Labour stops opposition money

Labour are in such debt that it will probably damage their ability to fight the next election. The Labour party know this so they are trying to stop opposition parties from spending and raising more money than the Labour party can.

There is to be a limit on how much can be spent on election campaigns. While this would be a good thing Labour are only doing it because they are facing serious financial difficulties and probably couldn’t fight an effective campaign if there was an election right now.

There will also be a cap of £50,000 on individual donations which will hurt the Conservatives much more than Labour who have decided not to put a cap on donations from unions who give Labour millions and effectively stop them from going bankrupt.

Trade union donations should also be capped at the same as individual donations but that would destroy the Labour party within weeks and Labour don’t want to compete on an even playing field. They want to be able to have the unions donate millions of pounds while the Conservatives spend time looking for more and more donors to help them.

Judge stops treaty while Ireland will vote again

There is good news regarding the EU treaty. A judge has temporarily stopped ratification. While it probably won’t lead to anything it still gives us a small glimmer of hope. If the judgement comes back favourably for patriotic Brits we can than Stuart Wheeler.

If ratification is stopped it could also mean that the European Union will not be able to expand which is of course the best thing that could happen. I don’t want millions of Turks coming to this country when we already have millions from other countries coming here.

The European Union of course don’t like any opposition to their plans so will get around any judgement and any opposition. In Ireland they are going to make the Irish vote again until they give the EU the decision they want. The new referendum will probably be held next spring so they can rush the treaty in as fast as possible.

Government win 42 day detention

There are advantages and disadvantages of the government winning the 42 day detention vote. The disadvantage is that they can keep you without charge for 42 days. No government should be allowed to do that. If the suspects are guilty they should be charged. If there is a lot of evidence to sift through then the government should provide whatever manpower is needed.

If you were innocent you would want compensation if they kept you for this long which is why I am happy to see that the government have promised to give £3000 compensation per day to anyone not charged after 28 days.

If the government were actually serious about dealing with terrorism they would pour more resources into dealing with terrorism and not lock you up for 42 days without charge. They would also stop leaving sensitive information lying around on trains. Such incompetence should not be tolerated and anyone doing so should be sacked.

Sir Mugabe

Gordon Brown has rejected angry calls to strip murderous dictator Robert Mugabe of his honorary knighthood.

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg urged the Prime Minister to remove the honour to press the Zimbabwean president's 'odious regime to heel'.

But Mr Brown warned that revoking the title, awarded by John Major's Tory government in 1994, would undermine Government efforts to force the tyrant to end human rights abuses, including beating, torturing and killing opponents.

I am sure if it was a white man murdering blacks and taking their land they would be taking his honour without any hesitation but seeing how much Labour hate white people he is happy to see it go on.

EU getting desperate

The EU and Labour have shown yet again what a load of fascists they are. Labour MEP Richard Corbett has begun a motion in the European Parliament to silence any type of dissent and opposition to the European Union.

His plan is to make it tougher for euro realist MEPs to come together to form a group. His reasoning is ”it would prevent single issue politicians from being given undue support”. I am sure he realises that the euro realist MEPs were probably elected for the sole reason of being single issue politicians. Why else would anti EU politicians ever be elected to the European Parliament?

That’s not all that this fascist wants to do. Mr Corbett’s proposals will also give the President of the Parliament sweeping powers to approve or reject parliamentary questions. That means silencing any critics and making sure than anything embarrassing for them doesn’t come out.

These are people that are willing to stop any opposition from even being heard just so that people will think that everything is good in the European Union and everyone thinks the EU is great. They are even willing to threaten countries like Ireland so that their people will vote to adopt a treaty that will completely change the sovereignty of their country.

The EU wants even more control

If anyone doubts the power of the European Union over Britain they are not paying attention. Past government have repeatedly betrayed Britain and allowed the EU to make more and more decisions that affect us which we have no say over.

A proposed European directive could shut down some of our much needed power stations and result in widespread blackouts. Those of us paying attention know why the EU is doing this. The disgraceful thing is that our corrupt and treacherous government will allow them to do it.

They are doing it because Britain is waking up and seeing what a terrible decision it is to be part of the EU. People want out and the only way the EU can keep us if we can’t fend for ourselves. At the moment we don’t need the EU and they know this. If we needed them for our energy requirements we would not be able to leave and even if we did leave they would make us regret it.

The EU are now even trying to control our police and have a single European police. After this Parliament will just be a talking shop, unable to influence the police or tell them what to do. Whatever the government says they will do about crime they won’t do because the power will no longer be with Parliament. The power will be with the EU and our politicians won’t be able to do anything about it, not that the traitors will want to of course. They despise Britain and want to see it as just like a state in the USA but with even less power to decide things for the benefit of Britain.

People have lost faith with police

The public is losing faith in the police with only four out of ten saying they can be relied on to deal with minor crimes, according to a report yesterday.

Only 47 per cent of those questioned for the British Crime Survey felt police were 'there when they were needed'.

And only 41 per cent said they believed an officer could be depended upon to help if they were the victim of a less serious offence.

The survey, carried out by the Home Office and considered the most authoritative in the country, also found that only 51 per cent thought officers in their area did a good or excellent job.

Is it any wonder people are losing faith in the police when they don’t even concentrate on crime anymore and instead just persecute people like Ben Smith for having an England flag in his car.

If people aren’t happy with the police then the police’s £40 million spent on public relations obviously isn’t working. Maybe they should have spent that money on 1,400 extra police and people might trust them a bit more.

Gordon Brown: silencing opposition

Gordon Brown enjoys silencing any opposition to what he does. First he silenced the postal workers over post office closures by bribing and blackmailing all employees. Gordon Brown then silenced the military over appalling treatment that they receive.

Yesterday I blogged that the government is going to abduct a child and stop the media reporting what is happening.

Today they are trying to silence the junior doctors and the dissidents in the Labour party who want to have a debate.

When it comes to the junior doctors the government is threatening them with disciplinary action if they take better jobs than they were offered at first. When they don’t take the better offers the government will probably say that all doctors got the positions they wanted. We know different though.

Meanwhile in the Labour party the membership are going to be stripped of their right to put forward emergency motions to the party conference so that the party don’t have to debate any of the damaging policies that Labour have inflicted upon this country.

Government to abduct child over future abuse

A pregnant woman has been told that her baby will be taken from her at birth because she is deemed capable of "emotional abuse", even though psychiatrists treating her say there is no evidence to suggest that she will harm her child in any way.

Social services' recommendation that the baby should be taken from Fran Lyon, a 22-year-old charity worker who has five A-levels and a degree in neuroscience, was based in part on a letter from a paediatrician she has never met.

Hexham children's services, part of Northumberland County Council, said the decision had been made because Miss Lyon was likely to suffer from Munchausen's Syndrome by proxy, a condition unproven by science in which a mother will make up an illness in her child, or harm it, to draw attention to herself.

Under the plan, a doctor will hand the newborn to a social worker, provided there are no medical complications. Social services' request for an emergency protection order - these are usually granted - will be heard in secret in the family court at Hexham magistrates on the same day.

From then on, anyone discussing the case, including Miss Lyon, will be deemed to be in contempt of the court.

What has this country come to when the government can legally abduct a child and then be allowed to silence any opposition to it? What the hell has happened?

They say she is deemed capable of emotional abuse but isn’t every capable of emotional abuse? What exactly is the criteria for emotional abuse? Couldn't she make a human rights case like the murderer of the head teacher did? Surely she is also entitled to a right a family life?

Police want unlimited detention without trial

Police chiefs are demanding the power to lock up terror suspects indefinitely, it has emerged.

Reopening the debate over detention without trial, the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) called for some suspects to be held for "as long as it takes".

Acpo president Ken Jones said police were struggling to operate within the 28-day limit, stressing the global scale of terror investigations and the need to arrest suspects early.

"We are now arguing for judicially supervised detention for as long as it takes," he told the Observer.

"We are up against the buffers on the 28-day limit.

"We understand people will be concerned and nervous, but we need to create a system with sufficient judicial checks and balances which holds people, but no longer than a day necessary."

The idea is said to have been discussed with Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who has signalled his intention to re-visit the subject of detention without trial this year.

Gordon Brown should not give them this right. If they were guilty they should be sent to trial. They should not be sent to prison forever just because they suspect they might be guilty of something.

I am even iffy about the 28 day period. I am not sure it should even be that long but I definitely think locking people up forever without trial is unnecessary. If they are guilty they should prove it in a court of law with a jury finding them guilty.

British tyranny

One of the things which marks a tyrant...or a tyrannical government..is FEAR.
FEAR of individuals saying and writing things which the tyrant or the government do not want the people to hear or read.
Thus it is such tyrants and such tyrannical governments make it ILLEGAL..a criminal offence..for individuals to say or write certain things,that is,they introduce laws which curtails and restricts FREE SPEECH.

This is exactly what has happened in BRITAIN,over the past 30 years,the various governments have introduced laws which takes away our right of FREE SPEECH,which restricts what can be said or written.
And more than that,they have made mere possession of certain literature,certain writings,a criminal offence.
That is,a person can now be sent to prison for several years if it be proved that they merely possessed literature which the government finds offensive.

This is tyrannical;this is a denial of FREEDOM.

Of course,tyrants and tyrannical governments use clever propaganda to try and persuade the people they rule over that these tyrannical laws are " necessary ",some go further,even to claim that such denial and suppression of FREE SPEECH is " morally justified " because the views they have outlawed,they have made ILLEGAL,are " abhorrent " or " evil " or whatever.

This is exactly what successive British governments have done.
They have introduced tyrannical laws to suppress FREE SPEECH on the grounds that any and all views those governments do not like..any and all political views which the government does not want the people to hear or read about have been and are said to be " abhorrent " and " evil " and so are banned because they might " upset " or " hurt " or " offend " someone.
That is, these governments have taken away the power of the people to make their own judgements about,their own decisions concerning,certain political matters,because the governments has decided that such views,such political opinions,might or will or could " upset " or " hurt " or " offend " someone.

In effect, the government have said,and are saying,to the people : WE regard you,the PEOPLE,as CHILDREN who must be protected from words or literature that we consider might upset you.
WE want you to hear and read only the nice things we have permitted.

These governments go on to say," We are determined to keep treating you,the PEOPLE,like CHILDREN.
So we have banned..and will continue to ban..all those political words or political literature or political writings we consider might offend you,and we will lock away in PRISON all those nasty grown-ups who say or write such nasty political things that we consider might offend someone.
We certainly will never allow you to listen to these nasty grown ups or read their writings and literature because we never want you to make you own your own mind up about politics.
We have taken care of all that for you.
NOW CHILDREN,isnt that NICE of us..

Our tyrannical governments have gone much,much further than the tyrants of history,so far,in fact,that what they have created is very similiar to the repressive Stalinist government which existed in Russia not many decades ago.
People are kept under surveillance,their mail is opened,their telephone calls monitored,and if the government suspects ( note...suspects ) a person may have done something,or said something or written something which that government does not like or has made ILLEGAL,then the person will be subjected to a dawn raid,by the police,their home searched,the person arrested and any dissident literature seized.

There then follows a SHOW TRIAL...where the accused has to rely on..because of the legal jargon and the lagal complexities of the case and the very nature of the Courts themselves..some barristers to represent them,and where the TRUTH of any statement made by the accused in the ILLEGAL literature is ruled to be " irrelevant ",that is THE TRUTH OF WHAT HAS BEEN SAID,OR WRITTEN,OR PUBLISHED IS NO DEFENCE.
If what has been said or written is deemed ILLEGAL,then the person will be sent to Prison whether or not what was said or written is TRUE.
And the government call these trials FAIR and the verdicts JUST....

The way our government have suppressed opposing politucal views..the means whereby they have outlawed political views and opinions they do not like and do not want the people to hear..was and is by using the claim that such views,whether spoken or written about,involved " Incitement " to " Hatred "

To incite is to " urge;to stir to action";while hatred,properly defined,is " dislike,ill-will;strong aversion towards ".

What is particularly tyrannical in such laws as these is that to be found GUILTY,NOTHING actually has to happen " in the real world " no people have to be physically hurt,or physically harmed in any way.
That is,the person is found GUILTY on the basis that was said or written might or could lead to such things.
The so-called INTENT of the person is all that matters.

This is UNJUST,it is UNFAIR,it is DISHONOURABLE,it is TYRANNICAL.
It is AGAINST the whole tradition of WESTERN JUSTICE.

There does`nt have to be anyone,anywhere who is actually offended,all there has to be is a BELIEF.

And even if a person or persons do claim they are offended or upset or hurt by WORDS,written or spoken...SO WHAT.
That is,and always has been part of LIFE,of being an ADULT.
What kind of person can claim they have been so offended or so hurt by some words,written or spoken,that they want to see the person who said those words or who wrote those words put in Prison ?
Perhaps a churlish,surly,unruly,vindictive child.

What kind of world is it where the majority of people DO NOT care that their government is TREATING them like CHILDREN.