ARTICLE: Oppression Finally Arrives in the British Police State

untitled

Hat-tip: http://www.westernspring.co.uk/gagging-camerons-counter-extremism-measures/

“Over generations, we in Britain have built something extraordinary: a successful multi-racial, multi-faith democracy. Our country today is more vibrant, buoyant and diverse than ever before in our history.” These are the opening words of our Prime Minister David Cameron’s forward to the document presenting his government’s ‘Counter Extremism Strategy’, and all people grounded in reality will recognise at once how delusional they are. While the population of Britain are indeed more ‘diverse’ than ever before, no-one outside of a funny-farm, and certainly no-one with first-hand experience of life in our inner cities, could possibly describe our society as currently more vibrant, or more buoyant than ever before.

David Cameron then goes on to talk about the ‘British values’ of freedom, inclusivity and democracy that we have, according to him, come to cherish.

One might think that with all the ‘vibrancy’ and ‘buoyancy’ that our increased ‘diversity’ has brought us that we British people would be falling over ourselves to welcome even more ‘diversity’, and that there would be no need for duress on the part of the Government to persuade us that we must accept more. All is not as David Cameron pretends however, because the ‘Counter Extremism Strategy’ aims to prevent the polarisation of our society in which disparate communities and disparate individuals reject the government’s insistence that we must all live happily, cheek-by-jowl with people who are alien to our way of life. In short, the Counter Extremism Strategy is intended to intimidate communities into accepting the imposition of multiculturalism and multiracialism that few people actually want.

If we truly had built something ‘extraordinary’, a ‘successful multi-racial, multi-faith democracy’, with greater ‘vibrancy’ and ‘buoyancy’ than ‘ever before in our history’, there would be no need for the government’s Counter Extremism Strategy. This whole issue therefore, and the government’s position is predicated on a lie.

David Cameron goes on, “One of the greatest threats we face is the scourge of extremism from those who want to divide us. We see it in sickening displays of neo-Nazism, Islamophobia, antisemitism and, of course, Islamist extremism”, oh, of course!

David Cameron says, “… of course, Islamist extremism”, in order to emphasise the only form of extremism that the indigenous British are actually concerned about. His focus here on ‘Islamist extremism’ is intended to distract us from the real intention of the legislation being proposed and to provide the Draconian measures planned with an element of ‘sugar coating’, making them easier to swallow.

Cameron states that government has in the past been “too tolerant of intolerance”, and with regard to Islamic extremism he is right, however with three Race Relations Acts, in 1965, 1968 and then 1976, and finally the Equalities Act of 2010, each act ratcheting-up the restrictions on our freedom of action and freedom of speech regarding race, government have already taken very oppressive steps where so-called right-wing extremism is concerned.

At any time over the last sixty or seventy years government could have almost completely defused the race issue in this country, by simply halting mass immigration from the Third World and by allowing people the freedom to discriminate as we see fit. This would have significantly limited the impact of non-White immigration on our society and by not forcing disparate peoples into contact with each other, public resentment would have greatly diminished. This would have been the response of a moderate government, but sadly, successive governments have not been moderate, they have sought to flood our country with non-White immigrants and to force us to interact with them at every step and turn of our lives. We have been governed by a succession of extremist governments, with the extreme aim of forcibly creating a multiracial society and inducing our people miscegenate.

Oppression 1The Race Relations Act 1965 represents the measures that the Labour government of Harold Wilson thought appropriate in 1965. The measures contained were considered the limit of what could be achieved in terms of coercing the British people forcing us to submit to the presence of a significant non-White population in this country. By 1968 however, the Wilson government thought they could get away with more and they introduced more extreme measures, and by 1976 the Labour government of James Callaghan introduced even more extreme measures.

Finally, came the Equalities Act 2010, which creates an onus on every government department and every public body to take active steps to promote ‘diversity’ and suppress any expression of opposition. The race relations regime established by the Equalities act creates a rigid legislative framework making discrimination virtually impossible and making public dissent from the ostensible goals of tolerance and diversity so costly as to be untenable.

The measures incorporated within the Equalities Act however, were thankfully only designed to punish those who break the law, and this is where the governments proposed counter extremism measures go right off the ‘Richter scale’ of law enforcement measures as far as civilised Western nations are concerned. The new measures include measures to ‘disrupt’ the lives of people who have not broken the law, but who are judged by the authorities to hold and disseminate views with which the government disagrees.

“We will disrupt extremists, aggressively …” says David Cameron, “We will disrupt all those who seek to spread hate and we will prosecute all those who break the law”, adds the Home Secretary Theresa May. Let us be clear, when a government imposes measures that disrupt the lives of its citizens simply because those citizens hold beliefs that are contrary to those of the government, and in circumstances where the citizens concerned have neither employed violence nor broken the law, this is not ‘law enforcement’, it is not ‘protecting the people’, it is not ‘good government’, it is out-and-out oppression!

Illustrating the hypocrisy of these new measures, the government document detailing the proposed counter extremism strategy begins Chapter One with the words: “Life in our country is based on fundamental values that have evolved over centuries, values that are supported and shared by the overwhelming majority of the population and are underpinned by our most important local and national institutions. These values include the rule of law, democracy, individual liberty, and the mutual respect, tolerance and understanding of different faiths and beliefs”.

It does not seem to have occurred to David Cameron or Theresa May that ‘the rule of law’, means that government does not act outside of the law by persecuting with disruption orders, those who have been law abiding. It does not occur to them that a central tenet of ‘democracy’ is the right of freedom of expression, a freedom that successive rafts of so-called hate-speech legislation has already substantially curtailed, or that ‘individual liberty’ confers upon people, freedom of belief, and freedom of conscience. That is, the freedom to hold beliefs not shared by the government and in some instances directly opposed to those of the government, providing the people holding those beliefs act within the law.

In Chapter Two of the government document, it states under the heading ‘Disrupting Extremists, “We will create new targeted powers, flexible enough to cover the full range of extremist behaviour, including where extremists sow division in our communities and seek to undermine the rule of law”. Furthermore, in Chapter Five, dealing specifically with ‘Disrupting Extremists’, it continues, “there remain extremists in our society who cause an immense amount of harm, while being careful to stay just the right side of the law. In addition to strengthening our use of existing powers against such extremists, we will introduce new, carefully targeted powers to challenge the most active and persistent individuals and groups”.

Bear in mind here, the government are not talking about terrorist groups being targeted for disruption, nor are they talking about criminal organisations that break the law, they are talking about ‘disrupting’, that is, persecuting people for simply holding and disseminating dissident beliefs. These are the sort of tactics which a generation ago, and perhaps even a decade ago would only be associated with totalitarian regimes, or autocratic governments in Africa or Asia.

Gagged 1The government document continues: “The police have a range of powers to deal with extremists. However these powers are neither comprehensive nor are they always flexible enough to respond to the risk. For example it is not currently possible to ban groups which stir up racial hatred, or to stop the activities of extremists who deliberately set out to sow divisions between communities and encourage young people to reject the fundamental values and institutions on which our society is based.

“We will therefore introduce new powers to: ban extremist organisations that promote hatred and draw people into extremism; restrict the harmful activities of the most dangerous extremist individuals; and restrict access to premises which are repeatedly used to support extremism.”

When we realise how low the threshold is becoming in terms of the authorities deciding what is considered to be racial hatred, the implications of the above two paragraphs become frighteningly clear. The ‘working definition of anti-Semitism’, which is currently being promoted in government circles by Jewish groups, asserts that, “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations”, amounts to anti-Semitism, and as we all know, in the minds of Judeophiles, anti-Semitism is the most heinous form of racism. Therefore, we can expect to see certain nationalist organisations banned under the government’s new measures.

The measures that have already been vested in the Home Secretary under the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011, include:

House arrest;
Travel restrictions and/or denial of passport;
Exclusion from certain geographical areas;
Denial of banking or other financial services;
Banning from buying or selling property;
Banning the use of computers or telephones;
Banning association with certain other individuals;
Proscribing certain kinds of work or study; or
Electronic tagging and/or curfews.

Refusal to comply with such a disruption measure would of course be an arrestable criminal offence.

Most importantly, we must make as many people as possible aware of these new measures and the way in which they deviate into naked oppression in a way that the law in the UK has not done for hundreds of years or more. These measures will undermine democracy in the name of protecting democracy; they will undermine the rule of law while professing to do the opposite and they will similarly undermine freedom of belief and freedom of conscience, and we must make our people beyond the nationalist community aware of this. We must make them understand that if government find they can behave in such a cavalier fashion without any adverse repercussions, this kind of crude and lazy law enforcement will increase, sweeping aside the civil rights of everyone and sooner or later we will all find ourselves living in a police state.

(2016) Conservatives: David Cameron’s former aide Patrick Rock guilty of making child sex abuse images

patrick-rock

A former aide to Prime Minister David Cameron has been found guilty of five counts of making indecent photographs of children.

Patrick Rock faced 20 charges of making an indecent photograph of a child, including downloading pictures of girls as young as 10 in sexual poses.

The 65-year-old, of Fulham, London, had claimed the 20 images downloaded on to his iPad over three days in August 2013 were not indecent.

The jury at Southwark Crown Court took more than eight hours to convict Rock of five counts. He was acquitted of three similar charges.

Jurors have been unable to agree on 12 other counts and were discharged, meaning the charges will lie on file.

The court heard the youngest of the girls in the pictures was aged 10 years and four months when he downloaded the image, meaning she was even younger when it was taken.

None of the girls were naked in the pictures, but prosecutors claimed they were in “sexualised” poses in revealing clothing, including swimwear and bras.

Rock is due to be sentenced at a later date.

Read on:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/david-cameron-former-aide-patrick-rock-guilty-of-making-child-sex-abuse-images-a7059966.html

(10/1/16) ARTICLE: The Tory Empire of Porn and Perversion

Cameron-Osborne-AnnSummers

Did you know that British Prime Minister David Cameron is closely associated with Jewish pornographers and their families and that the entire British government is surrounded by a sickly aroma of smut and sleaze?

Based on this article by Guy Adams in the Daily Mail

Important note. This is an edited and abridged version of the above-mentioned article, with much added material in the form of pictures, captions and comments by Lasha Darkmoon. As such, in its present form, the article would never have been published in the Daily Mail.  

2FAF698D00000578-0-image-m-6_1451688221733

SEX SHOP OWNER  JACQUELINE GOLD
WITH HER JEWISH PORN BARON FATHER DAVID GOLD

LD:  The 55-year-old Ms Gold boasts, “I have empowered women in the bedroom,” referring to the sad fact that she has managed to persuade 2.5 million sexually frustrated British women to buy her company’s Rampant Rabbit vibrators each year, making her the 16th richest woman in Britain and a darling of the British political establishment. 

Read on: http://renegadetribune.com/empire-of-porn-and-perversion/

Are you sick to the back teeth of this daily nonsense from each of the political parties? Politics has failed us; elections will get us nowhere and more of the same but in a different version. If you like me have had enough then you might want to get involved, as I have, in the following movement: Western Spring is not just a website. We are a community of people dedicated to achieving the Six Prerequisites and thereby acquiring the wherewithal needed to win political power and through that secure the future survival, proliferation and advancement of the British people and other White peoples of European descent, wherever they may live. Please join us: http://www.westernspring.co.uk/

14/6/15: ARTICLE: U.K. Squanders £5.2 million of YOUR Money on Foreign Celebrity Jolly

original (2)

  • Former foreign secretary spent four days hosting London summit last year But no summit on the 1,400 children who were raped and sexually abused in Britain.
  • Food bill came to £299,000 while taxis, hotels and transport cost £576,000 This amount totals £875,000 that could be spent on investigating the 1,400 children who were raped and sexually abused in Britain. 
  • Foreign Office annual budget to tackle sexual violence in conflict is £11m What about spending £11million on tackling rape and sexual abuse in the U.K.?
  • American Bar Association in Congo said rape prosecutions had fallen They are falling in the U.K., too, because the government, judiciary, and police are actively covering up the crimes and wasting money elsewhere to deflect attention.
This is what YOU are voting for.
William Hague faced criticism as it emerged that a high-profile summit he held with Angelina Jolie about rape in war zones cost more than £5million.The former foreign secretary spent four days hosting the lavish summit in London last summer, which he said would help to eliminate the scourge of sexual violence in conflict.The food bill alone came to more than £299,000 while spending on taxis, hotels and transport for dignitaries came to £576,000, according to figures obtained under Freedom of Information laws.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3123755/William-Hague-s-three-day-global-rape-summit-Angelina-Jolie-London-summer-cost-5-2million-host-rate-sexual-violence-conflict-zones-increasing.html#ixzz3d4vgPO8n

(Tue 9/6/15) Article: Expenses and sex scandal deleted from MPs’ Wikipedia pages by computers inside Parliament

 

liblabcon

The Expenses Scandal 2009: Remember all these crimes committed that we the People would have been imprisoned for? https://eotp.org/expenses-09/

References to ‘chauffeur-driven cars’ and a criminal arrest wiped from online biographies in run-up to election

Expense claims and a Westminster sex scandal were deleted from MPs’ Wikipedia pages by computers inside Parliament before the election, The Telegraph has found.
Details of a police arrest, electoral fraud allegation and the use of “chauffeur-driven cars” were also been wiped by people inside the Commons.
The revelation will raise suspicion MPs or their political parties deliberately hid information from the public online to make candidates appear more electable to voters.

More than a dozen online biographies of sitting MPs were doctored from computers with IP addresses owned by the Houses of Parliament in the run-up to the election.
Requests for comment were made to all the MPs in question via their party press offices, but just a handful replied to say the changes had nothing to do with them.

Anyone can edit Wikipedia, an online encyclopaedia kept up to date by users. However each change is tracked and linked to an IP address – a unique string of numbers that identifies each computer using an internet network.

By looking at the changes made by computers with IP addresses owned by the Houses of Parliament it is possible to see what edits are being made from inside the Commons.

The Telegraph has discovered persistent changes to MPs’ biographies made from Parliament in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to hide embarrassing information from the electorate.

ARTICLE and VIDEO: ‘Britain may call off Westminster child sex abuse inquiry’

paedoWestminster

Reports say the British Home Secretary has considered disbanding an investigation into allegations of child sex abuse by Westminster lawmakers.

A confidential letter from the Home Secretary, Theresa May has revealed that she was considering disbanding the current panel, and that May outlined three possible plans to give further powers to the historic abuse inquiry, only one of which did not involve its dissolution, RT reported on Monday.

The inquiry has already begun investigations, but is currently without a chairperson after May’s top choices, Fiona Woolf and Baroness Butler-Sloss, both stood down.

This is while survivors of alleged Westminster child sex abuse have called on the government to replace the current inquiry with a more powerful body.

Now Human Rights Activist Lee Jasper says: “The government’s unwillingness can be understood in terms of the vested interests of the rich, the powerful, the judiciary, the policing, the Westminster and the military… some of whom will be determined to ensure that such an inquiry doesn’t go ahead. The government along with MPs are…slow and unwilling to launch a timely and professional investigation into these accusations, because the whole of Westminster will be affected.”

Jasper also pointed out to Press TV’s UK Desk that “the perpetrators should be brought to justice, but in this case what we are witnessing, is a wealthy powerful elite who were involved in the routine sexual abuse of children, particularly young people in children’s homes, and they’ve conspired to make sure that no successful investigations have taken place today, even though these allegations stand from the mid-1970s.”

Meantime, a spokesperson from the Home Office has reportedly claimed that Secretary May was torn between pressure to make progress and “the need to get this right.”

The Home Secretary has been heavily criticized by the Labour Party for her alleged lack of progress.

The inquiry is already investigating three murders in relation to the historic sex abuse scandal, and reports suggest they are looking into five separate pedophile rings which operated at the heart of Westminster and included many “highly influential” figures.

Read on http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/12/22/391390/uk/

ARTICLE and VIDEO: Two more ministers accused in the VIP child abuse scandal: MP wants Secrets Act lifted to let police speak out

original (2)

 

  • Two politicians join 22 others named in allegations of abuse in 1980s
  • Form part of powerful ring of Westminster paedophiles, it is claimed
  • MP John Mann said he was approached by victim who says he was abused 
  • Called for retired detectives to be granted amnesty from Secrets Act 
  • Scotland Yard is investigating allegations made by handful of ‘victims’
  • The men, all now adults, say they were routinely abused by politicians 

 

Scotland Yard has been handed the names of two more former Government ministers accused of sexually abusing children.

Campaigning MP John Mann said he was approached last week by a victim who claims to have been abused by the politicians – one a peer – in the 1980s and has passed the detailed allegations to detectives.

The latest phase in his search for the truth about a suspected Westminster child sex ring came as he called for retired detectives to be granted an unprecedented amnesty from the Official Secrets Act to help lift the lid on alleged VIP abusers.

Allowing former Special Branch officers who witnessed the alleged events to speak out could be central to bringing prosecutions, said Mr Mann. He has now called on Home Secretary Theresa May to lift Official Secrets Act restrictions.

The new allegations of child abuse emerged after the Bassetlaw MP handed a carefully-researched dossier about five paedophile rings to police with the names of 22 MPs. It includes 13 ex-ministers, at least two of whom are claimed to have gone to ‘abuse parties’ held at Dolphin Square, the luxury riverside estate in Pimlico which has been home to dozens of MPs.

However, Mr Mann said the latest claims, which involve two former politicians who are still alive, are ‘entirely separate’. ‘Someone has contacted me with some very precise allegations – not just the names but the basis of the allegations – and it is going straight to the police,’ he said.

He said the key to unlocking the truth behind the saga lies with retired Special Branch detectives who witnessed events and could be ‘absolutely critical’ in providing information to an investigation.

He said ‘a number’ of officers have contacted him, including one who has read a 50-page dossier of evidence amassed by Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens which is now said to be missing.

He added: ‘It is clear there are a lot of people who could provide a lot of information, potentially vital information, to support ongoing criminal investigations.

‘But they are not doing so because of the Official Secrets Act. They are fearful of not only breaking the law but the potential effect on their pension. This is absolutely crucial if we are to get some of these ex-officers coming forward and to get prosecutions of some of the former MPs.’