Saturday, 6 December 2014

The British police state

“Britain is in danger of becoming a police state” warns the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester, Sir Peter Fahey, in the week that The House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee reports “The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) is not fit for purpose because it allows the police, MI5, MI6, all manner of secret government listening organisations, the Americans and a great many bureaucrats on the local council, to spy on anyone they want.

I have news for him: it already is.

In 1966 the then head of the Ant-Terrorist Squad, commenting on wire-taps on IRA suspects and, no doubt, the tracking of other “commie subversives”, “queers and druggies” said that “Britain has become a police state – and that is a pity.”

It has come to something when British and American journalists feel they have to base themselves in Berlin to exercise the right of freedom of action and free speech in order to feel reasonably safe from surveillance.  Because of its all-too-obvious recent history, Germany is the only country in the world that still makes a serious attempt to limit the power of the state over the freedom of the individual.

Just a few months ago Mr and Mrs King had to flee to Spain because an NHS hospital had arranged for them to be arrested for the crime of trying to get the best cancer treatment for their dying child.

Then there is the case of Betty Figg’s mother.  Mrs Figg considered that the local council were treating her elderly mother inadequately in an old people’s centre.   She decided she could look after her mother better at home.  One day after bringing home her elderly mother, six policemen arrived at the kitchen door with a battering ram, seized the old lady, bundled her into a wheelchair and for some extraordinary reason, threw a tea towel over her head as they raced her to their van.  They were in such a hurry to complete the “smash and grab raid” that they collided with a concrete bollard on the pavement.

“We’re in danger of becoming a police state”.  I have news for you, Sir Peter: we are well past that stage.

CRIMAX – the laws based on lies.

Monday, 17 November 2014

Cannabis - a cure for cancer?

Recent studies have shown that some cannabinoids have potent anti-cancer action.



In a study published in Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, it has been reported that cannabinoids could play a role in treating one of the most aggressive cancers in adults - brain cancer, which is notoriously difficult to cure.

Dr Lui of St George's Medical School, University of London, reports: "our results showed that the dose of irradiation we used had no dramatic effect on tumour growth, whereas CBD and THC administered together marginally reduced tumour progression. However, combining the cannabinoids with irradiation further impeded the rate at which tumour growth progressed and was virtually stagnant throughout the course of the treatment. Correspondingly, tumour sizes on the final day of the study were significantly smaller in these subjects compared with any of the others."

In some cases the tumours virtually disappeared.

Read the abstract published by the American Association for Cancer Research

For years the British government has banned scientific research into cannabis in case it contradicted the official stance that cannabis was an especially dangerous drug.  The government's own scientific advisors have been fired for attempting to alert the public to the truth.

The Cannabis Cover-Up

Sunday, 9 November 2014

James Bond isn't "The Good Guy".


From an artcile by Caroline Cadwalladr...

Laura Poitras is an American journalist who has chosen to live in Berlin in order to avoid NSA surveillance.

Annie Machonis is a whistle-blower from another time, who also now lives in Berlin.  She was an MI5 agent who went to the press back in 1997. “In relative terms, that was a golden time for MI5. I was horrified by what I saw happening. There were no limits on its power. And there were so many things it was doing: illegal wiretapping of journalists, state-sponsored terrorism, files being held on government ministers, withholding of evidence, the imprisonment of innocent people… ”

"Everyone in Berlin takes a horrified delight in telling me that the British have what Laura Poitras calls “the worst of the worst”. It’s notable that she travelled back to the US last month for the premiere of Citizenfour but she wouldn't come to Britain. “It’s what I was advised by my lawyers.” We don’t just have GCHQ, which goes far beyond even what the NSA is doing – according to Snowden it harvests “everything” – but we also have no constitutional protections, no amendments that guard the freedom of the press, no nothing. Just a historical perspective that gives us one, possibly distorted, view of how our intelligence services work.

Read the full article:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/09/berlins-digital-exiles-tech-activists-escape-nsa

Too many jobsworth

A mother who left her six year old child alone in the house for 45 minutes while she took a driving lesson is now unable to find a job because because the criminal conviction that followed continuous to haunt her.

She left her six year old child in the house while she took a driving lesson in order to improve her chances of getting s job.  She did, in fact, pass her driving test.  While she was out a 'community nurse' called and the boy answered the door.  The nurse contacted the police; the police felt obliged to issue an official caution which, technically, gives a person a criminal record.

The woman wishes to practice mental health care but now whenever a check is made on her 'criminal record' the caution for 'child neglect'shows up.

This case highlights much of what is wrong with this country: too many civil 'servants' wandering around trying to justify their existence.  Are the authorities seriously arguing that a six year old boy is too young to be left alone in the house for a few minutes?  Presumably he is allowed to go out an play with other kids without being tied to his mum's apron strings.

What was the nurse thinking of, making a fuss; why did the police feel compelled to stick the boot in - and what is wrong with all the prospective employers who cannot understand the pettiness and irrelevance of an out-dated caution?

We have become a nation of small-minded bumbling bureaucrats looking to cause trouble - like the traffic warden who issued a penalty notice when she saw a guy smoking a cigarette in his own van.  We have become a mean-spirited and spiteful little country - and worse still, one in which all the 'genteel folk' will soon be too frightened to do anything without permission from a government official.  And the authorities cannot work out why British productivity per worker is now one of the lowest in the industrialised world.

Thursday, 6 November 2014

UK government dismantles lawyer-client confidentiality

In my book The Cannabis Cover Up, I make the allegation that, because of a combination of a restricted Legal Aid budget and lazy barristers, the (government) Prosecution staff effectively control the Defence lawyers.  Many readers might consider that a bit far-fetched.

Little by little, however, the British government is forced to make public the degree to which it manipulates the criminal ‘justice’ system for its own ends.  Today it is revealed that government lawyers have the ability to override lawyer-client confidentiality and spy directly on what is passing between a Defendant and his barrister.

Cori Crider, a lawyer for the human rights charity Reprieve, says: "It's now clear the intelligence agencies have been eavesdropping on lawyer-client conversations for years.
"This raises troubling implications for the whole British justice system. In how many cases has the government eavesdropped to give itself an unfair advantage in court?"

The excuse, of course, is ‘national security’ – the usual government get-out-of-jail-card excuse for all skulduggery.  The truth, as always, is somewhat different.  Money and expediency is the order of the day in the British system.  The quickest and cheapest way to get the result they want is to nobble the Defence.  It saves time and cost – and where the case opens up the possibility of seizing assets – it allows the government to get to the money faster.

Read more at CRIMAX

Tuesday, 4 November 2014

The Rotten rotting State

Corruption from the very top down.

At the risk of saying “I told you so” (my previous blog “The British government as child abusers - 29 October 2014”)

It is now being reported in the British press that Mrs May (Home Secretary) has conceded that the Home Office may now be forced to look overseas for a new chairman / chairwoman to supervise the enquiry into the long-term and systematic child abuse that has taken place throughout the government, parliament, the police and the legal profession.

She said in Parliament yesterday “To put it bluntly, it will not be straightforward to find a chairman who has both the expertise to do this hugely important work and has had no contact at all with an institution or individual about whom people have concerns.”


Decoded: “we can’t find anyone in senior management in the civil service who may not be related to some pervert.”

Home Affairs Committee chairman Keith Vaz rejected suggestions the job had become a ‘poisoned chalice’.
He said: “We’re an island of 64 million people, and I’m certain we have someone with the skills, the leadership qualities, the integrity, and the ability to have a hands-on approach for what will be a very long inquiry.”

In a land where the basis of law is lies, discrimination, opportunism and racism, it is not surprising that those at the top are twisted.

More background at: www.crimax.net

Saturday, 1 November 2014

Who can you trust?

The Establishment is unable to find a candidate to supervise the latest paedophile investigation who is not, somehow, connected to the people who may have committed the crimes.

The Lord Mayor of London, Fiona Woolf, who was brought in to replace Lady Butler-Sloss, has been forced to stand down because the victims have formed a pressure group strong enough to play the government at its own game.

Former victims of abuse have learned how to kick up a fuss in the media and get noticed, at last.  The only thing the shadowy figures at the top of our 'Civil Service' are afraid of is coming under public scrutiny.

It is beginning to look as though the upper echelons of government are so riddled with corruption and perversion that a suitable person, with sufficient impartiality, will have to be found beyond these shores.  Understandably, the victims will not tolerate the appointment of a British judge or barrister because, quite rightly, these are the people who helped cover up the abuse in the first place.