responsibility will be taken by the BNP in comparing Muppet's to the vegetables that are Gordon Brown and Bernard Hogan Howe in writing this post and the Black police federation, the racist organisation who also played a part in this political lynching.


  1. Israel Expels African Asylum Invaders from Tel Aviv

    Some 3,000 African invaders posing as “asylum seekers” who have illegally entered Israel have been forced to leave Tel Aviv in terms of a ruling by the Israeli Ministry of the Interior.

    The ruling permits asylum seekers to reside and work only in towns and cities north of Hadera and south of Gedera, about an hour’s drive from Tel Aviv. The ruling was initially imposed only on recent invaders but in recent months asylum seekers living in Israel for longer periods have experienced the same constraints on their work permits, forcing them to leave their homes.

    Unemployment is rife in Israel’s south and north while in Tel Aviv asylum seekers can find menial jobs as street-sweepers or restaurant workers. Tel Aviv also has the one school in Israel that caters to the special needs of asylum seekers’ children - the Bialik Elementary and High School in southern Tel Aviv.

    On 17 February, the asylum seekers protested in Tel Aviv against this regulation. Holding banners and chanting slogans, they asked the government to allow them to remain in Israel’s main city.

    Israel has of late been inundated with bogus African asylum seekers crossing into its territory from sub-Saharan Africa. All have crossed multiple safe countries on their way to Israel, and therefore have not qualified for asylum in Israel under any international law.

    According to the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), Israeli police in Tel Aviv arrested over 240 asylum seekers - mostly from Eritrea, Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire - in one day in February. This mass arrest took place one day after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ordered security forces to step up measures to “prevent the infiltration of foreigners and deport those staying illegally.”

    Nearly all of those arrested had some sort of documentation from the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) showing their cases were under review.

    Those arrested were told by police they could wait for their interviews with the UN while in jail, according to lawyers from Israeli non-governmental groups trying to aid the asylum seekers.

    During the weekly cabinet meeting on 24 February, President Olmert ordered the Israel Prisons Service to detain all infiltrators not classified as refugees, and instructed the Defence Ministry to tighten security at the Israeli-Egypt border.

    However, Defence Minister Ehud Barak rejected President Olmert’s suggestion that the military relax its “open fire” policy (the Israeli military’s rules of engagement) along the border, a move that would have made it easier to fire live ammunition at people trying to sneak into the country. Instead, he said Israel should implement the “hot return” policy, whereby asylum seekers and others would be immediately sent back to Egypt upon capture.

    Meanwhile, on the Egyptian side of the border there appear to be less stringent regulations on the use of live ammunition by the authorities, as media reports indicated that in many instances migrants crossing the border were shot at by police, in some cases resulting in death.

    The UNHCR has estimated that 7,400 people, mostly Africans, have crossed into Israel in the past three years, with most coming in the past ten months. Recent weeks have seen a surge in the number of people crossing the border.

  2. Jade Goody: death as entertainmen

    Jade Goody has died. Move along now, there's nothing more to see. Unless you count her grief-stricken relatives and "grieving" crowds, but you always get them with the death of a public figure. The fascinating spectacle of a young woman dying on camera is over.

    Jade took longer dying than some people expected

    And it was fascinating, judging by the "most read" lists on newspaper websites. Millions of people who would be ashamed to be caught rubbernecking at the scene of a car crash found themselves clicking on links and turning on the news "to see how Jade is doing" (ie, to see how bad her cancer had got). And they didn't feel guilty, because the victim of this particular car crash was leaning out of the wreckage and beckoning them in.

    One could almost hear that irritating Geordie voiceover from Big Brother: "Today, Jade has to make it through her wedding without collapsing..." It's an obvious point, but the sight of Ms Goody receiving news of her diagnosis on camera, the progressive thinning of her hair, the unveiling of her new "bald look", her dramatic weight loss ("it suits her"), the wedding, the terrified expression on her face as she was lifted into the ambulance one last time - all these developments occurred in the right order, parcelled up and presented to us by Max Clifford. They were "episodes" in more than one sense of the word.

    Jade was Britain's first reality TV star, and the first to die. I've never felt remotely troubled by her decision to exploit her plight in order to raise money for her little sons, even though, like many people, I suspected that it had as much to do with her constitutional need to show off as financial anxiety. But then, I was one of the rubberneckers. I probably should feel guilty, but I don't, because I've always been a defender of Jade's - the manufactured anger over the Shilpa Shetty incident infuriated me - and because she behaved so courageously during her illness. It wasn't a middle-class sort of courage, in which you smile wanly and soak up sympathy; instead, Jade used her natural exhibitionism and self-mocking humour to ward off self-pity. She needed her audience. Also, to her credit, she never bought into the fashionable notion that "beating" cancer is a question of willpower. If it was, she would have been restored to health by now.

    Still, The Death of Jade Goody (as I think of it) raises troubling questions. Reality television is the product, not the cause, of a popular urge to turn our lives into drama, to measure ourselves against celebrities. The factory workers of the mid 20th century were encouraged to cast themselves as members of a proletariat who would be swept to power and prosperity by the inexorable forces of history. Or they might even have gone to church. Today's lads and ladettes dress like celebs and turn their weddings into film sets; they can't even draw up a shopping list without invoking their personal "fulfillment".

    Jade was fascinating because she embodied these urges: she went from being a dental nurse to a celebrity without the hassle of professional achievement. She stepped straight into a movie, as it were, even if - thanks to her own stupidity - her part was briefly rewritten to turn her into a racist. But then she really startled us, by getting cancer.

    The public's confused reactions to Jade's illness tell us so much about the disorientation of the 21st century. Her decision to hold on to the conventions of reality television while she was dying made us all feel uncomfortable. The joke about reality TV was it made everything so unreal; yet this cancer was real, and spreading fast. Viewers had difficulty getting their heads round that.

    The shocking thing, to my mind, was that so many people carried on believing that Ms Goody's diagnosis was a stunt until she was virtually on a stretcher. That illustrates not only their massive stupidity but also their feeble grip on the distinction between fact and fantasy. If Jade's cervical cancer was invented by her PR machine, then the Royal Marsden would have had to be in on the act. Cue conspiracy theorist: "Well, I'm not saying that she hasn't got it, but don't you think it's strange that...?" This is the sort of person who, after enough vodka-Red Bulls, could be persuaded that Jade and Prince Philip blew up the Twin Towers together. There are plenty of them out there.

    But even worse than this were the people - mostly from Jade's own generation - who, having decided that she was a "disgusting pig", felt only Schadenfreude at her plight. I remember, back in September, telling a guy in his late 20s that her cancer had been found in more than one place. Perhaps I shouldn't have been discussing it in such a casual fashion in the first place, but I wasn't prepared for his reaction: "Oh, great, it's metastasised," he sniggered.

    That's my abiding memory of The Death of Jade Goody: the entertainment it provided for young people who couldn't wait for her to expire. They have been growing impatient in the last week: Jade, like King Charles II, took "an unconscionable time a-dying" (so long, in fact, that OK magazine deliberately and disgustingly jumped the gun). Their inhuman response can be blamed partly on media-driven expectations that this young celebrity would die in the right episode of her personal soap opera.

    It goes deeper than that, however. Jade belonged to the first generation of Britons who have been raised without religion and the meaning it ascribes to death. A streak of callousness goes with being young, and always has done; but the peculiar brutality shown by twentysomethings towards the cancer-stricken Jade, for no better reason than that they didn't like her, is a miserable and worrying sign of the times

  3. UK population must fall to 30m, says PorrittJonathan Leake and Brendan Montague
    JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.

    Porritt’s call will come at this week’s annual conference of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), of which he is patron.

    The trust will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably.

    Porritt said: “Population growth, plus economic growth, is putting the world under terrible pressure.
    Shockwaves are the stock in trade of this father of the apocalypse
    “Each person in Britain has far more impact on the environment than those in developing countries so cutting our population is one way to reduce that impact.”

    Population growth is one of the most politically sensitive environmental problems. The issues it raises, including religion, culture and immigration policy, have proved too toxic for most green groups.

    However, Porritt is winning scientific backing. Professor Chris Rapley, director of the Science Museum, will use the OPT conference, to be held at the Royal Statistical Society, to warn that population growth could help derail attempts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

    Rapley, who formerly ran the British Antarctic Survey, said humanity was emitting the equivalent of 50 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year.

    “We have to cut this by 80%, and population growth is going to make that much harder,” he said.

    Such views on population have split the green movement. George Monbiot, a prominent writer on green issues, has criticised population campaigners, arguing that “relentless” economic growth is a greater threat.

    Many experts believe that, since Europeans and Americans have such a lopsided impact on the environment, the world would benefit more from reducing their populations than by making cuts in developing countries.

    This is part of the thinking behind the OPT’s call for Britain to cut population to 30m — roughly what it was in late Victorian times.

    Britain’s population is expected to grow from 61m now to 71m by 2031. Some politicians support a reduction.

    Phil Woolas, the immigration minister, said: “You can’t have sustainability with an increase in population.”

    The Tory leader, David Cameron, has also suggested Britain needs a “coherent strategy” on population growth.

    Despite these comments, however, government and Conservative spokesmen this weekend both distanced themselves from any population policy. ”

  4. Stasi HQ UK... where details of all your journeys are secretly logged and kept for a decadeBy

    The anonymous office building on a business park near Heathrow Airport is where the Government has begun monitoring millions of British holidaymakers using its controversial new 'terrorist detector' database.
    The top-secret computer system - tied into the airlines' ticketing network - makes judgments about travel habits and passengers' friends and family to decide if they are a security risk.
    Like something from a science-fiction film, the Home Office has designed it to spot a 'criminal' or terrorist before they have done anything wrong.


    Death squad leader ‘was top CIA agent’
    SERBIA: Gabriel Ronay
    THE LATE President Milosevic's secret police chief and organiser of Serb death squads during the genocidal ethnic cleansing of disintegrating Yugoslavia was the United States' top CIA agent in Belgrade, according to the independent Belgrade Radio B92.

    The claim that from 1992 until the end of the decade, Jovica Stanisic, head of Serbia's murderous DB Secret Police, was regularly informing his CIA handlers of the thinking in Milosevic's inner circle has shocked the region.

    Stanisic is said to have loyally served his two masters for eight years. He is facing war crimes charges at the International Criminal Court at The Hague.

    In the terrifying years of Yugoslavia's internecine wars, he acted as the willing "muscle" behind Milosevic's genocidal campaigns in Croatia, Kosovo and Bosnia, including Sebrenica.

    According to the charges he faces, Stanisic was "part of a joint criminal enterprise that included former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic and other Serbian politicians".

    Dermot Groome, The Hague's chief prosecutor, has specifically accused him of sending in the Serb Scorpion and Red Beret death squads into the states seeking independence from Belgrade. Stanisic has pleaded not guilty.

    Like in a Cold War spy thriller, Serbia's secret police chief met his CIA handlers in safe houses, parks and boats on the river Sava to betray his master's action plans. He provided, it is claimed, information on the whereabouts of Nato hostages, aided CIA operatives in their search for Muslim mass graves and helped the US set up secret bases in Bosnia to monitor the implementation of the 1995 Dayton peace accord.

    This has raised awkward questions for Washington. With Stanisic providing chapter and verse of the genocidal slaughter of Croats, Bosnians and Albanians from the early 1990s, should President Clinton have cut a deal with Milosevic at Dayton, Ohio, ending the Bosnian war on such equitable terms for the Serbs? Or, using Stanisic's evidence, should the Americans not have unmasked Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic, the then head of Republika Srpska, as genocidal war criminals and demanded their surrender?

    From his prison cell at The Hague, Stanisic countered the charges facing him with an aide memoir portraying himself as "a person who had sought to moderate Milosevic and had done a great deal to moderate the crisis".

    In an unusual move, the CIA has submitted classified documents to the court that confirm Stanisic's "undercover operative role in helping to bring peace to the region and aiding the agency's work. He helped defuse some of the most explosive actions of the Bosnian war."

    In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, William Lofgren, his original CIA recruiter and handler, now retired, said: "Stanisic provided valuable information from Milosevic's inner circle. But he never took money from the CIA, worked with the agency on operations or took steps that he would have considered a blatant betrayal of his boss."

    Thus the judges at The Hague are having to judge a man who allegedly sent the Scorpion death squads to Srebrenica to "deal" with men and boys fleeing the UN-protected Muslim enclave, while working with the CIA trying to end Milosevic's ethnic wars.

    The way the CIA apparently viewed their Belgrade "asset" is revealed in an interview with Balkan Insight, a little known south-east European publication.

    The emerging picture is a quaint reflection from a hall of mirrors. Greg Miller of the Los Angeles Times, writing about the links between the CIA and the Serb secret police chief, is quoted as saying: "As I said in the LAT story, the CIA do not see Stanisic as a choirboy. When you talk to people who work in espionage, this is often the case.

    "Because of the nature of that job, of that assignment, they are working with people who do not have unblemished records, it would be difficult for them to be effective if they only worked with people who had unblemished records.

    "People in Belgrade who have been following the career of Jovica Stanisic would say that this was a guy who was an expert in his field; he was a highly-trained and highly-effective spy. His motivation may have been that he wanted to know what the United States was up to.

    "He did not believe that Milosevic was taking the country in the right direction - so he wanted to influence events. He saw himself as an important guy who could pull strings behind the scenes to make things happen in Belgrade."

    Stanisic apparently did so on his own terms, while trying to remain a loyal Serb. He did not succeed.

    Now he is having to account for his actions as Milosevic's loyal lieutenant at The Hague.


    Mother Given Parking Ticket 'For Reviving Her Severely Disabled Son'

    'Penny Batkin, 40, says that Richmond Council has refused to back down over the fine despite receiving a letter of explanation from her, supported by her GP. She says she was taking her son, Freddie, 4, to the Shooting Star children's hospice in Hampton when he began gasping for breath and turning blue.

    Mrs Batkin, who has three children, was unaware that she had been captured by traffic wardens who were patrolling the area in a CCTV camera car.'


    President Andrew Jackson called the banking cartel a "hydra-headed monster eating the flesh of the common man." New York Mayor John Hylan, writing in the 1920s, called it a "giant octopus" that "seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection." The debt spider has devoured farms, homes and whole countries that have become trapped in its web. In a February 2005 article called "The Death of Banking," financial commentator Hans Schicht wrote:

    The fact that the Banker is allowed to extend credit several times his own capital base and that the Banking Cartels, the Central Banks, are licensed to issue fresh paper money in exchange for treasury paper, [has] provided them with free lunch for eternity. . . . Through a network of anonymous financial spider webbing only a handful of global King Bankers own and control it all. . . . Everybody, people, enterprise, State and foreign countries, all have become slaves chained to the Banker's credit ropes.1
    Schicht writes that he had an opportunity in his career to observe the wizards of finance as an insider at close range. The game has gotten so centralized and concentrated, he says, that the greater part of U.S. banking and enterprise is now under the control of a small inner circle of men. He calls the game "spider webbing." Its rules include:

    Making any concentration of wealth invisible.
    Exercising control through "leverage" – mergers, takeovers, chain share holdings where one company holds shares of other companies, conditions annexed to loans, and so forth.
    Exercising tight personal management and control, with a minimum of insiders and front-men who themselves have only partial knowledge of the game.
    The late Dr. Carroll Quigley was a writer and professor of history at Georgetown University, where he was President Bill Clinton's mentor. Dr. Quigley wrote from personal knowledge of an elite clique of global financiers bent on controlling the world. Their aim, he said, was "nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole." This system was "to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements."2 He called this clique simply the "international bankers." Their essence was not race, religion or nationality but was just a passion for control over other humans. The key to their success was that they would control and manipulate the money system of a nation while letting it appear to be controlled by the government.

    The international bankers have succeeded in doing more than just controlling the money supply. Today they actually create the money supply, while making it appear to be created by the government. This devious scheme was revealed by Sir Josiah Stamp, director of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. Speaking at the University of Texas in 1927, he dropped this bombshell:

    The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.3
    Professor Henry C. K. Liu is an economist who graduated from Harvard and chaired a graduate department at UCLA before becoming an investment adviser for developing countries. He calls the current monetary scheme a "cruel hoax." When we wake up to that fact, he says, our entire economic world view will need to be reordered, "just as physics was subject to reordering when man's world view changed with the realization that the earth is not stationary nor is it the center of the universe."4 The hoax is that there is virtually no "real" money in the system, only debts. Except for coins, which are issued by the government and make up only about one one-thousandth of the money supply, the entire U.S. money supply now consists of debt to private banks, for money they created with accounting entries on their books. It is all done by sleight of hand; and like a magician's trick, we have to see it many times before we realize what is going on. But when we do, it changes everything. All of history has to be rewritten.

    The following chapters track the web of deceit that has engulfed us in debt, and present a simple solution that could make the country solvent once again. It is not a new solution but dates back to the Constitution: the power to create money needs to be returned to the government and the people it represents. The federal debt could be paid, income taxes could be eliminated, and social programs could be expanded; and this could all be done without imposing austerity measures on the people or sparking runaway inflation. Utopian as that may sound, it represents the thinking of some of America's brightest and best, historical and contemporary, including Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Among other arresting facts explored in this book are that:

    The "Federal" Reserve is not actually federal. It is a private corporation owned by a consortium of very large multinational banks. (Chapter 13)
    Except for coins, the government does not create money. Dollar bills (Federal Reserve Notes) are created by the private Federal Reserve, which lends them to the government. (Chapter 2)
    Tangible currency (coins and dollar bills) together make up less than 3 percent of the U.S. money supply. The other 97 percent exists only as data entries on computer screens, and all of this money was created by banks in the form of loans. (Chapters 2 and 17)
    The money that banks lend is not recycled from pre-existing deposits. It is new money, which did not exist until it was lent. (Chapters 17 and 18)
    Thirty percent of the money created by banks with accounting entries is invested for their own accounts. (Chapter 18)
    The American banking system, which at one time extended productive loans to agriculture and industry, has today become a giant betting machine. An estimated $370 trillion are now riding on complex high-risk bets known as derivatives – 28 times the $13 trillion annual output of the entire U.S. economy. These bets are funded by big U.S. banks and are made largely with borrowed money created on a computer screen. Derivatives can be and have been used to manipulate markets, loot businesses, and destroy competitor economies. (Chapters 20 and 32)
    The U.S. federal debt has not been paid off since the days of Andrew Jackson. Only the interest gets paid, while the principal portion continues to grow. (Chapter 2)
    The federal income tax was instituted specifically to coerce taxpayers to pay the interest due to the banks on the federal debt. If the money supply had been created by the government rather than borrowed from banks that created it, the income tax would have been unnecessary. (Chapters 13 and 43)
    The interest alone on the federal debt will soon be more than the taxpayers can afford to pay. When we can't pay, the Federal Reserve's debt-based dollar system must collapse. (Chapter 29)
    Contrary to popular belief, creeping inflation is not caused by the government irresponsibly printing dollars. It is caused by banks expanding the money supply with loans. (Chapter 10)
    Most of the runaway inflation seen in "banana republics" has been caused, not by national governments over-printing money, but by global institutional speculators attacking local currencies and devaluing them on international markets. (Chapter 25)
    The same sort of speculative devaluation could happen to the U.S. dollar if international investors were to abandon it as a global "reserve" currency, something they are now threatening to do in retaliation for what they perceive to be American economic imperialism. (Chapters 29 and 37)
    There is a way out of this morass. The early American colonists found it, and so did Abraham Lincoln and some other national leaders: the government can take back the money-issuing power from the banks. (Chapters 8 and 24)
    The bankers' Federal Reserve Notes and the government's coins represent two separate money systems that have been competing for dominance throughout recorded history. At one time, the right to issue money was the sovereign right of the king; but that right got usurped by private moneylenders. Today the sovereigns are the people, and the coins that make up less than one one-thousandth of the money supply are all that are left of our sovereign money. Many nations have successfully issued their own money, at least for a time; but the bankers' debt-money has generally infiltrated the system and taken over in the end. These concepts are so foreign to what we have been taught that it can be hard to wrap our minds around them, but the facts have been substantiated by many reliable authorities. To cite a few –

    Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, wrote in 1934:

    We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. 5
    Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged:

    Banks create money. That is what they are for. . . . The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all. . . . Each and every time a Bank makes a loan . . . new Bank credit is created -- brand new money.6
    Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of U.S. News and World Report:

    [W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.
    Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, wrote during the Asian currency crisis of 1998:

    [P]rivately held money reserves in the hands of "institutional speculators" far exceed the limited capabilities of the World's central banks. The latter acting individually or collectively are no longer able to fight the tide of speculative activity. Monetary policy is in the hands of private creditors who have the ability to freeze State budgets, paralyse the payments process, thwart the regular disbursement of wages to millions of workers (as in the former Soviet Union) and precipitate the collapse of production and social programmes.7
    Today, Federal Reserve Notes and U.S. dollar loans dominate the economy of the world; but this international currency is not money issued by the American people or their government. It is money created and lent by a private cartel of international bankers, and this cartel has the United States itself hopelessly entangled in a web of debt. By 2006, combined personal, corporate and federal debt in the United States had reached a staggering 44 trillion dollars – four times the collective national income, or $147,312 for every man, woman and child in the country.8 The United States is legally bankrupt, defined in the dictionary as being unable to pay one's debts, being insolvent, or having liabilities in excess of a reasonable market value of assets held. By October 2006, the debt of the U.S. government had hit a breath-taking $8.5 trillion. Local, state and national governments are all so heavily in debt that they have been forced to sell off public assets to satisfy creditors. Crowded schools, crowded roads, and cutbacks in public transportation are eroding the quality of American life. A 2005 report by the American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation's infrastructure an overall grade of D, including its roads, bridges, drinking water systems and other public works. "Americans are spending more time stuck in traffic and less time at home with their families," said the group's president. "We need to establish a comprehensive, long-term infrastructure plan."9 We need to but we can't, because government at every level is broke.

    Money in the Land of Oz

    If governments everywhere are in debt, who are they in debt to? The answer is that they are in debt to private banks. The "cruel hoax" is that governments are in debt for money created on a computer screen, money they could have created themselves. The vast power acquired through this sleight of hand by a small clique of men pulling the strings of government behind the scenes evokes images from The Wizard of Oz, a classic American fairytale that has become a rich source of imagery for financial commentators. Editorialist Christopher Mark wrote in a series called "The Grand Deception":

    Welcome to the world of the International Banker, who like the famous film, The Wizard of Oz, stands behind the curtain of orchestrated national and international policymakers and so-called elected leaders. 10
    The late Murray Rothbard, an economist of the classical Austrian School, wrote:

    Money and banking have been made to appear as mysterious and arcane processes that must be guided and operated by a technocratic elite. They are nothing of the sort. In money, even more than the rest of our affairs, we have been tricked by a malignant Wizard of Oz.11
    In a 2002 article titled "Who Controls the Federal Reserve System?", Victor Thorn wrote:

    In essence, money has become nothing more than illusion -- an electronic figure or amount on a computer screen. . . . As time goes on, we have an increasing tendency toward being sucked into this Wizard of Oz vortex of unreality [by] magician-priests that use the illusion of money as their control device.12
    James Galbraith wrote in The New American Prospect:

    We are left . . . with the thought that the Federal Reserve Board does not know what it is doing. This is the "Wizard of Oz" theory, in which we pull away the curtains only to find an old man with a wrinkled face, playing with lights and loudspeakers.13
    The analogies to The Wizard of Oz work for a reason. According to later commentators, the tale was actually written as a monetary allegory, at a time when the "money question" was a key issue in American politics. In the 1890s, politicians were still hotly debating who should create the nation's money and what it should consist of. Should it be created by the government, with full accountability to the people? Or should it be created by private banks behind closed doors, for the banks' own private ends?

    William Jennings Bryan, the Populist candidate for President in 1896 and again in 1900, mounted the last serious challenge to the right of private bankers to create the national money supply. According to the commentators, Bryan was represented in Frank Baum's 1900 book The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by the Cowardly Lion. The Lion finally proved he was the King of Beasts by decapitating a giant spider that was terrorizing everyone in the forest. The giant spider Bryan challenged at the turn of the twentieth century was the Morgan/Rockefeller banking cartel, which was bent on usurping the power to create the nation's money from the people and their representative government.

    Before World War I, two opposing systems of political economy competed for dominance in the United States. One operated out of Wall Street, the New York financial district that came to be the symbol of American finance. Its most important address was 23 Wall Street, known as the "House of Morgan." J. P. Morgan was an agent of powerful British banking interests. The Wizards of Wall Street and the Old World bankers pulling their strings sought to establish a national currency that was based on the "gold standard," one created privately by the financial elite who controlled the gold. The other system dated back to Benjamin Franklin and operated out of Philadelphia, the country's first capital, where the Constitutional Convention was held and Franklin's "Society for Political Inquiries" planned the industrialization and public works that would free the new republic from economic slavery to England.14 The Philadelphia faction favored a bank on the model established in provincial Pennsylvania, where a state loan office issued and lent money, collected the interest, and returned it to the provincial government to be used in place of taxes. President Abraham Lincoln returned to the colonial system of government-issued money during the Civil War; but he was assassinated, and the bankers reclaimed control of the money machine. The silent coup of the Wall Street faction culminated with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, something they achieved by misleading Bryan and other wary Congressmen into thinking the Federal Reserve was actually federal.

    Today the debate over who should create the national money supply is rarely heard, mainly because few people even realize it is an issue. Politicians and economists, along with everybody else, simply assume that money is created by the government, and that the "inflation" everybody complains about is caused by an out-of-control government running the dollar printing presses. The puppeteers working the money machine were more visible in the 1890s than they are today, largely because they had not yet succeeded in buying up the media and cornering public opinion.

    Economics is a dry and forbidding subject that has been made intentionally complex by banking interests intent on concealing what is really going on. It is a subject that sorely needs lightening up, with imagery, metaphors, characters and a plot; so before we get into the ponderous details of the modern system of money-based-on-debt, we'll take an excursion back to a simpler time, when the money issues were more obvious and were still a burning topic of discussion. The plot line for The Wizard of Oz has been traced to the first-ever march on Washington, led by an obscure Ohio businessman who sought to persuade Congress to return to Lincoln's system of government-issued money in 1894. Besides sparking a century of protest marches and the country's most famous fairytale, this little-known visionary and the band of unemployed men he led may actually have had the solution to the whole money problem, then and now . . . .


  9. Monday, 23 March 2009
    GPs' Surgeries 'To Sell Medicines'

    'Ministers are considering changing NHS rules to allow some doctors to sell "over-the-counter" products to patients for commercial gain for the first time. The prospect of doctors making money from their patients' illnesses will raise questions about one of the fundamental principles of the NHS: that treatment should be based on medical need and not commercial interest.

    Last night the opposition parties claimed the move was potentially "dangerous" and could risk profiteering.'



  11. Henrik Holappa’s application for political asylum tells his story. Holappa first ran afoul of Finnish authorities in August 2006 because of his nationalist politics. He has persistently opposed massive immigration on non-Whites into Finland. After he was linked openly, by name, to a newspaper article denouncing gangs of African rapists of white Finnish women, in particular the infamous “scissor rapists” - Sudanese black Africans - who clitorectomized a Finnish female rape victim with scissors in June 2005, he was briefly incarcerated, then economically disenfranchised by the authorities when they blackballed him with the country’s security industry. Though he had specifically trained to become a security guard, he suddenly could not find a single job in that profession.

    In May 2008, the Finnish police began dogging him again. One policewomen told him that he was likely to be indicted by the Finnish government on three serious charges so as to make an example of him for other racists in Finland, as follows:

    1) Two years imprisonment for “incitement of racial hatred”;
    2) Two years imprisonment for “defaming the honor of the African community of Finland”; and
    3) Six months imprisonment for “copyright violation.” (Holappa had merely scanned a photo of “multiculturalism” from a Finnish newspaper, and sent it as a private email attachment to an American friend. He then, unbeknownst to Holappa, posted it on an American website.)

    Holappa believes the Finnish government would arrest and prosecute him upon his return to Finland, and incarcerate him next to Somali and Turkish felons who might seek to beat, rape, or kill him. Or they might also put him in a maximum security prison where he would be shut up in a cell for 23 hours a day. And so he has applied for political asylum.

    Dr. David Duke points out that we need to raise a serious ruckus over this intolerable breach of human rights, quote; “and make the biggest ruckus that you legally can make over this blatant abuse of the public’s trust. Phone up the Finnish Embassy, contact American Finnish associations and women’s organizations, post Henrik’s story everywhere until those responsible are relieved of their jobs!” Print and distribute the flyers on the Free Henrik Holappa website. And let Holappa know he’s not alone. Send your letters to:

    Esa Henrik Hollapa
    ID #: A087361909
    Buffalo Federal Detention Facility
    4250 Federal Dr. RN, 108
    Batavia, NY 14020

  12. Monday, March 23, 2009
    Canadian Killers get out on Bail; Writers Go To Jail

    Brad Love Arrested At Political Meeting in Toronto

    “Please phone your nearest Canadian Consulate and ask, how a country that says it is commited to Freedom of Speech and Human Rights can put a man in jail for writing letters?”

    By Paul Fromm — MP3, or here

    REXDALE. March 19, 2009. Eight burly Metro policemen burst into a Rexdale hotel meeting room this evening and handcuffed and arrested former political prisoner Brad Love, apparently, for “breach of parole.”

    Mr. Love had just finished giving a rousing talk on freedom of speech in Canada to a standing room only gathering of supporters of the Canadian Association for Free Expression. He had warned that police were eager to crack down on immigration critics. Almost prophetically he explained: “If immigration were reformed and criminals kept out, it would mean far fewer cops and less overtime, also fewer social workers. Immigration is a growth industry.”

    Mr. Love was convicted, in 2003, under Sec. 319 of Canada’s notorious “anti-hate” law Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code for writing letters to MPs, MPPs, and newspapers — over 10,000 letters he reckons in a 20 year period. He drew the stiffest sentence ever — 18 months in prison. Earlier, while violent criminals were released on bail, Mr. Love was repeatedly denied bail.At one point, his parents unsuccessfully offered to post $250,000 and were turned down.

    Mr. Love was twice sent back to prison, once for 46 days, the second time for 5 months, again for writing non-violent, non-threatening letters to public officials. After his last stint in prison, he was ordered for three years not to write to ANY elected official in Canada.

    For the past two and a half years, Mr. Love has worked in Fort McMurray in the oil industry.

    Meeting chairman Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, called tonight’s arrest “an outrage. This is like Haiti. We’re becoming a banana republic — 8 cops to arrest an unarmed man at a political meeting!”

    Mr. Fromm pointed out that Rexdale has some areas notorious for gunfire and killings between rival Jamaican gangs. “I guess there are no crack dealers to arrest tonight. So, the local constabulary can free up eight men to arrest a letter writer who complains about poorly screened immigration and immigrant crime.”

    CAFE organized protests outside the prison when Mr. Love was twice incarcerated for writing letters in apparent violation of his parole conditions.

    “What sort of country jails political dissidents and letter writers?” he demanded. “It’s a disgrace.”

  13. "This is the sort of person who, after enough vodka-Red Bulls, could be persuaded that Jade and Prince Philip blew up the Twin Towers together. There are plenty of them out there."

    Lee Barnes?

  14. Eric why dont you go and check Alec McFadden piles out!

  15. Daily Mail owner axes 1,000 jobs as sales fall let us hope more scum from the Dailypost and liverpool Echo all get sacked !

  16. Horst Mahler's Last
    Public Statement
    Horst Mahlers Vermächtnis
    Horst Mahler's Legacy
    Letzte Stellungnahme vor der Verhaftung vom 25.02.2009
    His Last Statement Before Verdict and Imprisonment on 25 Feb. 2009

    Translated from the German by J M Damon

    I am sending this at the last moment.

    After this I shall no longer have opportunity to address the public, so I am using this opportunity to briefly explain once more what is really at stake here.

    I am now being sentenced and I shall be imprisoned immediately.

    Many of my supporters disapprove of what I have done. They ask me: "Why are you doing this?"

    {As part of the growing civil disobedience movement in Germany, Mahler had filed charges against himself for "Holocaust Denial."} Some of my supporters point out that I would be more effective on the outside than the inside of prison.

    They say the government will now put me away and no benefit will come from it.

    I explain to them that they are considering the matter from the wrong point of view.

    The most important issue is no longer the fact that the present regime has taken away our right of free speech! This state has always had the power to do that, in any number of ways, regardless of whether one is expressing an opinion.. Something greater than the right to utter dissident remarks is at stake here.

    If one realizes, as I do, that the "Holocaust" Religion is the principal weapon for the moral and cultural destruction of the German nation, then it is clear that what is at stake here is nothing less than the collective right of self-defense, that is, Germany's right to survive.

    Survival affects everyone!

    Does the world really believe that we Germans will unresistingly allow ourselves to be destroyed as a Volk, that we will passively allow our national spirit to be extinguished without a struggle?

    What kind of jurists argue that self-defense is a criminal act?

    As a Volk and a living collective entity we have a national and a spiritual nature.

    The surest way to extinguish Germany as a spiritual entity is to destroy our national soul and identity, so that we no longer know who or what we are.

    Destroying our national spirit is precisely the intent of our enemy in demanding that we unquestioningly accept his alien "Holocaust" dogma and desist from pointing out that his fantastic "Holocaust" never happened. There is no evidence of it!

    Once we realize that we are faced with the threat of annihilation, we no longer have doubts about who our enemy is: it is the ancient murderer of nations.

    Once we realize this, we no longer passively listen to the enemy's lies and misrepresentations. We look for a weapon and a way protect our Germany, to deprive the enemy of the power he has over us. Lo and behold, we have the only weapon we need to protect ourselves from annihilation. We have he truth.

    "The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!"

    A rather unusual aspect of my life history is that I entered politics from the left of the political spectrum, by way of the Red Army Faction (RAF).

    {Mahler's critics never tire of stressing this political transition, although the definitions of "left" and "right" have changed drastically in the last twenty-five years.

    These critics would do well to consider Ralph Waldo Emerson's aphorism "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." A wise man learns new things as he goes through life and changes his ideas accordingly.} Briefly stated, the RAF took the path of armed struggle against "the System" as it was called in those days.

    The idea that motivated us to take the path of armed struggle was our belief in "Holocaust." We actually believed what "the System" had taught us in school and what was constantly proclaimed in the enemy-controlled media. Like others in the RAF, I believed this anti German propaganda. As the American culture bringers say, "I bought it." I truly believed it as I sought a way to break out of the unbearable guilt complex associated with the "murder of six million Jews." I cannot go into the details of this period of my life here -- the point to be made is that I was a "true believer" in "Holocaust" when I was young.

    In 2001, in the course of my career as attorney, I was asked to defend a musical patriot. This was the singer Frank Rennicke, who had been convicted and sentenced in the lower courts for "Holocaust Denial." My response to his request was: "Of course I will defend you!"

    The task of defending Frank made it necessary for me to investigate all the facts, evidence and allegations connected with "Holocaust." This is what my investigations revealed: There is no supporting evidence for the fantastic allegations of "Holocaust!" There are only proclamations released by the victors' tribunal at Nuremberg to the effect that such an event occurred and was sufficiently "investigated." With his proverbial chutzpah our enemy tells us: "No other event in all history has been as thoroughly investigated as 'Holocaust.'" [The same chutzpah leads the enemy to claim that the huge amounts of insecticide Germany used to protect the health of internees during World War II were used to murder Jews!] If we examine the actual facts, we discover that it is all a lie.

    It is atrocity propaganda that is still being disseminated, 65 years after Germany's defeat. When the servile Bundesgericht (German High Court) declares that a thousand "eyewitnesses" support the "proven event," it is another bald-faced lie!

    Our so-called Bundesgericht (High Court) understands perfectly well that our so-called Bundesrepublik (Federal Republic) is not a sovereign state and therefore not a legitimate government. Prof. Carlo Schmid, the internationally recognized expert on international law and author of our Grundgesetz (Basic Law), stated clearly that the Federal Republic is not a valid state. In a speech he gave on the occasion of its creation in 1949, he specifically describes it as an "Organisationsform einer Modalität der Fremdherrschaft" (Organizational Form of a Modality of Foreign Rule), that is to say, a vehicle for domination by our enemies. Prof. Schmid invented composed this diplomatic expression to avoid using the term "puppet government." Our Basic Law was not written by a convention of elected representatives and it was not approved by plebiscite. Enemy occupiers imposed it on us and it does not meet the prerequisites for a legitimate state. Since the Federal Republic is not a legitimate state, the institutions and stipulations that our enemiues forced upon us are likewise not legitimate under international law.

    It is clear that the victors or victor of World War II (the only real victor was world Jewry) took great pains to assure that the basis for Jewish domination, namely the religious cult of "Holocaust," would be legalistically unassailable. This was their intent when they created the Federal Republic, and it is clear that the High Court long ago adopted a judicature designed to perpetuate "Holocaust." The mission to protect "Holocaust" lies at the heart of both the Federal Republic and the Basic Law. This is the basis of Germany's domination by its enemies.

    Germany's foreign minister Joschka Fischer explained this very clearly when he referred to "Holocaust" and sponsorship of Israel as the raison d'etre of the Federal Republic.

    What is happening now is nothing other than the destruction of the moral foundation of our Volk through genocidal assault on our national soul. There is nothing surprising about this.

    We would have to consider our enemies really stupid, especially our most powerful and dangerous enemy, if he did not take decisive measures to maintain domination over us. Our enemies did not launch World War II against us in order to abandon their war aims after the inevitable victory of their overpowering resources of numbers and materiel. They went to great lengths to avoid giving us the possibility of exonerating ourselves ourselves from the Great Lie through authentic trials conducted by a professional and independent judiciary. Our greatest enemy is not stupid!

    He took painstaking precautions, and he is all too familiar with elaborate methods to assure compliance with his peculiar brand of "justice."

    No one who perceives that our enemy is still perpetrating genocide against us as part of his war aims can expect a German to obey the proscription against questioning "Holocaust." No one can expect that a German who wants to be German will not object to this assault against our nation. This assault is nothing less than cultural genocide, and it threatens us all.

    If possible, I ask you to dare to imagine what necessarily follows from this, if it is really the case. What a wretched excuse for a human being I would be if I, knowing of this threat to our nation in all its implications, would keep quiet and sink back in my easy chair and just wait for the day when the truth would come to light of its own accord! Every German has an obligation to do his duty to the Fatherland!

    We have a right and sacred to defend ourselves, to preserve our nation and our Volk! In every civilized country, there is a legal obligation to come to the aid of those who are in danger. In fact, the law prescribes punishments for those who fail to render aid.

    Failure to assist and render aid is a serious violation of law; it constitutes a corpus delicti in itself. I would be guilty of a serious crime if I failed to render aid to my Volk - if I kept quiet and failed to come to its aid, knowing that the monstrous fraud called "Holocaust" did not really occur. In that case, I would be a truly depraved criminal!.

    In the present situation, it would be pointless for me to plod along and attempt to gain a majority in this or that political party, or to found a new and independent party that would somehow make its way through our corrupt and labyrinthine parliament to repeal genocidal anti-German laws. Working alone, my only course of action is to continue doing what I have done. Relying on myself alone, I can do nothing except repeat the truth over and over again. I have sworn a sacred oath that can be read on the Internet, our only source of uncensored information, that I will never desist from repeating this truth: "Holocaust" is a lie, and so is the claim that it has been "proven." There is no supporting evidence.

    In his undaunted defense of the Christian faith, the traditionalist Bishop Richard Williamson recently stated the same truth that I discovered long ago.

    In the Rennicke case I was professionally obligated to investigate the evidence of "Holocaust" and it turned out that no such evidence exists. After reviewing several similar trials, we were able to produce a letter written by a professor of contemporary history, Prof. Gerhard Jagschitz of Vienna, whose research had also led to the conclusion that there is no evidence to support "Holocaust." When I contacted him he said: "Yes, of course, we already know that." Prof. Jagschitz had been commissioned by the court as an expert witness to determine whether "Holocaust" is "manifestly obvious" as an actual event of contemporary history. He spent three years researching all the available literature concerning "Holocaust" in order to determine the actual truth. After these three years he informed the court that he could no longer defend his original assumption in support of the validity of "Holocaust." He arrived at the emphatic conclusion that, within the guidelines of a society of laws, it is not permissible to use the "manifest self-evidence" of "Holocaust" as a basis for sentencing those found guilty of questioning it. In those days it was Prof. Jagschitz and now it is Bishop Williamson, and soon there will be many other prominent persons who arrive at this same conclusion.

    Self-defense is an inalienable right. As a German who wants to be German I am personally affected by this assault against my Volk. The German nation is not only entitled to defend itself, it is in fact obligated to defend itself. Because of our cultural substance, we as a nation in central Europe have the duty and obligation to resist attempts to destroy us culturally, to annihilate us as a Volk and a spiritual entity. This is what is at stake! I do not choose to wait for others to defend the German nation - I choose to do it myself! I am telling the truth as I perceive it, and the truth is that the so-called "Holocaust" never happened. That is the obvious reason why there is no evidence of it! There is nothing to support "Holocaust" except the verdicts of Moscow type show trials. These verdicts are constantly hammered into our heads by the Jewish media as "proof" that "Holocaust" was real and that there is an abundance of evidence to support it.

    Those who enforces and perpetuate this blood libel is guilty of treason against the German nation. Most notorious among these traitors are the judges of the High Court, who sanctify and reinforce the decisions of the lower courts concerning the absurd "manifest obviousness" of "Holocaust." This is worse than merely perverting justice -- it is carrying out deliberate genocide against the German people. I have proven the guilt of the robed traitors in Karlsruhe numerous times and I shall continue to stress this even while in prison.

    I am facing twelve years' imprisonment. How willl it all end? I am 73 years old, and so this is a life sentence for me. My sentence proves that in Germany today, life imprisonment can be imposed for anyone who refuses do obeisance to the Great Lie. The Jews, of course, are always willing to "bargain." First the dissident is lightly punished, perhaps with just a fine. Or there can be a prison sentence of just a few months, which can be probated. One always has a chance of getting off easily by kowtowing to the Great Lie and giving assurances that there will be no more difficulties in future. This is precisely what the enemy wants.

    Anyone who is convinced that life under the Great Lie is not worth living must be kept behind bars forever. Since I have openly expressed this sentiment countless times, knowing full well that the cudgel would fall, the enemy will most assuredly keep me in prison for the rest of my life. The enemy must demonstrate to the cowed public what is really at stake here! Obviously we Germans are now in a situation in which we must rot away our entire lives if we do not submit to the Great Lie. Whatever happens to me ­ I can only say, as our Savior says in the Evangel of St. Matthew: "Whoever is not willing to take up his cross is not worthy of me!"

    We are not worthy to call ourselves Germans if we do not stand up for the truth, but unresistingly submit to the Great Lie!

    However, I am confident that Germany's historic plight is about to change.

    The struggle over the authenticity of "Holocaust" and dominance of "Holocaust" dogma is now raging within the Catholic Church. The Church is still a great power, even though its leadership has been corrupted and undermined by the Jews. With its great wealth and hundreds of millions of faithful followers, the Church is the rock on which the ship of the Great Lie will crash and perish.

    The Jews are about to experience their Waterloo.

    Once "Holocaust" is openly discussed, knowledge of its true nature can no longer be suppressed. When the Bishop Williamson affair reaches the point at which a sitting pope is forced to again excommunicate him, as the head of ADL (Anti Defamation League: the fighting organization of world Jewry) demands; or if, under pressure of the Jewish media and corrupt politicians, Pope Benedict XVI abdicates the Throne of Peter, this will be an excruciating shock for the Catholic world, and the truth will break through on this account! Christian faith is based on the Truth, the Rock of Ages.

    The Truth will make us free and the will to be free will grow stronger until it is irresistible, and then we will prevail. As for me, I have done everything I could do. I have set an example.

    I have often said that ours is the easiest revolution that was ever carried out. We need only for a few thousand persons to rise up and speak the truth as clearly and openly as Bishop Williamson has done and I have attempted to do, along with the others who have filed legal complaints against themselves for telling the truth and distributing Germar Rudolf's "Lectures on the Holocaust."

    The ultimate victory of the truth is inevitable, as is the defeat of the global Zionist Empire. However, we have no way of knowing how much more time must pass, or the exact circumstances that will usher in the victory of the truth. We have to wait and see.

    At present we are witnessing another collapse of the global Jewish financial system. The Jewish power base, the temple of their god Jahweh­Mammon, has been struck in the heart by the collapse of their predatory banking system. Jewish power is based on money power, which buys them control of the politicians and media. At present they are losing this money power.

    Once they lose it, they also lose control of government and public opinion. Their control of public opinion has already been weakened by the rise of the uncensored Internet, which they are unable suppress. When they lose control of the media, they will be in a pitiable condition indeed!

    When that happens, the Jews will be grateful that we understand and accept their historic role in world redemption. We recognize their destructive tyranny as a revelation of the path of God through the world to Himself, as the philosopher Hegel explained. We respect the Jews as the followers of Satan and we accept them in the certainty that we can redeem them as well as ourselves, by bringing the Truth into the world through our deeds. The Jews are in dire need of redemption, and they will one day be grateful to us!


    Here's freedom to him who would speak, Here's freedom to him who would write; For there's none ever feared that the truth should be heard, Save him whom the truth would indict! ROBERT BURNS (1759­96)


  17. What a surprise, Holocaust denial on The BNP site.

  18. Thursday, March 19, 2009
    Australia to fine its residents $11,000 for visiting 10,000 politically incorrect websites

    Perhaps the Aussie's should have been a bit more verbal a decade ago when their government started fining and persecuting those that questioned certain aspects of history associated with the holocaust lie? Please note that the below article, which doesn't condemn the Australian governments censorship in any way, was written by a Jew.

  19. Poor Eric the kipper he thinks a fairy dies because people deny!


  20. The decision to ban George Galloway from Canada seems odd, but now it emerges that the Jewish Defence League (JDL) pressured the Canadian Government to do so. The action takes on sinister connotations for Canada, why? Because the Jewish Defence League are according to the FBI a Terrorist Group. In its report, Terrorism 2000/2001, the FBI referred to the JDL as a “violent extremist Jewish organization”. This “violent extremist Jewish organization” now it seems has power and influence over the Canadian Government.

    Canadians are just waking up to the fact that Israel controls their government just as much as it does the USA. And note that inevitably, the Israeli shill has to fall back on the Holocaust to try to bludgeon his way through Galloway’s arguments. The good point is watching the Israeli whore thrashing around and clearly aware that he is losing the war for legitimacy in the public eye.]

  21. Intelligence Pick Blames 'Israel Lobby' For Withdrawal

    By Walter Pincus
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Thursday, March 12, 2009; A01

    The withdrawal of a senior intelligence adviser after an online campaign to prevent him from taking office has ignited a debate over whether powerful pro-Israel lobbying interests are exercising outsize influence over who serves in the Obama administration.

    When Charles W. Freeman Jr. stepped away Tuesday from an appointment to chair the National Intelligence Council -- which oversees the production of reports that represent the view of the nation's 16 intelligence agencies -- he decried in an e-mail "the barrage of libelous distortions of my record [that] would not cease upon my entry into office," and he was blunt about whom he considers responsible.

    "The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East," Freeman wrote.

    Referring to what he called "the Israel Lobby," he added: "The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views." One result of this, he said, is "the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics."

    Freeman's angry rhetoric notwithstanding, the controversy surrounding the former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia was broader than just Middle East politics. Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair's choice of Freeman prompted a storm of complaints about his recent commercial connections to China and questions about whether he was too forgiving of that nation's leaders.

    But most of the online attention focused on Freeman's work for the Middle East Policy Council, a Washington-based nonprofit organization that is funded in part by Saudi money, and his past critical statements about Israel. The latter included a 2005 speech he gave to the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations, where he referred to Israel's "high-handed and self-defeating policies" stemming from the "occupation and settlement of Arab lands," which he called "inherently violent."

    Only a few Jewish organizations came out publicly against Freeman's appointment, but a handful of pro-Israeli bloggers and employees of other organizations worked behind the scenes to raise concerns with members of Congress, their staffs and the media.

    For example, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), often described as the most influential pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington, "took no position on this matter and did not lobby the Hill on it," spokesman Josh Block said.

    But Block responded to reporters' questions and provided critical material about Freeman, albeit always on background, meaning his comments could not be attributed to him, according to three journalists who spoke to him. Asked about this yesterday, Block replied: "As is the case with many, many issues every day, when there is general media interest in a subject, I often provide publicly available information to journalists on background."

    Yesterday, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, which tried to derail Freeman's appointment, applauded his withdrawal. But it added: "We think Israel and any presumed 'lobby' had far less effect on the outcome than the common-sensical belief that the person who is the gatekeeper of intelligence information for the President of the United States should be unencumbered by payments from foreign governments."

    There was plenty of debate about that within the blogosphere immediately after Freeman's withdrawal and the publication of his e-mail.

    Jonathan Chait wrote irreverently on his New Republic blog, "The old spin was that Freeman's nomination, and the failure of his critics, shows how evil the Israel lobby is. . . . The new spin will be that Freeman's, ahem, resignation shows the Israel lobby is even more powerful and sinister than we thought."

    And Stephen Walt, one of two writers who in 2006 famously described the influence of the Israel lobby as dangerous, chimed in on "For all of you out there who may have questioned whether there was a powerful 'Israel lobby,' or who admitted that it existed but didn't think it had much influence . . . think again." (Foreign Policy is owned by a subsidiary of The Washington Post Co.)

    Time's Joe Klein opined that Freeman "was the victim of a mob, not a lobby. The mob was composed primarily of Jewish neoconservatives -- abetted by less than courageous public servants . . . [who have] made Washington even less hospitable for those who aren't afraid to speak their minds, for those who are reflexively contentious, who would defy the conventional wisdom."

    The White House, which had sidestepped questions about Freeman twice in one week, said little yesterday. "I don't have anything to add from what Admiral Blair discussed yesterday in accepting Mr. Freeman's decision that his nomination not proceed and that he regretted it," press secretary Robert Gibbs said.

    The White House did not respond last night to a question about outside influence on personnel decisions.

    The earliest cry of alarm about Freeman's appointment -- a week before it was announced -- came from a former AIPAC lobbyist. Steve Rosen wrote Feb. 19 on his blog that Freeman was a "strident critic of Israel" and described the potential appointment as "a textbook case of the old-line Arabism" whose "views of the region are what you would expect in the Saudi foreign ministry."

    Rosen said yesterday that he had been "quite positive" about President Obama's previous appointments for Middle East positions but that he was "surprised" about Freeman. The appointee's "most extreme point of view," he said, was not what he had expected for the head of the NIC.

    Rosen has a unique position in Washington. A former chief foreign policy lobbyist for AIPAC, he and a colleague were indicted by the Bush administration in 2005 on suspicion of violating the Espionage Act, the first nongovernment employees ever so charged. AIPAC cut him loose, and a trial date has been set for May.

    Meanwhile, Rosen is limited in what he can do. He said he cannot talk to AIPAC employees, nor can he lobby Congress. He has talked to "a number of journalists" who called him about Freeman, but not members of Congress. He did not answer when asked yesterday whether he has talked to Hill staff members.

    Rosen's initial posting was the first of 17 he would write about Freeman over a 19-day period. Some of those added more original reporting, while some pointed to other blogs' finds about Freeman's record. In the process, Rosen traced increasing interest in the appointment elsewhere in the blogosphere, including coverage by Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic, Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard, and Chait and Martin Peretz of the New Republic.

    Interest also was growing among members of Congress.

    On March 2, Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) wrote Blair to raise concerns based on what he had read about Freeman's positions. Two days later, he called for Blair to withdraw the appointment.

    Also on March 2, the Zionist Organization of America called for support of a letter by Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) that called on the DNI inspector general to investigate Freeman for possible conflicts of interest because of his financial relations with Saudi Arabia. That letter, signed by Kirk and seven other congressmen, including House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), was sent to Inspector General Edward Maguire on March 3.

    Close observers of the events consider that request a turning point in the effort to stop Freeman's candidacy, and Rosen's blog began focusing almost exclusively on the appointment.

    On Monday, the seven Republicans on the Senate intelligence committee wrote Blair to protest his choice, which was not subject to Senate confirmation, and threatened to review the NIC's work as long as Freeman chaired that body.

    At a Senate Armed Services Committee meeting one day later, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) told Blair of his own concerns, and he added that the controversy "is not going to go away until you or Ambassador Freeman find a way to resolve it." Hours later, Freeman withdrew.

    Freeman explained his decision last night on National Public Radio: "It became apparent that, no matter what the National Intelligence Council or the intelligence community might put out under

  22. I see that the anti-white and anti-British TUC have betrayed their True British members who pay their inflated wages and pensions and is wasting more of their subscription money by trying to prop up the Establishment in Hackney London.

  23. Shamed fire chief who made child porn gets £500,000 pension pay-out
    By Daily Mail Reporter Payout: Former West Midlands Chief Fire Officer Frank Sheehan, who admitted making indecent images of children, has received an estimated £500,000 pension payout
    A former fire chief who made indecent images of children has received an estimated £500,000 pension pay-out.
    Frank Sheehan was arrested on November 18 and resigned from his position as Chief Fire Officer for West Midlands Fire Service the day afterwards.


  25. Here are some frightening statistics that a friend just emailed to me, Off topic but I thought worth a mention.
    "Nearly the entire population of earth are Asian, Nearly all the rest are black, A small percentage are white.
    There is only one minority group on earth, Us the white folks and we are the only group that is openly discriminated against in every country of the world'.
    It seems that in global terms we are already the Diminitude.



    Canada can't muzzle me to ban me from the country for my views on Afghanistan is absurd, hypocritical, and in vain says
    George Galloway

    The Canadian immigration minister Jason Kenney gazetted in the Sun yesterday morning that I was to be excluded from his country because of my views on Afghanistan. That's the way the rightwing, last-ditch dead-enders of Bushism in Ottawa conduct their business.

    George Galloway has been an agent of Zionism for thirty years,this little bit of publicity is to help, confuse and restore his failing image. A smart move once you know the script

  28. Millions face pay freeze as Britain enters deflation zone
    Millions of public sector workers could face pay freezes for the next three years as Britain is today set to officially enter a period of deflation for the first time since 1960.

    The pay freeze for teachers, nurses and council workers will come as the Office of National Statistics confirms the widely-held belief that the Retail Price Index (RPI) – which measures the average month-to-month change of the prices of goods and services - has fallen below zero for the first time in 49 years.

  29. Government warns of nuclear terror threat
    Britain faces a renewed threat of attack by terrorists with chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, a major new government report states.

    Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, launches Government's counter-terrorism report Photo: PA
    An increase in the theft and smuggling of dangerous materials means that terrorists are more likely to be able to use weapons such as a dirty bomb, according to the report.

    The warning comes in the Government's counter-terrorism strategy document called Contest 2, the most significant redrafting of the Government's fight against violent extremists for six years.

    terror groups a threat to Britain
    Shopping centre staff will be trained to deal with terror attacks
    Police investigate 'eco-terrorism' campaign to save council flower beds
    We won't beat Islamists with Whitehall verbiage
    £90K a day spent on 'soft schemes' to tackle extremism
    First UK security strategy warns of terror plotsThe report warns: "Contemporary terrorist organisations aspire to use chemical, biological, radiological and even nuclear weapons.

    "Changing technology and the theft and smuggling of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive materials make this aspiration more realistic than it may have been in the recent past."

    Launching the report, Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said: "Failed states, conflict and technology contribute to our concern about the threat, including what we know about what terrorists want to do and are planning to do."

    The report adds that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have allowed terrorists to develop more sophisticated types of improvised bombs.

    "Terrorists have also developed new types of explosives and new ways of using them," the report says. "Technology has developed in conflict areas overseas and is rapidly shared by terrorist organisations around the world."

    Britain is at most risk from the al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan and Afghanistan and from groups associated with al-Qaeda in North Africa, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iraq, as well as "self-starting networks or even lone individuals motivated by an ideology similar to that of al-Qaeda," according to the report.

    Al-Qaeda has lost many experienced individuals, is short of money and is "likely to fragment" the report says but autonomous groups are likely to survive, operating out of fragile or failing states as part of al-Qaeda's "global movement."

    "The ideology associated with al-Qaeda will outlive changes to its structure," the report warns, adding: "Terrorist organisations will have access to new technology and may become capable of conducting more lethal operations."

    The current threat level remains at "severe" – only one step from the highest level – and the report says: "We know that some British citizens still travel abroad to be trained in hot to commit terrorist attacks, that terrorists want to strike the UK again and that they will keep on trying."

    In order to counter the threat, the Government plans to spend £3.5bn a year on counter-terrorism by 2011, which goes beyond police and the security services to 60,000 "store, pub and club managers who all work in crowded places that might be targeted by terrorists."

    "We have provided security advice to sport venues and shopping centres and expanded protective programmes for air, sea and rail travel to provide proportionate, sustainable and efficient security for passengers and staff," the report says.

    Local government, schools and universities have also been recruited to try and prevent extremism and the report adds: "From experience and through research we now know more than ever before about how some British citizens are being drawn into terrorism. We are using this understanding with partners to divert people away from this path."

    Ms Smith, who said the strategy was the "most comprehensive and wide ranging in the world," also spoke of the need to "strengthen mainstream voices of those that share our values" and to challenge those, such as the recent protesters against troops returning from Afghanistan.

    "We the Government and others will say that we think that that's wrong," she said. "Not that they've broken the law. One of the things we're defending in this country is the right to free speech, but that isn't free speech that will go unhindered or unchallenged."









  31. "Law is often the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.": Thomas Jefferson to I. Tiffany, 1819

  32. Thirteen die after C. diff outbreak at hospital
    Thirteen patients have died after an outbreak of C. diff at Eastbourne District General Hospital in East Sussex.

    Eastbourne District General Hospital: The deaths were revealed at a press conference following a week of ward closures as the hospital battles to contain the problem
    Three died as a direct result of clostridium difficile while the bug was linked to a further 10 deaths at the hospital.

    A further 17 patients are still being treated for the fatal infection.
    Related Articles
    Half of women in England survive cancer
    Six die as vulnerable 'failed' by 'appalling' NHS The deaths were revealed at a press conference following a week of ward closures as the hospital battles to contain the problem.

    A special isolation ward has been opened and patients were last week diverted to other sites up to 30 miles away for operations while cleaning work is carried out.

    The increase in cases is thought to be due to the high number of patients admitted with respiratory infections.

    C. diff is the major cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and colitis, an infection of the intestines.

    The bacterium, which lives in the gut, multiplies when doses of antibiotics disturb the natural balance of germs in the body - causing severe complications for the elderly and those already suffering a serious illness.

    A spokesman for East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs the hospital, said: "The trust continues to keep the situation under close review and maintains the most stringent measures to contain the spread of this infection.

    "A dedicated facility for patients with C. diff has been established on East Dean ward.

    "The ward has been staffed with a dedicated workforce of nurses and doctors working to recognised national guidelines.

    "The trust has also invested £100,000 to purchase a number of specialist hydrogen peroxide vaporisation system units.

    "These are used to ensure that every surface in the area being treated is covered and ensuring that any C. diff spores are destroyed.

    "This investment ensures that the trust's housekeeping teams can immediately decontaminate any area required, significantly reducing the time that a clinical area is closed which is most important at this busy time of the year."

    The Kent-based Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust came under fire in October 2007 after a report revealed 90 of its hospital patients had died from C. diff.

    The trust's chief executive Rose Gibb quit over the scandal.

  33. Oliver Cromwell had the right idea

    A robber with a gun is more honest and open than an MP

    So yet another MP has been caught with her dirty hands in the till of public money.

    The whole lot of them are rotten to the core. Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats. All rotten, perverted and corrupt. Bloated Pigs whose time has almost come.

    Oliver Cromwell's Speech on the
    Dissolution of the Long Parliament, 20th April 1653.

    It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

    Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you?

    Is there one vice you do not possess?

    Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes?

    Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

    Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?

    Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone!

    So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!"

    You sheep people who still vote for these parasites with no honour need to wake up soon or you will be the death of us all. The Establishment care nothing for others, only themselves. They have no ideas. No dreams and no humanity. They are filth.

  34. over 4000 british muslims have gone to afghanistan to kill our troops! on returning to the u/k fully trained full of hate!the liverpool police will welcome them give them a job!that is 4000 fully trained enemy! yet if our kids are lucky to get home alive they will not be welcome in the police no job for them! our kids save the lives of the police!the police give the enemy the jobs!Sick or what!!Hope when the police call for our kids to defend them from the 4000+ we tell the police to do it them selves!



  36. Now 'Big Brother' Targets Facebook

    'Millions of Britons who use social networking sites such as Facebook could soon have their every move monitored by the Government and saved on a "Big Brother" database. Ministers faced a civil liberties outcry last night over the plans, with accusations of excessive snooping on the private lives of law-abiding citizens.'

  37. Axe of 100 civil servant jobs on Wirral
    Mar 25 2009 by Matt Hurst, Liverpool Echo

    THE housing slump has cost Merseyside 100 land registry jobs.

    Staff at Birkenhead’s two offices were offered voluntary redundancy and the Hamilton Street base will close.

    Some 400 workers are affected by plans to merge the Old Market site with the Rosebrae office.

    The organisation said it is looking to cull 1,000 positions out of a nationwide workforce of 8,000.

    Public services union PCS said this translates to 100 job cuts in Birkenhead – a quarter of employees.

    Land Registry said it was reducing costs “whilst retaining sufficient core skilled staff to process work once the market rises”.

    Publicly-funded it is responsible for registering land and providing title information.

    PCS’s Birkenhead branch chairman Dave Lunn said the economy was “a convenient excuse” and warned compulsory redundancies would lead to “a dispute, not just with Land Registry, but across the entire civil service”.



    Indian government minister Shibu Soren was convicted of murder.

    Some big democracies seem to be run in part by criminals.

    This may work to the advantage of the CIA and Mossad when they want to influence policy on nuclear or terror issues.

    In India, the world's biggest democracy, there are 'criminals' in parliament and government.

    At Newsweek, 7 March 2009, Jason Overdorf wrote about the criminals in India's parliament. (New Rules Expose Criminals in India's Parliament Newsweek)

    In India's current parliament, according to Newsweek:

    The coal minister, Shibu Soren, stepped down after he was convicted of murder.

    Shibu Soren had become coal minister after being put on trial for the alleged kidnapping and murder of his former personal secretary and the alleged massacre of 11 people in sectarian violence.

    Several M.P.s are serving life sentences for murder.

    128 of the 543 M.P.s have faced criminal charges, including:

    84 cases of murder,

    17 cases of robbery

    and 28 cases of theft and extortion.

    One M.P. faces 17 separate murder charges.

    Eleven M.P.s have recently been expelled for taking bribes.

    The two main parties are Congress and the BJP.

    About a fifth of the representatives of these two major parties have been under investigation for criminal activity.

    "The general opinion is that the influence of criminals in politics is steadily increasing," states Himanshu Jha of the National Social Watch Coalition

  39. The Green Crescent madrassa, in Bangladesh: Police claim it is a militant training camp
    It has emerged that the father-of-three was also given a suspended sentence for trying to board a plane with a pistol in his suitcase last year.
    The Charity Commission said tonight it was investigating the allegations, which it said it was taking very seriously.

    On Monday Bangladeshi security forces raided the orphanage and attached Muslim school on the remote island of Bhola in South Bangladesh.

    They discovered explosives to make 'several hundred' grenades, as well as ammunition, remote control devices and radical Islamic books.
    A teacher and three caretakers have been arrested but Mostafa, who is in his mid-40s, is being searched for in Bangladesh.
    Lt Col Munir Haque, an officer involved in the operation by the Rapid Action Battalion, said: 'We found small arms – about nine or 10 in total – plus equipment to make small arms, about 3,000 rounds of ammunition, two walkie-talkies, two remote control devices and four sets of army uniforms.

    'We also found enough explosives and other equipment to make several hundred grenades. We found some ordinary Islamic books, but others that are in line with extremists like Bin Laden.'
    He said that there were about 11 children between the ages of 7 and 8 at the compound at the time of the raid, but no other adults.

    K M Mamunur Rashid, another officer involved in the raid, said: 'It is a big madrassa and we have so far gathered that this whole compound is being used for militant training,' he said.

    He added that the charity had plans to build two more madrassas, viewed by the authorities as recruiting grounds for militant groups.
    Mostafa, who has a PhD in chemistry from Manchester Polytechnic, was cleared of conspiracy to cause explosions with intent to endanger life at Birmingham Crown Court in 2002.
    He was working as a teacher at a Birmingham mosque when MI5 agents swooped on a flat where they discovered bin liners containing chemicals, electronic devices and gloves with traces of HMTD, a high explosive.
    Mostafa denied involvement with any terror organisation and told the jury that chemicals and explosive materials were intended to make fireworks.
    His co-accused, Moinul Abedin, was jailed for 20 years after being found guilty of planning to cause explosions around the UK.
    In 1996, Mostafa had been cleared at Manchester Crown Court of involvement in a terrorist bomb plot campaign with two other students after explosives were found at his home.

    But he was found guilty of illegally possessing a firearm, sentenced to four years in prison and banned for life from possessing a firearm.
    In July last year he was caught trying to board a plane to Bangladesh with a gas-powered pistol and bullet parts in his luggage.

    He was arrested at Manchester Airport by security officials and claimed the gun was a gift for his brother, as part of a hunting and fishing trip with his wife and three children.
    The charge carried a maximum sentence of five years' imprisonment but Mostafa was sentenced to 56 days in prison, suspended for two years, and 100 hours' community service.
    According to its website, the Green Crescent charity was set up by students in 1998, with the motto, 'Individuals with vision are capable of changing society in a positive way'.
    Last year it had an income of £63,000 for 'long-term educational and health projects'.
    The Charity Commission, which awarded Green Crescent charity status in 2004, last night came under fire from partner organisations in shock about Dr Mostafa's record.
    Saeed Mahmood, of the Stockport-based charity Human Appeal International, said: 'Faisal comes in every few months about mainland projects in Bangladesh. We only work with organisations that are registered with the Charity Commission so we had no idea about these allegations.
    'I'm taken aback. The Charity Commission should have told us if they knew and if they didn't know, why not?'
    A spokesman from counter-terrorism think-tank the Quilliam Foundation added: 'If the Green Crescent charity has indeed been involved in militant activity, this will reflect very poorly on the Charity Commission, particularly given that Mostafa, the head of the charity, had previously been put on trial twice for terrorist offences.
    'Ineffectiveness by the Charity Commission in identifying and tackling extremist charities leads to the British taxpayer directly subsiding militancy and extremism.'
    Andrew Hind, Chief Executive of the Charity Commission said: 'We are working with relevant law enforcement and other agencies to investigate the allegation that terrorist activity is connected with the charity. The matter is of serious concern to us, and we are taking this action given the gravity of the matter, the public interest and the need to protect charity work and funds.

    'We intend, as is normal procedure, to publish a statement of the results of the inquiry setting out our findings once the inquiry is completed.'

  40. The British National Party in the southeast of England is pulling out all the stops in its European election campaign fight, reports southeast regional organiser Andy McBride.

    The most recent Bracknell and Wokingham branch meeting was host to the BNP’s official police spokesman and sleaze-buster Mr Michael Barnbrook.

    Addressing a packed hall, Mr Barnbrook provided a fascinating insight into the wholesale fraud practised by members of the “House of Treason.”

    Mr Barnbrook, a former police inspector who has been personally responsible for exposing fraud committed by at least two MPs, revealed how both Labour and Tory members of parliament have lied about expenses and twisted the law to suit their Marxist agenda.

  41. 'Hate Law Jihad!'
    By Rev. Ted Pike

    Have you ever criticized Islam - perhaps for its militancy or restrictions on women? An increasing number of people in Canada, Europe, and Australia have--thinking they were within their free speech rights. Next thing they knew, a Muslim or local Muslim council hauled them into court on the "hate crimes" charge of defaming Islam. One defendant in England--prominent political leader Nick Griffin--faced a possible seven years in prison for calling Islam a "wicked faith."

    Today, the hate laws the Anti-Defamation League established in Jewish self-interest are being exploited by Muslims. Hate laws are part of ADL's self-protective agenda of discouraging criticism of Jewish matters and Israel. ADL is also intent on restraining the advancement of Christian values, evangelism, and political activism.

    But now, Islamic zealots are increasingly ready to use hate laws for their own ends, pouncing on any pastor, talk show host, politician, or outspoken citizen who "defames" Islam. In fact, the 56 Muslim nations that dominate the U.N. Human Rights Council are attempting to force all U.N. member nations to criminalize criticism of Islam through the "Combating Defamation of Religions Resolution."

    In response to the changing, widening threat of hate laws, we have produced another 10-minute video alert, Hate Law Jihad: How Hate Laws Criminalize Islam's Critics. We reveal stories of people who faced Muslim-backed hate crime lawsuits and indictments. Our video proves that all free thinkers, liberal or conservative, religious or not, are vulnerable to prosecution if a Muslim-protecting federal hate crimes law is established in America.

    In fact, Canadian and European hate laws have often been enforced retroactively. If federal hate crimes bill HR 256, now in the House Judiciary Committee, becomes law, we can expect hate crimes indictments against those who "incited violence" against Muslims by criticizing Islamic behavior or doctrine, even if it was years ago! We can also expect special federal protection of Muslims through HR 262's massive national reeducation program against "bias," if this becomes law in public schools from kindergarten through college.

    Stubborn Silence from Religious Right

    It is now 10 weeks since the federal hate crimes bills, HR 256 and HR 262, were introduced in Congress. Yet almost all of the largest Christian/conservative "watchdog" groups (including the American Center for Law and Justice, Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, and Concerned Women for America) have made no effective warnings or calls to action against them. I've quit speculating on the reasons for such baffling silence in the face of the most freedom-destroying legislation ever to enter Congress! But our National Prayer Network will never quit doing our best to alert Americans and develop strategies to hold the hate bills back.

    I have spoken on 64 talk radio shows since January 1 and saturated the listeners to "far right" alternative talk radio with warnings against the hate bills. I am now pursuing interviews on mainstream talk radio - liberal or conservative. Our new video Hate Law Jihad was created to reach this vast audience. Many people have criticized Islam and should realize they are personally threatened by encroaching hate crimes legislation.

    With this audience in mind, we are unveiling our updated website, It is exclusively dedicated to the hate laws issue and especially emphasizes the threat to critics of radical Islam. All our hate law videos, including Hate Law Jihad, can be viewed on as well as

    Still Time to Save Free Speech

    Mercifully, the federal hate bill HR 256 has not yet moved forward into hearings in the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime. God has given us precious time to further educate Congress. It is more important than ever to call the House and Senate - especially the crucial 39 members of the House Judiciary Committee. A relatively small but steady number of calls are still made to Judiciary members. These legislators will decide whether the hate bills die in committee or shoot forward to the House for a vote. I am encouraged by reports from callers that many liberal and conservative Judiciary staffers say they are aware of and have watched How to Kill the Hate Bills.

    It's time to encourage staffers to watch Hate Law Jihad at Expanding knowledge could turn Congress against hate crime laws completely!

    I believe protest calls to the Judiciary may have already put brakes on the hate bills. Pro-hate bill Democrats may fear that your daily calls are an omen of more controversy to come and don't want their hate bill humiliated in debate on the floors of Congress and a sixth defeat. Perhaps they realize Americans still don't want a federal hate bureaucracy, and that some other form of legislation should be contrived to achieve police state sovereignty.

    We know one thing for sure. To members of Congress, your call stands for a thousand other citizens who feel just like you but don't have the impetus to act. Members of Congress know this "silent majority" is very capable of voting out them out of office if hate laws become unpopular enough and they vote for them!

    Let's magnify such anxiety in members of Congress. Even if you've called the Judiciary members before, call again! Route their staff to Hate Law Jihad, now on the main pages of and

    Call your members of the House and Senate toll free at 1-877-851-6437 or toll 1-202-225-3121. Tell them, "Please don't vote for any hate crimes legislation. Don't vote for HR 256 and HR 262. Please watch online the video Hate Law Jihad which shows how Muslim extremists will use a federal hate law to criminalize critics of Islam. It's at"

    Members of Congress have criticized Islam more than anyone; in fact, their "hateful" remarks are part of the Congressional record. Let them know--as all Americans should--that the federal hate law they are now considering could, like a cobra released from its cage, turn on them!

  42. Usury Remains Untouched
    Jim Kirwan

    "We [have] dismantled the most ancient of human laws, the law against usury, which had existed in some form in every civilization from the time of the Babylonian Empire to the end of Jimmy Carter's term." From: Infinite Debt, Harpers' Magazine - How Unlimited Interest Rates Destroyed the Economy." By Thomas Geoghegan

    THOMAS GEOGHEGAN: In the article, that appeared in Harper's, I've talked about the fact that we've not focused enough on the big deregulation that precedes all other deregulations, and that's the ceiling that has existed on the financial sector since time immemorial on the amount of interest that banks can get from their clients, their customers, their depositors. Historically, and even up through movies like It's a Wonderful Life with Frank Capra and Mr. Potter and George Bailey, the interest rates in this country were capped at eight percent, nine percent. In the 1970s, we began to deregulate this, and then we had a massive big bang with a Supreme Court case that effectively knocked out all the interest rate caps. And we have today, taken as common, that banks can charge 17, 18, 19, 30, 35 percent, not to mention payday lenders charging 200, 300, 400 percent in states like Illinois, California."

    "If you're able to charge 30 percent or, in a payday lender case, 200 or 300 percent, you don't care so much if the loan-in fact, you actually want the loan not to be repaid. You want people to go into debt. You want to accumulate this interest. And this addicted the financial sector to very, very, very high rates of return compared to what investors were used to getting in the real economy, the manufacturing sector, General Motors, which would give piddling five, six, seven percent returns.

    So the capital in this country began to shift in the financial sector. That's why the financial sector began to bloat up. That's why we ended up, by 2006, having a third of all profits going into the banks and the financial firms and not into the real economy." (1)

    ?These cords of dynamite that blew the lid off interest caps; have taken away our freedoms and insured that, like our money, our financial options have nearly been destroyed. This all began with the appointment of Gerald R. Ford and the 25th Amendment that made his administration possible. Ford did a lot more than just officially pardon Nixon: because he also appointed Rockefeller as his VP, who was able to quietly connect all those secret decisions that linked corporate banking to the military-congressional-industrial-complex; which opened the way for the formal creation of the New World Order, and simultaneously unplugged the public from any role in this entire travesty, as depicted in the 1974 illustration above.

    The recent changes in the Bankruptcy laws, penalize individuals far beyond what most people can afford: while at the same time Congress liberalized the Business Bankruptcy Laws to the point where when a business goes bankrupt today; this amounts to taking a brief shower that allows them to shed all of their most painful obligations while retaining all their assets. In other words; Bankruptcy for Businesses is the exact opposite of what happens to individuals, when they are forced into personal Bankruptcy. And it is this form of bankruptcy that awaits the automotive industry, and probably almost every major corporation that still has labor contracts or social obligations to their employees, such as retirement accounts, or medical guarantees. So when you hear about how dire things will be if one or more of our major industries is about to be forced into bankruptcy, you might want to run it through this simple lense-before deciding as to "what will be lost."

    The 'Bankruptcy Card' now belongs completely to the owners, just like their "get-out-of-jail-free" Card. There are so many different facets to their use and abuse of Usury that it literally boggles the mind. But then that is why 'Usury Laws have existed in some form in every civilization from the time of the Babylonian Empire,' except for now, under the watchful eye of the Illuminati and the New World Order.

    For instance; 'the problem' that Obama and Geithner supposedly addressed was "toxic housing stocks" when the real problem is still "toxic banks, and their thoroughly criminal practices and procedures. By the end of January of this year the FED had already dispensed $11.5 Trillion to the shadow government of this country-yet MSM is currently claiming that only $4 Trillion plus has been allocated thus far (about a third of the actual amount). Until government begins to level with the public this monstrosity will only get bigger because the real causes of all our problems are in the details of everything they say they're doing; and are not mentioned in any of the endless press conferences that Obama continues to give. (2)

    Yesterday's announcement offered this "deal" to the taxpayers. 'We put up 94% of the investment while the private financial institutions put up 6% of the investment: Then we and the "vulture capitalists" each get 50% of the profits, if there are any. This is the brilliant plan that Geithner and Obama would not reveal the details of, the first time they tried to force this down our throats. Yesterday was a re-run, nothing new, except that this time they were comfortable with telling us about this, as they were certain that none of the idiots in the public would understand what is really going on.

    There are no real changes in the way that bonuses are paid either, except for AIG. They failed to mention this part of that deal as well. The changes only apply to AIG, and not to any of the other obscene bailouts or the outrageous bonuses paid to their executives-because as usual they haven't fixed the system: They have only tinkered with one instance of 'a problem' that managed to seriously anger a great many people. What happens when and IF the public ever learns the truth about the entire monetary collapse that is continuing without interruption in the real world? I'd love to hear about what happened to that $11.5 Trillion (as of 1-31-09) that has since been added to, no doubt: How about you, aren't you even curious?

    There is a 'solution' floating around out there in the shadows: it's called the 28th Amendment and could, if enacted, eliminate the corporate personhood status, that has caused all this criminality to have such a hugely successful run through this lawless place that it has structured, since that travesty was successfully created out of the 14th Amendment.

    The 14th Amendment was used by the corporations to acquire personhood. But the 14th Amendment was intended to protect the then recently-freed African-American slaves from racism-just one more example of the strong-arm legal tactics used to alter this Republic and turn it into just another fiefdom of, by and for, the Super-rich! (3)

    If we do not begin to protect ourselves from this government, then we shall become the new slaves that the Illuminati and the New World Order were formed to create here, in the first place.

    1) Thomas Geoghegan on "Infinite Debt: How Unlimited Interest Rates Destroyed the Economy" - video & partial transcript
    2) Delusion & Denial
    3) Proposed Amendment to Article 28

  43. MADMAN Brown's free trade plea 'puts millions of jobs at risk'War on Want attacks Gordon Brown's call to G20 leaders to complete Doha talks on liberalising world trade










  51. The abuse of buying and selling votes crept in and money began to play an important part in determining elections. Later on, this process of corruption spread to the law courts. And then to the army, and finally the Republic was subjected to the rule of emperors: Plutarch - Historian of the Roman Republic

  52. FACT: There are 20,000 black-on-white rapes every year in the US, but fewer than 100 white-on-black rapes.

  53. US backing for world currency stuns markets
    US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner shocked global markets by revealing that Washington is "quite open" to Chinese proposals for the gradual development of a global reserve currency run by the International Monetary Fund.

    The dollar plunged instantly against the euro, yen, and sterling as the comments flashed across trading screens. David Bloom, currency chief at HSBC, said the apparent policy shift amounts to an earthquake in geo-finance.

    "The mere fact that the US Treasury Secretary is even entertaining thoughts that the dollar may cease being the anchor of the global monetary system has caused consternation,"

  54. Metropolitan Police Encourage Citizens To Rifle Through Neighbours Bins to Combat Terrorism

    'A new London Metropolitan Police anti-terrorism campaign is encouraging law abiding citizens to look through each others' bins to check for "suspicious" items such as chemical bottles, and to report any troubling findings to the police.

    A second poster has been produced outlining how returning the ever-watching gaze of one of the 4.2 million CCTV cameras in the UK should also be considered suspicious behaviour.

    Staring back at big brother is a no-no, the authorities can watch you but you cannot look back at them - you must practice cognitive dissonance or engage in "doublethink" as Orwell called it, pretending that the cameras are not even there.'


    Mother's anger over racist attacks that changed Curtis OjapahDonna admits that a £75-a-week cannabis habit also changed Curtis, but insists falling in with the wrong company over the last two years and on going psychological damage In 2006, aged 15, Curtis was chased along Aigburth Road by a gang wielding a Samurai sword who hurled racist abuse at him On Wednesday the ECHO reported how Curtis is a former Liverpool schools parliament leader who got into debt and went off the rails Curtis was always a quiet, helpful young man who read his Bible and loved singing and acting in school plays like Bugsy Malone. He has got a lovely voice and even sang in the town hall once.Earlier this week Curtis was sentenced to four years and eight months jail at Liverpool crown court after admitting the mallet attack which left shopkeeper Sabapathy Srithararajah with a fractured skull.

  56. Police identify 200 children as potential terrorists

    Drastic new tactics to prevent school pupils as young as 13 falling into extremism

    Two hundred schoolchildren in Britain, some as young as 13, have been identified as potential terrorists by a police scheme that aims to spot youngsters who are "vulnerable" to Islamic radicalisation.

    The number was revealed to The Independent by Sir Norman Bettison, the chief constable of West Yorkshire Police and Britain's most senior officer in charge of terror prevention.

    He said the "Channel project" had intervened in the cases of at least 200 children who were thought to be at risk of extremism, since it began 18 months ago. The number has leapt from 10 children identified by June 2008.

  57. Killer who pretended to be a 16 gets life sentence after he is proved to be an adult

    Life: Juvinal Ferreira was proved to be an adult despite claiming he was 16 when he carried out the crime

    A killer tried to avoid a life sentence for raping and murdering a grandmother by pretending he was 16.

    Gambian Juvinal Ferreira hoped to serve as little as eight years behind bars by claiming he was under 18 when he carried out the brutal and frenzied attack on Elaine Walpole in Norfolk in 2008.

    But police launched an international investigation and uncovered medical evidence and dental records to prove that he was really aged between 19 and 23.

    Ferreira has now been jailed for life and told he would serve at least 22 years before being considered for parole.

    He was born in war-torn Guinea-Bissau but grew up in the Gambia before arriving in the UK in 2007 and settling in Dereham, Norfolk.

    In April 2008, he stabbed Elaine Walpole, 47, in the neck and head in a horrifying attack at her flat two weeks after he befriended her.

    The half-naked body of the mother-of three was found thee days later. She had 50 other injuries including bite marks to her face.

  58. Battle of Corinth said...
    The Greeks are coming.

    The term Ancient Greece refers to the period of Greek history lasting from the Greek Dark Ages ca. 1100 BC and the Dorian invasion, to 146 BC and the Roman conquest of Greece after the Battle of Corinth. It is generally considered to be the seminal culture which provided the foundation of Western civilization. Greek culture had a powerful influence on the Roman Empire, which carried a version of it to many parts of Europe. The civilization of the ancient Greeks has been immensely influential on language, politics, educational systems, philosophy, science, and the arts, giving rise to the Renaissance in Western Europe and again resurgent during various neo-Classical revivals in 18th and 19th century Europe and the Americas.




  61. UK GDP suffers worst quarterly fall for 30 years
    Britain has suffered the worst quarterly fall in GDP for almost 30 years, raising fears that the country's fiscal situation is far worse than expected.

  62. When There's No Time To Dial 9-11

    The Dance Of The Trillions
    To Shore Up Banks, Bankers, And Gamblers
    By Rodrigue Tremblay

    "Deficits in the, let's say, 5 percent of GDP range would lead to rising debt-to-GDP ratios that would ultimately not be sustainable." Peter Orszag, Obama White House budget chief

    "The [US] financial system is facing possible total losses of $7 trillion. ...With the banks 'effectively insolvent', we've concluded that the only viable solution is nationalization." Matthew Richardson and Nouriel Roubini, American economists

    "China is worried that the U.S. may solve its problems by printing money, which will stoke inflation." Zhao Qingming, Chinese financial analyst

    "Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce." James A. Garfield, (1831-1881) 20th President of the United States

    After ten years of wholesale financial deregulation, bad policies and unsound banking practices, and facing a worsening recession, over the last year and a half the U.S. government has been pumping trillions of dollars in order to deleverage and recapitalize banks that were on the brink of insolvency. But the banking crisis is of such a magnitude, and the damage done to the financial system so widespread, that each pumping of money into the system has never seemed to be enough. This is because numerous American financial institutions, and among the largest, have suffered multibillion-dollar losses, not only with subprime mortgages, but especially with large amounts of derivative products that have turned sour. Not the least of these are the famous gambling products called credit default swaps, (CDS), [which the Bank of International Settlements is reporting to be worth some $57 trillion.

    For its part, ever since the collapse of the investment bank Bear Stearns on March 15, 2008, the Fed has pumped trillions of dollars, under various forms, into sick financial institutions in order to keep them afloat, or in order to merge them with other entities.

    In the case of Bear Stearns, for example, the Fed guaranteed $29 billion so that the new owner of Bear Stearns (JP Morgan Chase) would not suffer losses on the most risky assets on the books of the acquired bank. The Fed has also been buying loads of financial assets from troubled institutions, thus issuing new "high-powered" money against such assets. On November 25, 2008, for example, the Federal Reserve Board launched its up-to-one-$ trillion Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) to support the issuance of asset-backed securities (ABS) collateralized by student loans, auto loans, credit card loans, and loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA).

    As recently as March 17, 2009, the Fed has also announced that its purchases of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) would be expanded from $500 billion to $1.25 trillion, and that it intends to double its purchases of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Federal Home Loan Bank bonds to $200 billion from the $100 billion intended initially.

    Because the Fed stands ready to buy large amounts of the newly issued Treasury bonds to cover the large U.S. government's fiscal deficit, it can be said that the Fed is actively and effectively busy monetizing both the public debt and private financial debts. As a consequence, the Fed's balance sheet has ballooned to over $2 trillion now from less than $900 billion only one year ago. And it is likely to continue to expand in the coming months. Some of these loans will be repaid in the future and some of the new money will be retrieved, but if the Fed were to sell its portfolio of Treasury bonds to prevent an onset of inflation or to prevent the U.S. dollar from depreciating too fast, bond prices would drop significantly and interest rates would also rise quickly.

    Similarly, the U.S. Treasury has been "investing", guaranteeing and loaning hundreds of billions of dollars of public money to large American banks. It began on earnest last September, after the large investment bank Lehman Brothers($691 billion of assets at the end of 2007) failed and the large world insurance company American International Group (AIG) followed thereafter and became insolvent. Then, the U.S. Congress passed in a hurry the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), under the threat of a financial Armageddon.

    It has been evaluated that all these public bailouts of the financial system amount together to a staggering $12.9 trillion, nearly as large as the U.S. economy (GDP) at some $14 trillion, and larger than the current U.S. national debt of $11 trillion. This includes, of course, the close to $800 billion Obama Economic Stimulus package that the new administration sent to Congress in February and that Congress passed with a minimum of Republican support (none in the House and three in the Senate).

    That is where we stand.

    On Monday, March 23, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced that the Obama administration had decided to create a Public-Private Investment Program, and to pour $75 to $100 billion into it, the money coming from remnants of the old TARP program. The purpose, this time, is to rid American banks of the bad financial assets that are destroying their balance sheets, to the point of insolvency. What the new "Program" calls for is the purchase of as much as a half-trillion dollars of the American banks' so-called toxic assets, with the government providing 85 percent of the funds to willing private investors at low interest rates, and guaranteeing (through FDIC) any loss on the financial assets that banks will unload through public auctions. The political attractiveness of this measure is that it provides a public subsidy to the banks and other financial institutions without Congress having to debate and vote new funds. It can be done administratively.

    What can be said is that finally the Obama administration is doing, through the back door, what I myself recommended last April 12, 2008. The Obama administration, in effect, has decided to create the equivalent of the old Resolution Trust Corp. to liquidate bad mortgage-backed assets and other bad financial bets made by the banks and large insurance companies, such as AIG. The way that it is being done, however, is questionable, because this may turn out to be very costly to the U.S. taxpayers and is less than transparent.

    Indeed, the new entity to be created would be tailored somewhat along the lines of the 1980s' Resolution Trust Corp., which was established to dispose of the bad real estate assets of savings and loan institutions. However, and this may be a sign of the times, the new public-private program would be a mixed venture and would be far from having the same powers that the RTC had in managing the current troubled banks. Nevertheless, the new PPIP will fill essentially the same basic function as the RTC, i.e. selling bonds and borrowing in order to finance the purchase of bad "toxic" assets from insolvent or near insolvent institutions, in partnership with private investors and managers.

    Financially, this is an operation that could be very profitable to the private firms that join the government in the operation, because the profit potential for them is high and the risks of losses are at a minimum, since such losses will be underwritten by the government. Therefore, most everybody in the private financial industry stands to win with the new policy: 1- the banks will rid themselves of bad assets at enhanced market prices (compared to what they are worth today); 2- banks' shareholders will see an appreciation in the value of their common shares; and, 3- private investment firms and hedged funds will buy some of these assets at prices lower than par, using low cost non-recourse government loans, and all the while being fully protected by government guarantees of no loss to themselves. The only losers in the operation could be the American taxpayers who are guaranteeing that there would be no loss to private investors. That is the reason Wall Street rallied 500 points after the announcement of the new banks' bailout. Cynics could say that this is American-styled capitalism at its best: no loser except possibly the government and the taxpayers who support it. How it is going to play politically is anybody's guess. It may be a good thing for the Obama administration that such a plan is not going to be debated in Congress.

    When all is said and done, the Obama administration is essentially pursuing a policy similar to the one followed by the Bush administration, i.e. supplying public money to private banks and to private investors with a minimum of strings attached. Remember that last September, the Bush administration committed $400 billion to obtain a near 80 percent control in the world's two largest mortgage companies, Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association: FNM) and Freddie Mac, (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation: FRE) which were close to insolvency. Instead of taking them over and placing them into administrative receivership, in order to change their business model and their lending practices, since the government was guaranteeing these two institutions' outstanding debts, (more than $ 5 trillion US), the Bush administration chose instead to keep up the appearance that these were still two privately run banks and only appointed a legal conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The rest was business as usual, including the payments of huge bonuses to the entrenched management.

    Similarly, with the new Public-Private Investment Program, the Obama administration would have the authority to place a failed bank deemed 'too big to fail' in the equivalent of a conservatorship, while keeping its management more or less intact. One thing is different this time, however. Indeed, contrary to what happened after the U.S. government poured $185 billion into the large insurance company AIG, this time around the Treasury Secretary would have the power to limit payments to creditors and to break contracts governing executive compensation. The fact remains that there is still no intention of placing the most insolvent firms into administrative receivership and to change their business model or practices.

    In conclusion, let us say that there will be consequences following from all this bailout money. In particular, what foreign lenders, especially the Chinese, do with their holdings of U.S. dollar-denominated debt, considering the risk of future interest rates hikes and future dollar depreciation. Already, China's Premier Wen Jiabao has publicly raised his government's concern about the safe value of the U.S. Treasury bonds and other dollar-denominated assets that they hold in huge quantities. -But, I guess, this is something for another day.

    Rodrigue Tremblay is professor emeritus of economics at the University of Montreal and can be reached at .

    He is the author of the book The New American Empire.

    Visit his blog site at

  63. He has four wives and he faced 783 counts of corruption: South Africa's next president


    'We were told: Go and spend it, boys,' says MP who claimed £310,000 for his holiday homeBy Simon Walters, Glen Owen and Brendan Carlin
    Is this a record? MP Harry Cohen has pocketed a total of £310,000 in expenses
    The Labour politician with the highest expenses claim of any London MP has denied that he was cheating taxpayers by claiming a second-home allowance while maintaining that his main home is a single-bedroom schoolhouse and seaside caravan 70 miles from his constituency.
    Defiant Left-winger Harry Cohen said: 'When MPs were given this allowance they were told "Go and spend it, boys" and that is what I have done. It is my right.'
    His comments come as The Mail on Sunday launches a petition to demand a full enquiry into MPs' expenses, to report within three

    months and NOT after the general election as is currently suggested.
    Mr Cohen has claimed every single penny of the maximum £104,701 in Commons expenses in the past five years for his £375,000 property in his Leyton and Wanstead constituency in East London, on the basis that it is his 'second home'.

    Astonishingly, he says he has claimed the full second-home allowance since 1990.
    It means he has pocketed a staggering £310,714 in total - believed to be the largest amount ever claimed by any MP.
    Yet he declares on his Labour website that he and wife Ellen 'live' in Leyton and 'spend weekends at their static caravan' on Mersea Island, an unspoilt stretch of the East Anglian coast.
    If his real main residence is the Leyton house, it means his Commons allowance has funded a holiday home completely unconnected with either his parliamentary or constituency duties.
    Sea views: The holiday park in Mersea Island, Essex, where MP Harry Cohen has a caravan, 70 miles from his constituency
    The couple also own a quaint one-bedroom former schoolhouse in Colchester, 20 minutes away, providing them with an ideal 'twin holiday centre' for weekends and summer.
    Mersea Island is full of second homes and Mrs Cohen said there were big advantages to having another home away from her husband's constituency.
    'We can get drunk in Colchester and no one knows who we are,' she joked.

    More...Now electoral roll row engulfs Tony McNulty
    113 allegations against MPs - and only one resolved by the invisible ombudsman
    Commons rules for the second-home allowance are very clear: you cannot claim the money for your main home 'where you spend more nights than any other'.
    By his own admission, Mr Cohen spends most nights in London. He would therefore be unable to claim expenses for his Colchester home because it has no connection with his political duties, either in his constituency or at Westminster.
    Mr Cohen tops the Commons expenses league after last week's row over the housing claims of Employment Minister Tony McNulty, a fellow London Labour MP.
    Mr Cohen spends weekends at his at his caravan or his Colchester home, above, which is 75 miles from the Commons
    McNulty was under fresh pressure last night over the £60,000 expenses he claimed for his parents' home in Harrow - as he registered for the 2009 electoral roll there, even though he now admits he lives permanently in nearby Hammersmith with his wife, Ofsted chief Christine Gilbert.
    Mr McNulty denies any wrongdoing, but making a false declaration on the roll is a crime with a maximum penalty of £5,000 or six months' jail.
    Mr Cohen is one of three MPs who claim for 'second homes' in London while maintaining other homes by the sea, far from their constituencies.
    Commons rules allow Outer London MPs to claim for second homes even though their constituencies are within commuting distance of Westminster.
    It is one of several loopholes to be examined in a review of MPs' expenses ordered by Gordon Brown after The Mail on Sunday's disclosures about Mr McNulty last week. The review will not report until after the next General Election.
    Mr Cohen's detached three-bedroom Leyton home is nine miles from Westminster, a journey that takes 25 minutes on public transport.
    His house in Colchester - which has a large open space downstairs with a bedroom on a mezzanine - is 75 miles from the Commons.
    The MP insisted he had done nothing wrong. 'Colchester is my family home and I am entitled to claim a second-home allowance on my constituency home,' he said.
    Mr Cohen claims his house in Leyton, East London - nine miles from Westminster - is his second home
    When The Mail on Sunday pointed out that Commons rules say an MP's main home is where they spend most nights of the week, and that he admits to spending most nights of the week at his London home, Mr Cohen replied: 'Traditionally, lots of MPs never lived where their constituencies are. They would swan in to their constituency and swan out the same day.'
    Mr Cohen, 59, bought the Leyton house in 2005 for £375,000, upgrading from a previous home in the constituency, also bought on expenses.
    'It is a nice home and I use the allowance to make it a nice home,' he said. 'I moved because I wanted to be near the woods so I can walk our Jack Russell dog, Rosa - named after German socialist Rosa Luxemburg.'
    Mr Cohen bought his Colchester house for £180,000 ten years ago. The properties are now worth an estimated £700,000 between them. Mr Cohen says he has a combined interest-only mortgage on the two. He said he paid about £7,500 for the caravan, plus an annual rent of around £2,000.
    'We like the area because of the sea and it has a very good arts scene,' he said.
    The MP insisted he was not abusing his expenses. 'The logic of what you are saying is that wealthy Tory MPs could live where they bloody well like but Labour MPs would have to live in their constituency. My dad was a hard-working taxi driver and I work hard as an MP.'
    He claimed that when the second-home allowance, officially called the Additional Costs Allowance or ACA, was introduced by the last Tory Government, MPs were encouraged to claim the full amount.
    When Mr Cohen entered Parliament in 1983, he had only one property, in Leyton. In 1990 he bought a flat in Wapping and started claiming the second-home allowance, then £9,914 a year, on the basis he needed it to perform his Commons duties.
    In 1998, he sold the flat and bought the home in Colchester. To carry on receiving his ACA, he had to declare Colchester as his main home.
    His website leaves little room for doubt about which is Mr Cohen's real 'main home' and his second home. It states: 'He enjoys living in Leyton with Ellen, his wife . . . Harry also spends weekends with Ellen and Rosa in their static caravan.'
    It goes on to say that he likes to spend Friday evenings in The Essex, a popular pub in Leyton.
    Mr Cohen caused a minor stir last year when he disclosed his passion for writing erotic poems, some of which border on pornographic.


    THE Home Secretary's husband has said sorry for causing his wife embarrasment after two PORN films he watched were claimed on her expenses.
    A Red-faced Richard Timney, who is also paid to be Jacqui Smith's assistant, told reporters: “I am really sorry for any embarrassment I have caused Jacqui.

    “I can fully understand why people might be angry and offended by this.

    “Quite obviously a claim should never have been made for these films, and as you know that money is being paid back.”

    Ms Smith was forced to issue an apology this morning and is said to be "mortified" after "mistakenly" submitting the claim, which included two pay-per view blue movies.

    It is believed her husband watched the films at their family home in Redditch, the titles of the films are not known.

    A friend said the Home Secretary knew there was "no excuse" for the error but added: "To say she's angry with her husband is an understatement.

    "Jacqui was not there when these films were watched.

    "She's furious and mortified."

    Ms Smith said in a statement: "I am sorry that in claiming for my internet connection, I mistakenly claimed for a television package alongside it.

    "As soon as the matter was brought to my attention, I took immediate steps to contact the relevant parliamentary authorities and rectify the situation.

    "All money claimed for the television package will be paid back in full."

    But the Home Secretary was said to be "getting on with her job" today despite her embarrassment.

    The £67 Virgin Media bill was submitted last June as part of Ms Smith's expenses

  66. Blue movies on expenses: Jacqui Smith's husband apologises for watching porn... paid for by the taxpayer


    113 allegations against MPs - and only one resolved by the invisible ombudsmanBy Miles Gosle
    The man in charge of investigating whether Ministers Jacqui Smith and Tony McNulty breached Westminster rules over their housing claims has been accused of shrouding his role in secrecy.
    John Lyon was appointed Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards 15 months ago, earning £108,000 a year for a four-day week. But he has refused to give interviews and no photograph of him has ever been released.
    Extensive enquiries by this newspaper have found only one picture of him in public archives - dating from 1991, when Mr Lyon sat on the judicial inquiry into the previous year's Strangeways prison riots.
    Only known photograph: Lyon, left in 1991, refuses to issue his picture or have it taken
    Lyon, who lives in a £1.5million house in Islington, North London, is solely responsible for deciding whether to launch a full investigation into complaints against MPs, depending on the available evidence.
    But if he rejects a complaint, or pursues it and then dismisses it, he does not have to publicly justify his decision.
    If he launches an investigation, Lyon, 61, presents a secret report to the Standards and Privileges Committee. This body of ten MPs then writes its own report based on Lyon's private findings and recommends what penalty, if any, an MP must pay.
    Each summer the commissioner publishes a report logging the number of complaints received.

  68. Millionaire William Hague’s £62,000 of taxpayer's cash for his 2nd home EXCLUSIVE by Vincent Moss, Political Editor, and Susie Boniface 29/03/2009

    David Cameron’s deputy claimed MP’s expenses while earning £800,000 a year.

    William Hague claimed £61,995 in taxpayers’ cash to help pay for a £1million second home in London – while pocketing around £800,000 a year from part-time jobs.

    The millionaire Shadow Foreign Secretary, who David Cameron refers to as his “deputy in all but name”, bought the penthouse in 2003 for £685,000.

    Despite earning hundreds of thousands of pounds through lucrative book deals, after-dinner speeches and directorships, Mr Hague – who also owns a £1million apartment in Yorkshire – used his MP’s living allowance to pay his mortgage interest and £4,000-a-year service charge, including use of a gym.

    Last week he boasted of not having a mortgage on either property.

  69. Dire Warning: UK Interest Rates to Rocket

    'Interest rates will rocket as the Bank of England battles to keep inflation under control, its chief economist warned yesterday. Spencer Dale told insurers the Bank would remain focused on inflation, regardless of the pain that would cause millions of home owners as their mortgage payments soared.

    Mr Dale, a member of the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee, which sets interest rates, said: "The committee adjusted monetary policy boldly and decisively on the way down in order to meet the inflation target. And let me assure you that, when the time comes, we will be prepared to respond with equal vigour on the way back up".'

  70. I have visited this site and got lots of information than other site visited before a month.

    part time job