What Kind of Monster Are You, Mr Brown?

At a time when Britain’s economy is in a state of collapse through either your mismanagement or by deliberate design, in line with your Fabian philosophy of subversion from within, you are now pledging £6billion pounds to third world countries on the basis of your criminal deception over CO2 emissions.


Both you and Blair embrace the Fabian tactic of saying one thing while actually doing the opposite.

"We are at present working ... with all our might to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local states of the world. And all the time, we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands."
Arnold Toynbee, well-known British historian, Fabian, and member of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (the British equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations).


During June, July and August this year you created another 230,000 public servants, the exact opposite of your pledge to reduce their numbers.


Both you and Blair pledged to end the scandal of forcing the elderly to sell their homes in order to pay for their care, 30,000 people a year are still being forced to sell their homes. Though you did give away £10+billio in foreign aid.


Both you and Blair removed our right of freedom of speech under the pretext of protecting the feelings of aliens settling here.

You have corrupted our children, attacked our history and traditions, and are currently brainwashing children and their parents into accepting the unproven and insane theory of anthropogenic global warming as being a scientific fact.

"No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits . . . [Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."
-- Christine Stewart, Canadian Environment Minister, Calgary Herald, December 14, 1998.


"A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect."
Richard Benedict, Clinton State Department employee, working on assignment from the Conservation Foundation.


"The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself."
Club of Rome, premier environmental think-tank consultants to the United Nations


And sure enough, look what happened next:

UN panel suggests new international taxes to help fund development

By Jullyette Ukabiala


As aid from rich countries slides further, a UN independent panel on development financing recently proposed new ways of raising more funds to rescue millions of people from poverty -- most of them in sub-Saharan Africa. In 1999, donor countries gave just $12 bn to the region as official development assistance (ODA), $6 bn less than they gave in 1995. Such aid, even at its peak, fell far short of the continent's needs.
The panel, chaired by former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, was set up by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to identify innovative methods for raising the estimated $50 bn needed yearly to implement the UN's commitments to poverty reduction and sustainable growth in developing countries. Its recommendations will be considered by the UN conference on financing for development, to be held in Monterrey, Mexico, in March 2002.

Among the proposals are taxes on the consumption of fossil fuels and on international currency transactions. The panel urges new ways to boost aid and investment flows to poor countries, and to assist countries raise funds from within their own economies through better political and economic management, including by improving their ability to collect domestic taxes. Such efforts would be supported by the establishment of an international tax organization and the holding of a summit that would address problems arising from globalization, the panel stated.
Members agreed that reversing the widening and "shameful" gap between rich and poor countries "is the pre-eminent moral and humanitarian challenge of our age." And sub-Saharan Africa, they noted, should be a priority. "Nowhere is a global commitment to poverty reduction needed more than in this region. Sub-Saharan Africa has the largest proportion of people living on less than one dollar a day, and indeed, its people are almost as poor as they were 20 years ago."

A currency tax
Combating poverty, the panel argued, requires the provision of vital services which strengthen social and political stability, such as peacekeeping, healthcare facilities and programmes for environmental protection -- described collectively as "global public goods." To secure the enormous amount of money needed yearly for that, it said a global system of taxation is necessary, either through a currency transaction tax or a tax on the consumption of fossil fuels.
A currency transaction tax, also known as a "Tobin tax" -- named after Yale University economist James Tobin, who first proposed it -- would have individual countries collect a "small tax" of between 0.1 and 0.5 per cent on all foreign exchange transactions in their national currencies anywhere in the world. With the total value of such transactions currently put at $1,600 bn a day, up to $400 bn yearly would be raised at a minimum tax rate of 0.1 per cent. Each country would keep part of the revenue collected and release the remainder to international agencies funding global public goods.
The panel noted that such a tax could have a side benefit of helping to curb potentially damaging speculative buying and selling of currencies -- aimed at making profit later when prices change. Such "gambling" was in part blamed for the devastating capital outflows that plunged Southeast Asian countries into economic crisis in 1997-98.
The Tobin tax has been criticized on the grounds that it could be evaded, might not actually yield the expected benefits and could unwittingly hurt global economic growth by discouraging financial transactions of all kinds. However, several major industrial nations have voiced support for the tax, which is also backed by a growing coalition of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The panel decided that "further rigorous technical study is needed" before any conclusions could be reached on its feasibility. Ms. Robin Round, policy analyst for the Halifax Initiative -- one of the NGOs promoting the tax -- told Africa Recovery that the call for further study "gives us an important opening to educate more people about the promises of a Tobin tax and to keep pushing for the consensus necessary to adopt it."


Taxing fuel consumption
The Zedillo panel also proposed a tax on the consumption of fossil fuels. Support for such a "carbon tax" has been growing since the 1992 UN Earth Summit focused international attention on the damage to the environment caused by excessive use of fossil fuels worldwide. The release of greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide from fossil fuels, contributes to global warming and climate change.
The main energy sources that would be affected by a carbon tax include coal, petroleum, kerosene and natural gas. The tax would be reflected in an increase in their price, at a level based on the capacity of each type of fuel to emit carbon dioxide. The higher the carbon content, the higher the minimum tax rate. The tax would likely be collected by fuel vendors. Implementation would not be difficult since many countries already impose taxes on fossil fuels. An additional carbon tax, the panel hoped, should encourage consumers to shift to lower or non carbon-emitting sources of energy, such as hydro-power, solar energy and wind power.
The panel gave no estimates of how much a carbon tax could generate. Industrial countries would agree to release their carbon tax revenue to international organizations funding global public goods. Developing countries would invest their proceeds in their own economies, enabling them to increase public spending.

________________________________________

The panel members agreed that reversing the widening and "shameful" gap between rich and poor countries "is the pre-eminent moral and humanitarian challenge of our age," with sub-Saharan Africa as a priority.

________________________________________

African states, like most other countries, are heavily dependent on fossil fuels for transport and industrial activities in both urban and rural areas. A carbon tax, which would make fuel more expensive for many families, would therefore also reduce the amount of money available for food and other basic necessities. Public demonstrations in countries like Nigeria and Zimbabwe following fuel price increases also indicate that a carbon tax could aggravate social discontent and political instability.
Would such a tax be good or bad for poor African countries? Good, says Ms. Emira Woods, programme manager for development policy issues at InterAction, a US-based coalition of over 165 NGOs, many of which are involved in development and humanitarian activities in Africa. Besides helping to clean up the environment, it would provide them with more development funding, she notes. Similarly, the deputy director of the regional bureau for Africa of the UN Development Programme (UNDP), Mr. Jacques Loup, told Africa Recovery that a carbon tax in rich countries would help "boost the international resource base for aid to Africa." However, Mr. Geoffrey Mwau, an economic and social policy adviser at the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), cautions that the benefits would be lost if the tax collected from rich countries is treated as a "substitute" for ODA.

An international tax organization
With increasing cross-border movement of goods, services and capital in the world today, states are less able to collect taxes from multinational corporations, the panel observed, bringing substantial losses in potential revenue. Pointing out that taxes have become a potential source of conflicts among states, it noted that "the taxes that one country can impose are often constrained by the tax rates of others." The lack of precise and established regulations for taxing the income of multinational corporations makes it difficult to determine which country is entitled to which tax. All that exists are "complex and in some respects arbitrary conventions," the panel said.
Several international and governmental organizations already deal with international tax issues, including a UN group of experts on international cooperation in tax matters. The panel said a new international tax organization should be created to assume all functions performed by existing institutions. It would serve as a global intergovernmental forum for international cooperation on all tax issues. It would also help resolve conflicts between countries and help them to increase tax revenue by fostering information exchanges and measures that could reduce tax evasion on investment and personal income earned at home and abroad. Funds raised could be used to increase spending on public services.
The capacity of many African states to generate income on their own is often hindered by inefficient tax collection. Mr. Loup of UNDP believes the proposed international tax organization could help African governments reform their tax policies, but it should not interfere with their authority to design their own tax systems. The real problem with the tax policies of African states has more to do with corruption, Mr. Mwau of ECA believes. Most Africans are poor and the small number of the rich from whom substantial taxes could be collected "are able to avoid taxes through corruption." For as long as that remains the case, he argues, tax reforms alone would not help Africa.

Globalizing decision-making
Existing international bodies, "largely designed for the world of fifty years ago," are no longer equipped to address problems arising from the growing interdependence of nations, the panel stated. There are no satisfactory means of dealing with global economic "shocks" and no effective way to ensure that all voices are heard. "Global economic decision-making has become increasingly concentrated in a few countries."
The panel called for the creation of a global council to lead the international community "at the highest level" in managing today's global issues. The council would be more broadly based than the Group of Seven industrialized countries or international financial institutions such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Its decisions would not be legally binding, but it should have the political clout to promote development, encourage major international economic organizations to improve their policies and build consensus for resolving global economic and social problems. The panel recommended that the UN convene after next year's Mexico conference, a "globalization summit" of heads of state to decide on the shape and status of such a global council.
African leaders and advocacy groups have been complaining about the continent's increasing marginalization and impoverishment as a result of globalization and are not sure how the proposed global council and summit could benefit them. They "would be worthwhile," Mr. Loup said, so long as they devote adequate attention to issues that seriously affect Africa -- crippling debt, aid flows, information and communication technology, market access and the environment. Mr. Lamin Manneh, UNDP's strategic and regional programme adviser for Africa, said more needs to be known about how a global council would help resolve "the problems we face today." A special forum or channel, he argued, should be created to enable African countries to express their concerns forcefully within the new institutions. The "big problem" is that the council would not have binding legal authority, says Ms. Woods, who nevertheless remains optimistic about the potential benefits of a global council to African states.
The ECA's Mr. Mwau notes that "attempts to deal with global issues through the existing mechanisms have failed not just because the institutional arrangements for dealing with them are inadequate, but more fundamentally because there is no political will." The creation of a new global council by itself would not help unless the international community commits to enforcing the council's decisions. African states, he argues, would benefit only if they are not excluded from making those decisions.

* * * * *

The faked science: the Hockey Stick Graph, Tree Ring Graph, and cherry picked weather station data, the refusal to reveal source data, is all part of a UN plot to impose a World Socialist Government upon us, by deceit and in the name of Wealth Re-distribution.


How rich that the richest men on Earth support this deception, though not through any concern over poor African countries, but because they stand to make quadrillions of dollars selling fresh air (Cap and Trade licences.)



But you, Mr Brown, are aware of the deception over CO2 emissions.

You know that it was the global temperatures that prevailed 800 – 2,000 years ago that produced the CO2 levels of today, just as global temperatures have done for the last 650,000 years.

You know this because your own scientists were forced to admit that this is so in Court.

Your pledge of £6 billion to third world countries to reduce their CO2 emissions is nothing less than subversion of the state.

You are prepared to sacrifice our troops by denying them equipment, deny our people life-saving drugs, steal the homes of the elderly all to further you own obscene political agenda.

What kind of monster are you, Mr Brown ?

How the UN Duped the World Over Global Warming

What the Opening Statement of the 1996 UN Climate Change Report said and The Two Statements They had Deleted.

The IPCC third scientific assessment (IPCC 2001) shows that there is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. Since the IPCC’s 1995 Report confidence in the ability of models to project future climate has increased. For example, there is now a longer and more closely scrutinized temperature record. Reconstructions of climate data for the past 1,000 years, as well as model estimates of natural climate variations, suggest that the observed warming over the past 100 years was unusual and is unlikely to be entirely natural in origin. In addition, detection and attribution studies consistently find evidence for an anthropogenic signal in the climate record of the last 35-50 years. However, there are still many remaining gaps in information and understanding about climate change.

Deleted (1) None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”

Deleted (2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”

One of the independent scientific groups, Friends of Science, has published scientific reports, refuting man made global warming, in easy to understand and researchable format.

http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3

It is an excellent place to find out what the real scientists are saying, which I would summarise as: We all now that the climate of the panel changes, it always has done and always will. However, there is no scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming, and that is why we need an open and honest debate.

I would ask the question; do we really want to bankrupt the economies of the democratic world on the basis of a half-baked theory built upon a foundation of lies and computer manipulation?

Make no mistake, if the global warming racketeers have their way and give themselves powers to control energy use, it will create the biggest single act of mass genocide, since other scientists fabricated evidence leading to the banning of DDT.

Al Gore and his billionaire buddies will make billions of dollars and the New World Order will gain complete control over every aspect of our lives.

Strike a blow for freedom and buy a coal or wood burning fire, and learn to love the gas Carbon Dioxide, which beneficial to all life-forms. Should these Copenhagen bankers, fraudsters, green fanatics and politicians get their way and eliminate all CO2 emissions then the results would be spectacular; the Earth would become barren, and animals and plants (including us) would become extinct.

Tonyb.

Is Bankrupting Britain, New Labour's True Goal.

Bearing in mind that in order to preserve its beaurocracy during the fall of communism in Russia, the government deliberately destabilised the economy.

The communist government of New Labour having subverted our democracy, stolen our freedom and country are now planning a mass increase in on-the-spot fines to be administered not by the police but by private companies and individuals.

Jack Straw, the contemptible maggot at the heart of New Labour's Police State, is as usual busily working at depriving us of our right to contest any on-the-spot-fine allegation made against us. This miserable piece of raw sewage is working on legislation that will allow us to contest an 0n-the-spot fine in court, but if we win we will be made to pay the court costs estimated at, £1500.

The aim is clear, he wishes to deny us our right to face our accusers before an independent tribunal, but because this right is enshrined in yer 'Uman Rights' legislation he cannot. But he can make it a very expensive business, fifteen-hundred-pounds will be the cost of doing so.

As we have experienced the people issuing these fines will be set targets and possibly paid an incentive on that amount of tickets they issue. This creates a motivation for corruption and must not be allowed to happen.

Meanwhile Gordon Brown is working flat out to decimate British Industry with fraudulent taxes on CO2 emmissions, fraudulent because like all the other government leaders clamouring for restrictions on energy use, they know full well that CO2 levels are governed by the global temperatures which prevailed between 800 years to 2, 000 years ago. The CO2 levels we are experiencing today are the result of the historically high temperatures of the Medieval Warm Period. The 65,000 year old ice cores prove this, Al Gore turned the science on its head, the reality is that it is global temperatures that govern CO2 levels, not the other way around.

Gordon Brown must be aware if this as it was his government's scientists that admitted so in court.

Yet still this thief, who having undermined our fiscal stability plans to throw billions of pounds of our taxes at third world countries, while claiming we can't afford meals-on-wheels- or cancer treatments for our elderly population.

He is an amoral communist thug, a Fabian, whose creed of subverting goverments from within, he and the traitor Blair, have followed so lavishly.

They plan to scrap our armed forces to plug a 36 million pound deficit, yet at the same time plan to give away £1.5 billion.

They will be telling us next that we do not need our own armed forces now that we're in the EU.

I would say we need them to defend us against the EU, and Brown, the traitor in No.10.

We should execute all government Fabians for treason and scatter their ashes over the heads of the EU assembly.

I want my country back!

Stop Worrying About CO2 Emissions

CO2 Emissions Do Not Cause Global Warming (It’s Official)

The UK Government was taken to court over its plans to show the film, ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, a wildly inaccurate and unscientific movie that claimed that man made emissions of CO2 had caused a sudden and unprecedented upward surge in global temperatures.

They even produced a graph showing a sudden upward surge in global temperature that resembled a hockey-stick lying flat with its blade pointing up. It became known as The Hockey Stick Graph, but it was faked. The sudden upward surge in temperatures was created by omitting the entire Medieval Warm Period, which occurred about a thousand years ago and which was much warmer than the temperatures of today.

The film claimed that unless we curb our use of energy immediately and reduced CO2 emissions, seven metre waves would flood the Earth and thousands of people would die and thousands more be made homeless.

It claimed that the 650,000 year-old ice cores show plainly that rising CO2 levels result in higher global temperatures.

However, in court the British Government’s own scientists conceded eleven scientific ‘errors’ that were contained in the film, including the fact that only four polar bears drowned - during a violent storm, that the Gulf Stream was highly unlikely to cease its function.

The Government scientists were forced to admit that the 650,000 year-old ice cores show the opposite to what Al Gore had claimed in his film. The ice-cores actually prove that CO2 levels were caused by the identical global temperatures that occurred 800 yrs. – 2,000 yrs. earlier.

In order to scare the public into believing in anthropogenic global warming, the Global Warming / Climate Change Industry have turned the science on its head. Hence the faked ‘Hockey Stick Graph’ and the later faked ‘Tree Ring Graph’.

Every time a British politician claims we have to reduce our CO2 emissions to save the planet, it’s a lie, and they are either criminally ignorant of the court ruling, against our own government, or outright liars and thieves.

THE ICE CORES PROVE THAT OVER THE LAST 650,000 years, C02 LEVELS ARE CREATED BY THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURES which PREVAILED: 800 years – 2,000 years EARLIER.

This explains why, when CO2 levels continue to rise, global temperatures have continued to fall for over a decade; something that could not occur if rising CO2 was the cause of global; warming, as stated by the IPCC.

However, if we look at the Ice Core statement of scientific fact above it becomes apparent that the CO2 levels in the atmosphere today must be, according to the ice-cores, the result of rising global temperatures 800 years – 2,000 years earlier, ‘The Medieval Warm Period’, which was so carefully removed from the Hockey Stick Graph.

Every Green Tax, Cap and Trade Transaction, Carbon Capture Scheme is a criminal racket, theft, which now appears to have become a global industry.

‘The panel members agreed that reversing the widening and "shameful" gap between rich and poor countries "is the pre-eminent moral and humanitarian challenge of our age," with sub-Saharan Africa as a priority.’

Extract from: The UN Report, African Recovery, 2001

What has that to do with taxes on CO2?

It was during this conference that the UN decided not only upon a CO2 emissions tax, but also to form a global taxation body, which would focus upon ‘wealth re-distribution’, either by imposing a currency tax, or a tax on fossil fuel emissions. They opted for the latter and the Great Green Global Warming Con-trick was born.

Click on the following link to read the relevant section of the actual UN’s African Renewal report.

CO2 is good for all life forms, including the lowlife scum who stand to make quadrillions of dollars selling fresh air, and ensuring that energy prices will continue to rise.

Those Government's who are using the IPPC's quack science to promote fear in order to ensure compliance without question to their climate change lies, have no intention of allowing cheap renewable energy to develop, there’s no money or political advantage in it for them.

The very democracy of the West is being trampled underfoot by these socialist dogs and their unholy alliance with the pagans and green fanatics. They are men and women without concience whose green legislation will enslave us all. Millions of people will die because of energy use restrictions based on the lie of anthropogenic global warming, but the bankers and politicians will prosper and will, no doubt, supply the needless dead their coffins, as a token gesture of remorse.

"By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes,"

It's from Copenhagen I fear.

Will no one jail these fraudsters?

The Angry Old Git

The EU has No Basis in Law

As the EU, an unlawful assembly, celebrates the ratification of the EU Treaty, it must be said that the Treaty is not worth the paper it is written on.

It has no basis in law; EU law that is, which reveals the entire charade as a communist inspired take over of the West.

Putting aside the betrayal of Britain, by the Fabians, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, every government minister and 300 fellow Fabian MPS; the fact remains that the EU Constitution had to be ratified by every member country or, quote: “Or it would be dead in the water. However, when three countries voted, NO, the EU unlawfully ordered them to vote again; it had no power to do so. Therefore the following enforced refrendum results are invalid.

The EU is now an illegal and fraudulent organisation.

In Britain we have been told we must contribute more to the EU, which would make us the second highest contributor to this unwanted and illegal organisation, which denied our nation a vote.

It is not going to happen.

I would, as a British Taxpayer, remind the British Chancellor that he has a duty of care towards our finances, and to withhold all payments to the EU until its accounts have been passed by the independent auditors. We do not pay taxes to have them stolen at will by the thieves of the (now unlawful assembly) the EU Parliament.

I would also remind the maggots, Gordon Brown and Jack Straw, that unless Britain is given a referendum on the EU Treaty, that the fraudulent signature of Gordon Brown is a worthless as his promises, invalid in British Law. “Consent obtained by deception is not true consent.

Until we have a referendum we are not members of the EU.

Green Taxes are Daylight Robbery

Governments all around the world have been conducting a campaign of terror against their citizens in a brazen and unscrupulous attempt to force a communist World Government upon us.

They have instilled fear within us by the use of fraudulent science, to convince the gullible that anthropogenic CO2 has caused a sudden and dangerous increase in global temperatures, and that drastic action is needed to ‘save the planet’ from imminent destruction.

However, as true scientists remorselessly reveal the UN’s IPCC lies and cherry picked data, and the Earth continues to cool; polar bears flourish and despite the Western edge of the Antarctic continuing to melt (it has been melting for 6,000 years) the much larger Eastern edge continues to cool. It sea ice has not merely regained the ice lost during the melt but is increasing in thickness, they now talk not of Global Warming, but of climate change, safer ground as the Earth’s climate has never achieved stability.

But still the liars in power promote the mad idea of man made global warming, the insanity that they can, if we do what they say, control the world’s climatic conditions.

The idea of a tax on CO2 came from, Club of Rome, the UN’s premier think tank: "The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.
All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

Richard Benedict, Clinton State Department employee, working on assignment from the Conservation Foundation.
"A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect."

Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports:
"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination...
So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC:
"Unless we announce disasters no one will listen."

Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace:
"It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."

Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation:
"We've got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy."

Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment:
"No matter if the science of global warming is all phoney... climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world."

Daniel Botkin, emeritus professor:
"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe."

David Rockefeller, Club of Rome executive member:
"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis..."

It was at The UN’s Bali Conference on Africa that the UN decided to impose a tax on CO2 emissions, not to save the planet, but as a means of ‘wealth redistribution’, to ensure that Africa received more overseas financial aid.

Hillary Clinton, June 28, 2004.
"We're going to take things away from you on the behalf of the common good."

However, as the plot by the politicians, financial speculators and the bankers, who own the main media and used it to scare the population into believing ‘disaster is nigh,’ becomes unravelled, still this bunch of thieves plot to fill their pockets by imposing financial penalties on energy use.

So what, if they bankrupt nations and create the biggest act of genocide the world has ever seen, these men and women consider themselves ‘world citizens’, and to them, home is where their profits are banked.

The New World Order is controlled by former Russian President, Mikhail Gorbachev.

The communists have defeated us by subversion and treachery, but we, in the lands of the free, must fight back, while we are still permitted to do so.

Britain the Great Betrayal

Britain, the ‘Mother of Democracy’, the nation that fought two world wars defending freedom in Europe, has been brought to its knees, not through the might of enemy armour, but by traitors from within.
Having lied their way to election victory, with promises of a fairer, more open style of government, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, aided and abetted by his 'New Labour' cabinet, began the process of subverting Britain.


They targeted the democratic independence of the institutions essential to preserving our freedoms and began the process of politicising the police force, courts, security services, and the civil service.
They imported EU legislation to bind the hands of our elected and independent politicians, by making, EU diktats, legally unenforceable, legal under British law.

They opened our borders to uncontrolled immigration, not as reported by the main media, to impose multiculturalism, but with the clear intention of disenfranchising the British Nation from it's own country. The Tibetan Solution, as used by China, and as advocated by Stalin.


They have now created a police state, with civilian police employed by the government's quango's. They send their agents, from our public services, for training under the banner of 'Common Purpose', funded by money stolen from council tax payers. How many quango leaders and their teams have undergone such training, has yet to be disclosed.


The EU establishment, a quanqo of socialist governments has encouraged and actively supported the destruction of Britain's industrial and political base, and has divided Britain into eight small regions, which will be dwarfed by it's new political neighbours and end its political independence forever. Though the EU and the liars in government deny that such plans were anything more than a political exercise, they have opened and are maintaining eight, fully operational regional assemblies, again with funds stole from the unwitting council taxpayer.


Why would Blair and Brown, the Betrayers of Britain, destroy their own country? The answer can be found by examining their membership, along with 300 plus New Labour MP's, to the socialist Fabian Society, think tank. The emblem of the Fabian Society is The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, supported by a smaller emblem of a tortoise, one paw raised to reveal its talons.
The Fabians, named after a famous Roman General, believe in conquering a nation, not by direct and bloody confrontation, but by stealth and from within, by use of subversion.

Quote: "We are at present working ... with all our might to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local states of the world. And all the time, we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands."
-- The late, Arnold Toynbee, well-known British historian, Fabian, and member of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (the British equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations).

It is not too difficult to link New Labour's secret strategy of subversion with Arnold Toynbee's statement.
You can read more about the Fabian Society, here: http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@@.1de0be86/9


"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known, and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor. He speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in hearts of men. He rots the soul of a nation. He works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city. He infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A Murderer Is Less To Be Feared." Cicero, 42 B.C.



Let us not beat about the bush, we British have been betrayed by our own government, who strive to steal our country, freedom and heritage, by deception. New Labour were elected to serve the nation because they lied to us and obtained our consent to form a government by a blatant criminal deception; the promises of a referendum. Blair and Brown, the liars of 10 Downing Street, had already decided to serve not us, but the EU and to create the foundations of the Socialist States of Europe, which will have a major part to play in the formation of the new Global Government to which they conspire.



Heath surrendered our territorial waters and fishing rights, Blair and Brown surrendered our history, independence, and sovereignty.



Blair and Brown, are both committed communists (socialist is merely another name for communist, even communist Russia claims to be a socialist country.) There used to be a difference between the original moderate Labour party socialists, but they have now been disenfranchised from their own party; just as we British have been disenfranchised from our own country.


We cannot, and should not, accept Brown’s signature on the EU Treaty as anything other than invalid, and unlawful. No man or political party has, or ever will have, the right to remove our status of an independent sovereign nation, without the mandate of the electorate. We British are a free nation, not New Labour slaves.



We will not recognise the EU Parliament nor laws of Brussels.



Great Britain remains a free and independent nation.



Our membership of the EU is an unlawful fraud, an establishment lie.



And let Blair, Brown and those of his cabinet who conspired to provide the fraululent documents that allowed the Blair to lead us into an unlawful war against the Sovereign State of Iraq, a crime under internatiional law, remember, there is no statute of limitations on war crimes, and they will face justice.

Open Letter to HSE Chief, Judith Hackitt

Dear Judith,

I have no idea what the hell you think you are playing at, in regard to your latest directive to the police, about their right to choose whether to endanger themselves, to protect a member of the public, or not. Already your insistent on the emergency services carrying out risk assessments is costing lives, just because you’re on some kind of feminist ego trip.

Perhaps the emergency services could find the time to give you a brain scan, if they can find it.

The reality is that the streets of our towns and cities have become unsafe with feral gangs of youths, gangsters, muggers, rapists and robbers hunting for their prey. This is mainly thanks to liberal lunatics, such as yourself, however, this time you have gone too far.

What is it with you?

Why get your knickers in a twist over the police taking a risk to protect us, the public, when that is exactly what we are pay them to do?

The police, who patrol the streets, very occasionally, in pairs, and carrying, CS sprays, telescopic metal truncheons, tazers, firearms and wear Kevlar vests.

The criminals carry knives and guns . . . and we, the general public are not allowed to carry anything with which to defend ourselves from attack; unlike our counterparts in America and Europe.

We are told is the province of the Police to protect us and we therefore have no excuse for carrying a weapon, but now you, an un-elected 'right-on' New Labour chick, have changed all that at a stroke. You have removed the protection of the police from us.

Brilliant! Anarchy, by order of the HSE.

Who the hell was it who let you out of the kitchen?

When the murder rates increase, as they will, and more people die because of HSE policy, will it give you a tingle of satisfaction?

In the name of God, put away your Barbie and Ken collection and get real, as real as the people you seek to control. But unlike Barbie and Ken, real people bleed.

You have, with your own unconstitutional legislations, violated the basic Human Right for someone to take a risk.

I have no doubt that you do not have any financial interests in the profits your legislation is causing the insurance companies. However, I do believe that you pose a threat to society, and that you should be arrested and charged with obstructing police officers in the execution of their duty.

Hackitt, put away you Barbie and Ken dolls and grow up, you're a threat to public safety.

New Labour'sNew £93.6million swindle The Carbon Trust

Despite the fact that the government's own scientists were forced to concede, in a British court of law, that rising global temperatures cause identical rises in CO2 levels, 800 yrs. - 2,000 yrs. later; reversing the theory that it was CO2 levels that resulted in higher temperatures.

Despite the government's own scientists conceding the point in court, the thieves of No.10 Downing Street, have at a time when the NHS cannot afford to give the terminally ill drugs to keep them alive, fraudulently spent £93.6 million pounds of taxpayer's money,on the quango, but private company, Carbon Trust.

The aim of this pointless organisation (pointless, because we know that anthropological CO2 does not cause global warming, they admitted so in court) and the sole aim of carbon Trust is to persuade governments to reduce their CO2 emissions. An email would have been as efective.

As the whole point of reducing CO2 emissions was based on the UN's IPCC's fraudulent and unscientific statement that man's acticities in burning fossil fuels and the resulting CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming.

These latter day, King Canutes were encouraged by politicians world wide to preach this rubbish, because it gave them an opportunity to thrust even more legislation on the electorate, and raise lots of lovely green taxes.

Therefore, logic demands that as it has been proved, beyond any reasonable doubt, that it is rising temperatures that cause rising CO2 levels, and man has nothing to do with it, the only way to prevent future rises in CO2 levels is to blow up the sun.

Here is my first proposal, we spend £20 million pounds on a rocket, crewed by the IPCC, Brown and his Government accompanied by Carbon Trust's management, who well armed with fire extiguishers will be sent to the sun to cool it down!

Or, ask how it is at a time when we cannot afford to give cancer patients, alzheimers sufferers, drugs; how it is that the Brown's government can fund a private company paid for by the taxpayer, for a fraudulent purpose?

Are these thieves in 10 Downing Street answerable to anyone at all, or have all our policemen and judiciary been bought and paid for?

Why aren't they in jail?

Am I calling Gordon Brown a Liar and a Thief, you bet your sweet life I am. He and Blair, the war criminal, lied their way into office with false declarations of intent, and neither of them nor their despotic, dictatorship of a governmentand have seldom told us, their paymasters, the truth.

Is it Not Time We Killed The KIllers?

Is It Not Time We Killed the Killers?

A murder is reported almost daily. By murder I refer to the cold blooded killing of someone by beating, kicking, knifing, strangling or shooting etc.

Murders today are soaring and it’s the liberal elite in this country who are to blame. Fools who cry that state execution is legalised murder.

They would rather wring their hands and bleat of lessons to be learned than execute murderers. They claim that executions are not a deterrent to other would-be-killers, that’s rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? At least we would be sure that the executed killer would never take another life, and save us the thousands of pounds cost of keeping him or her in prison.

The state has a duty to protect its citizens and it is failing to do so dismally.

We have a government more interested in obeying the wishes of the idiots of Brussels, than us who pay their wages.

When did any political party canvass with the slogan, “Vote for us and we’ll legislate to make you criminals, and do what’s best for the EU, bugger you and Britain?”

Or, “We’ll tax you higher than any other nation in Europe, spy on your every move and spend your taxes on foreigners and immigrants.”

The only way we can tame the feral gangs roaming the streets, the drug, knife and gun culture is to make them fear the law. Make them tremble at the thought of the punishment that will be meted out to them if they are convicted.

Is it not time to kill the killers, to thrash those who beat and cripple innocent members of the public, and those dealing in narcotics?

We can make our streets safe again, but not while the major political parties dominate Parliament.

Our Party–Your Party can make Great Britain great again, reclaim it for our own.

You and I together can make it happen.

Please join me and let’s take our Country back from the thieves that stole it.

Only you can make it happen and you know what? Labour and Conservatives think that you’re to dim to bother with politics and can therefore, do what the hell they like.

Are they right? I don’t think so!

Tonyb.

That's Just Not Justice, Jack

No one can ever
accuse Jack Straw of being anything but relentless in his endeavours to remove
any form of justice from our legal system. This sneaky little
man was responsible for introducing the crime of ‘Racial Harassment’ designed,
he claimed, ‘To stop the harassment of immigrants in their own homes.’

As usual with all
Straw’s legislation such a reasonable explanation hid its the real purpose,
which in the case of The Racial Harassment Bill, was to legislate against any
form of protest against the ever growing immigrant population.
It was even used to prosecute a CND protestor who while trudging back to
her car allowed the stars and stripes to trail in the mud.

I remember at the
time writing to the Attorney General, that obnoxious, instantly forgettable and
puffed up fellow, Tony Blair used to work for.

“Was it not a
perversion of justice,” I asked, “To use a law that had been debated through
Parliament as being needed to protect immigrants from harassment in their own
homes, for a completely different purpose?”

In his reply, the
arrogant bugger said that the government would continue to use any legislation
for any purpose it wanted.

 

The problem is,
as the much abused terrorism legislation has so clearly demonstrated, our
government, both national and local believe they can do whatever they like with
impunity. They believe that lying to get their required
legislation through parliament is legitimate.

It is not.
Consent obtained by deception is not true consent in law.

Which brings us
to Justice Minister, Jack Straw’s latest wheeze, to pressurise his Government’s
victims into forgoing their legal right to contest fixed penalty tickets or
speeding fines in court? He is legislating to make those
defending themselves in court, pay for the cost of the prosecution, even if they
win their case.

In other words he
is removing, by threats of huge financial punishment to those availing
themselves of their statutory rights. It is a transparent act of a conspiracy,
by the Ministry of Justice and the Crown Prosecution Service, to pervert the
course of justice.

One can only
assume that Jack Straw has either, finally cracked up, lost his marbles, gone
loopy-loo, round the bend, or suffers from the delusion that he’s some kind of
Mafia Don. No one in his right mind or with even the faintest
interest in justice could have conceived such an immoral and dictatorial piece
of legislation, which flies in the face of New Labour’s beloved, but watered
down, and therefore invalidated, EU version of The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.

Pressurising
someone to plead guilty to an offence to which they are innocent, by use of an
increased financial penalty, even if they prove their case, is a criminal abuse
of power.

But then that’s
New Labour the New Slavers hallmark, a criminal abuse of our rights.

 

 

Swine Flu - What They Haven't Told You

Swine Flu Pandemic - by Design?

72kgs Vaccine laced with live avian flu virus.

Perhaps you are not aware:

May 2009 Czech scientists discovered that vaccine supplied by Baxter, had been contaminated with live Avian Flu virus. A lethal contamination that could have caused a global pandemic and which, according to scientists could not possibly have happened by chance.

Accidental’ Contamination Of Vaccine With Live Avian Flu Virus Virtually Impossible

June 10^th 2009, Austrian investigative journalist, Jane Burgermeister filed charges with the FBI at the Austrian Embassy OF THE UNITED STATES, accusing, President Obama, WHO, UN, Baxter and others ( you can read the complete list of charges: Here ) of engaging in bioterrorism by creating the Swine Flu virus to a design copied from the 1918 Spanish Flu Virus and of releasing it in Mexico. www.naturalnews.com/026503_pandemic_swine_flu_bioterrorism.html

Augst 2009, The Pakistan Daily publishes an article offering new evidence that the virus was man made and released deliberately with intent to create a global pandemic.

http://www.daily.pk/7780/new-evidence-that-the-%E2%80%98swine-flu%E2%80%99-pandemic-is-man-made/

One thing is beyond question, that the destruction of industry and culling the human race to between 1 -3 billion, is a stated aim of the UN.

Green policies will ensure that power becomes too expensive to use, thus causing the infrastructure to collapse, and already in America they have built 28 concentration/extermination camps.

Ask yourself, why is it that news of the accusations of bioterrorism, the deliberate contamination of vaccines, has never been mentioned in the British Media?

Why are the WHO insisting on whole population vaccinations for a flu that is less potent than normal flu?

Will you stand in line with your sleeve rolled up and waiting for a Baxter vaccine?

Take my advice and stick to Night Nurse and avoid both the vaccine and Tamiflu – like the plague.

Swine Flu - Your Children the Guinea Pigs

Why is the Department of Health so determined to use the untested experimental anti-viral, Tamiflu suspected of causing 12 child deaths in America, to our children en-mass? After all it is known that Tamiflu can cause respiratory problem, nightmares, and other problems in children. Tamiflu will not prevent anyone from catching the virus, but may shorten the symptoms by a day.

A Department of Health spokesman dismissed the Oxford researchers' claims that their findings would also apply to swine flu.

"The BMJ review is based on seasonal flu and not swine flu," he said. "As the authors note, the extent to which the findings can be applied to the current pandemic is questionable - after all, we already know that swine flu behaves differently to seasonal flu, and past pandemics have hit younger people hardest.

"Whilst there is doubt about how swine flu affects children, we believe a safety-first approach of offering anti-virals to everyone remains a sensible and responsible way forward."

He said the policy would be kept under review and people with mild symptoms "may find bed rest and over-the-counter flu remedies work for them.

"But for those who experience severe symptoms, the best scientific advice tells us that Tamiflu should still be taken as soon as possible - and to suggest otherwise is potentially dangerous.

"If people are in any doubt about whether to take Tamiflu, they should contact their GP."

Perhaps the DOH spokesman needs reminding that the enforced use of experimental drugs is expressly forbidden under the Nuremberg Code.

That includes the untested, 'swine flu' vaccine from, Baxters, 72 kilos of which was found to be contaminated by live Avian and Human flu virus, something that could not happen by accident and which has led to them, the WHO, UN, and President Obama being accused of manufacturing the hybrid Swine Flu virus, releasing it in Mexico in order to create a pandemic, thus enabling President Obama to order the compulsory vaccination of the entire American population. The vaccine to be used would be contaminated to create a worldwide pandemic.

How the NHS can justify buying a vaccine from a company that is either grossly negligent and ignored every biochemical rule in the book, or deliberately set out to create a pandemic, defies belief.

Someone far more cynical than I, may well enquire as to whether those procuring vaccines for the NHS, have a personal or vested interest in Baxter.

ASPARTAME

(It used to be listed by, The Pentagon, as a bio-chemical weapon)

Poison Has Never Tasted Sweeter.

Have You Replaced Your Sugar With Poison?

About eighteen months ago, in 2007, my wife urged me to cut out sugar and use an alternative artificial sweetener, one which looks like sugar and tastes like sugar, ‘Simply Sweet’. So I did, but within weeks I soon began to develop unpleasant side effects, nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea, and my doctor advised me that it could be an adverse reaction to, Simply Sweet.

I ditched the sugar substitute but strange to say developed a taste for unsweetened tea, my main sugar intake, and then a few days ago I read this:

[SIDE EFFECTS] 04/05/2008: Phyllis from Knoxville, USA writes: "I am in very good health, and do not take any kind of medications. I have been having symptoms that were horrendous for 2 months. In hindsight I have been having puzzling problems for years now, but as my body became more poisoned with time, I played my own doctor...My symptoms were very blurry vision, tired all the time, falling asleep at the drop of a hat, feeling as though I was "high" all the time and could not focus on a thought and the bathroom visits!!!! I thought for sure I had colon cancer or something of that nature. It finally dawned on me! The diet pop I drink, the Splenda, I use in my coffee...I immediately stopped all consumption, and it is amazing, within 24 hours, I had a clear head...My visits to the bathroom ceased....my swollen stomach, no longer existed...My eyesight has been the best it has ever been...I have been experiencing withdrawal headaches...I am trying oil pulling as a remedy. I will NEVER consume any products that contain these poisons!!! and they should be outlawed!!!"

My own research into Aspartame has led me to believe that the outbreak of dementia, cancers, obesity and tumours, could well be attributed to this poison, that they’re feeding us in our drinks and food.

Both Diet Coke and Pepsi and many other health drinks are now sweetened by Aspartame as are sweets and yoghurts.

Aspartame in a beverage is unstable, and that it reduces the levels of serotonin (a substance that gives one that “full” feeling), which can induce a craving for carbohydrates. Could this be the root cause of the obesity epidemic?

‘Aspartame’ and ‘Acesulfame K’ the artificial sweeteners are used as sugar substitutes and to sweeten Diet Coke and other ‘health’ drinks, and below are just some of the 92 reported side-effects.

Aspartame is the technical name for Nutrasweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure.

Documented side-effects include:

· headaches/migraine

· dizziness

· seizures

· nausea

· numbness

· muscle fatigue and spasms

· weight gain

· rashes

· depression

· fatigue

· irritability

· tachycardia

· insomnia

· vision problems

· hearing loss

· heart-palpitations

· breathing difficulties

· anxiety attacks

· slurred speech

· loss of taste

· tinnitus

· vertigo

· memory loss

· joint pain

Aspartame can also trigger or worsen:

· brain tumours

· multiple sclerosis

· epilepsy

· chronic fatigue syndrome

· Parkinson’s disease

· Alzheimer’s disease

· mental retardation

· lymphoma

· birth defects

· fibromyalgia diabetes

However, for those cynics amongst you and also for those who would like to know more, but have a strong stomach, below is a link to a scientific study on the effect of Aspartame upon rats, carried out by an American housewife. It is generally accepted that whatever happens to rats in this kind of experimentation would also happen to humans, it would just take longer to develop.

http://myaspartameexperiment.com/index.php?

Aspartame mimics may well known disabling illnesses such as MR, so browse through the e-mails and Google Aspartame or Aspertame and you will never touch anything containing it again.

Tonyb

A second study conducted by the European Ramazzini Foundation (ERF) confirms the carcinogenicity of aspartame. The results of this study will be presented April 23, 2007 at the Mount Sinai Medical School of New York, where ERF Scientific Director Morando Soffritti will receive the third Irving J. Selikoff Award.

Aspartame is an artificial sweetener consumed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide. It is used in over 6,000 diet products including soft drinks, chewing gum, candy, desserts, yogurt as well as in pharmaceuticals, in particular, syrups and antibiotics for children. In 2005, the European Ramazzini Foundation published important experimental data demonstrating the carcinogenicity of aspartame. These data demonstrated for the first time that aspartame is a carcinogenic agent, inducing various types of malignant tumors in rats, even at dose levels currently considered acceptable for humans.

As soon as carcinogenic effects were perceived during this first study, the ERF began a second long term experiment, administering aspartame at low doses in feed to rats beginning during fetal life.

In a world exclusive, Italian news station TG2 announced on April 13th that the European Ramazzini Foundation will present the results of this second study at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine at the end of April when Scientific Director Dr. Morando Soffritti will receive the third Irving J. Selikoff Award. The news story may be viewed at: http://www.raiclicktv.it/raiclickpc/secure/list_content_tg.srv?id=1986#

-