Daily Archives: January 27, 2007

Gun crime soaring across Britain

Daily Express | Jan 26, 2007 

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that the enormous increase in residential gun robberies is directly proportionate to the lack of protection citizens have since the total gun ban in Britain. And I mean it is total. You cannot even have mace or pepper spray in the UK or you will be arrested and put away. The UK is the sickest socialist Orwellian tyranny in the world next to Communist China or North Korea. So don’t pretend it is some kind of free country. That is all in the past, if it ever was. British citizens should rise up and demand their rights, but they are too stupid, weak, sickly and pathetic to do that. It is all by design of course, so I won’t condemn them too much.


Home Office Minister Tony McNulty admitted that robberies on homes using firearms had risen but attempted to paint a generally brighter picture. He added: “We have some of the toughest firearms legislation in Europe.”

Alarmingly, there was a 46 per cent increase in so-called “residential robberies” where a gun was present.

ARMED robberies and gun violence are soaring on our streets and in our homes, alarming figures revealed yesterday.

Gunpoint muggings increased by 10 per cent in the past year while the number of armed burglaries rocketed by 46 per cent.

The toll of victims injured as a result of gun crime is also increasing dramatically and the figures make a mockery of Tony Blair’s pledge to make our streets safe.

Separate figures showed that robberies overall and drug offences are also continuing to rise in a fresh headache for John Reid, already reeling from fiascos in his beleaguered department.

A quarter of all woundings are now carried out in or around pubs and clubs, sparking fresh fears that Labour’s 24-hour drinking regime is fuelling violence.

The damaging crime figures come as the Home Secretary faces intense criticism for pressuring courts not to send as many offenders to jail to ease the overcrowding crisis.

Critics last night condemned Labour’s record and attacked Mr Blair for welcoming the latest crime figures overall despite some of the alarming increases.

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: “These figures show Labour continues to fail on crime. Robbery is a serious, violent crime.

“For Tony Blair to welcome these figures shows a staggering complacency towards public safety.

Alarmingly, there was a 46 per cent increase in so-called “residential robberies” where a gun was present. They predominantly refer to burglaries when the offender has been armed and been confronted by an occupant.

Last year there were 645 such cases, compared with 441 the previous year, and up fourfold on the 160 recorded in 2000-01.

Gunpoint robberies on the street are also increasing – up to 1,439 last year compared with 1,311 in the previous 12 months.

Handguns were the most commonly used firearm in all robberies, used in 2,888 cases.

There was also a 30 per cent increase in handgun offences which resulted in an injury – up to 1,024 compared with 787 in 2004-05.

Home Office Minister Tony McNulty admitted that robberies on homes using firearms had risen but attempted to paint a generally brighter picture, saying firearms offences overall had fallen.

He said: “Firearms offences have fallen significantly by 14 per cent in the year up to September 2006, which amounts to 1,642 fewer incidents.

“While there is a small rise in residential firearm robberies, these account for a tiny proportion of recorded offences overall.”

He added: “We have some of the toughest firearms legislation in Europe.”

‘There is no war on terror’

Rustomjee | January 24, 2007 

If Mr. Macdonald is a straight-shooter and is truly deluded enough to believe ernestly that 7/7 was merely the work of “deluded, narcissistic inadeqautes”, then it does make sense for him to say that “the fight against terrorism on the streets of Britain was not a war, but the prevention of crime and the enforcement of laws.” That makes perfect legal sense in the context of the official story doesn’t it? But the problem is, people like Mr. Macdonald either cover it up or they can’t face the facts that British Intelligence carried out 7/7 and US intelligence carried out 9/11. And I am sure that he has heard these “conspiracy theories” before and apparently rejected them in favor of the official line. Well, he couldn’t keep his job if he embraced the truth now could he? He’d be tossed out on his ear in no time, so he feels compelled to deal with it the best he can within normal rules. And if he is indeed honest in his assessment, then I commend him, but it gets us nowhere as long as he keeps supporting the official Big Lie.

So at this point all we can do is to ask Mr. Macdonald how the “ring leader” of 7/7 could be an MI6 asset, how the bombs could explode up from the bottom of the trains, how “anti-terror” exercises could “coincidentally” be staged at exactly the same locations at the same time as the bombings, how the bus could have been diverted to Tavistock at the last moment and how certain Israelis could have gotten prior warnings. There is more but that is enough to start with as we wouldn’t want to confuse the poor chap any further would we?


Even as the British Parliament on Wednesday debated the Iraq war for the first time since the conflict began three years ago, the director of public prosecutions took on Prime Minister Tony Blair by denying that the UK was caught up in a “war on terror”.

The outspoken DPP, Sir Ken Macdonald warned of the risks that a “fear-driven and inappropriate” response to the terror threat could turn Britain into a society which abandons respect for fair trials and the due process of law. Sir Ken pointed to the rhetoric around the “war on terror” adopted by Blair and close ally George Bush to show the risks.

“London is not a battlefield. Those innocents murdered on 7 July 2005 were not victims of war. And the men who killed them were not ‘soldiers’. They were deluded, narcissistic inadeqautes. They were criminals,” Sir Ken, who heads the Crown Prosecution Service, told the Criminal Bar Association. He argued that the fight against terrorism on the streets of Britain was not a war, but the prevention of crime and the enforcement of laws.

The warning shot from the DPP comes just as Home Secretary John Reid is trying to finalise new anti-terror legislation in which he is making a renewed attempt to increase detention without charge of terror suspects to 90 days. Currently they can be held for 28 days.

Meanwhile, a survey released today shows that an overwhelming majority of Britons are willing to surrender civil liberties to help tackle the threat of terrorism. The annual British Social Attitudes survey found that seven in every 10 people think ‘compulsory identity cards’ are a price worth paying to reduce the threat of terrorism. Eight out of 10 say tapping the phones of those suspected of terrorism, or opening their mail, imposing electronic tagging or home curfews should be allowed. These are all measures that the Blair government has been wanting to bring in but have been opposed by civil liberties groups.

The survey found that people were less inclined to support civil liberties when asked questions mentioning terrorism, but also added that the change in public mood was not caused specifically by threats of terrorism, but that it was now being used by Labour and Conservative politicians to mobile support for even tougher measures.  The poll also showed that attitudes hardened in the mid-1990s and were influenced by the tough rhetoric used by Blair and his law and order ministers.

At world forum, Blair offers strong support for Bush plan


British Prime Minister Tony Blair, left, and rock musician Bono attend a session ‘Delivering on the Promise of Africa’ at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Friday Jan. 26, 2007. The annual meeting moved into its third day Friday with continued discussions surrounding global warming, the Middle East, and the Internet. (AP Photo/Michael Probst)

Dallas News | Jan 26, 2007

British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Friday offered strong support for President Bush’s new plan for Iraq and said he believes the Iraqi prime minister can meet the benchmarks the United States has set.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Blair said of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki: “He’s a man with the intent and we’ve got to support him in having the capacity. That’s what it’s all about.”

Despite the optimism, Blair called Iraq a tremendous challenge. Bush has committed an additional 21,500 American troops to a new security push for Iraq, with most bound for Baghdad. U.S. officials have indicated the operation should start in earnest about Feb. 1.

Blair, who is expected to leave office by June and is making his last appearance as prime minister at the World Economic Forum at Davos, said that the world is already in a climate crisis and that he expects progress on global trade talks.

“It’d be a fantastic thing for poor countries, but also good for us.”

Blair Rejects Calls For Iraq Withdrawal

Playfuls.com | Jan 25, 2007

British Prime Minister Tony Blair Wednesday rejected calls for an “arbitrary timetable” for the withdrawal of British forces from Iraq and pledged to “see the mission through and complete it successfully.”

Blair was challenged during parliamentary question time by Liberal Party leader Menzies Campbell who said Britain’s 7,200 troops should be withdrawn by the end of October.

“I believe we should set a target for controlled withdrawal,” Campbell said.

The opposition Liberals, Britain’s third biggest party, have opposed British participation in the war from the outset.

Future British Prime Minister Hails New World Order

Nation News | Jan 25, 2007  


Alan Greenspan and Gordon Brown Receive Honorary Degrees From NYU, December 14, 2005

Once you understand the Illuminati’s modus operandi of Ordo Ab Chao (“order out of chaos”) everything begins to make perfect sense. Bilder-Bush and Bilder-Blair conspire to trap America in Iraq while Bilder-Blair works closely behind the scenes with both the EU and the UN who then proclaim America to be the new Evil Empire. Then here we have the next “prime minister-in-waiting” (pre-selected by the Bilderberg elite obviously) to roll out the next phase which is the complete damning of America in the eyes of the world and subsequent absorption into the global government after a chastising in the fires of WWIII. All of this is staged, set up and engineered for public consumption. All of it is designed to bring America down to its knees because only by destroying America can the New World Order be realized. And after that, the whole world can kiss their freedoms goodbye and accept their total enslavement.

Hope all of you (foreign and domestic) who hate America will enjoy your servitude. And as for you fools who think fighting in Iraq is somehow patriotic (idiotic more like it) and for our freedoms, you have been duped by the globalists and I hope you also enjoy your servitude. And as for you frothing Christian fundamentalists who think this is great news, that the much-loved Apocalypse is upon us, I just don’t even want to hear any more of your crap. You are the most pathetic and stupid of all. So everyone on all sides, all Hail the New World Disorder! Frankly, we have it coming to us because of our moral weakness, willful ignorance and unsurpassed stupidity.

I only hope with all my heart that enough of us can wake up and get deprogrammed soon enough so that this scenario is never realized. The point of no return is fast approaching, so it is extremely urgent that you wake up to the full horror of it and reach out to everyone you know and try to get them informed, whatever it takes.


A strong need is being felt for a “new world order”. Ironically, this view came from Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer and prime minister-in-waiting, Gordon Brown.

ON TUESDAY, a news item on the BBC World News confirmed what most people already knew: the United States has lost influence in world affairs since the Iraq war, according to opinion polls in Europe.

The United States is also losing its credibility as far as the issue of human rights is concerned in its pursuit of the war on terror. The US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, remains a blot on America’s ideals. It is time to close it down.

The so-called “enemy combatants”, who are still only suspects, have been languishing in the cells for about five years, without being in a position even to have access to the due process of law or hint of a trial. On a recent visit, British members of Parliament were not allowed to see them.

No case has been established against these men, and though it is said all is fair in love and war, it seems inconsistent with the American concept of freedom that these men could be kept “incommunicado” without access to attorneys, families or friends.

If, however, there is a silver lining on the dark cloud hovering over the last five years of controversial international politics, it is that a strong need is being felt for a “new world order”. Ironically, this view came from Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer and prime minister-in-waiting, Gordon Brown, during his much publicised tour of India. Though he is not yet his own man, he is considered the front-runner to succeed Tony Blair when the prime minister steps down in May.

UK “Prime-Minister-in-Waiting” sets forth vision for New World Order

The Herald | Jan 18, 2007

Gordon Brown spelt out his vision for a world order underpinned by British values, to meet the economic and security challenges of globalisation, in India yesterday.

Revealing the international priorities of a Brown premiership likely to begin this summer, the Chancellor argued that global institutions must be inclusive and open to represent the emerging world order.

Without sounding like a British bulldog, he nevertheless beat the drum for Britain, hailing British values as the building blocks for the new institutions.

“I see myself as representing Britain and doing my best for Britain, talking about what is going to bring Britain prosperity in years to come. Everything is a challenge because there are new opportunities we can build for our country.

“We can help to build things and shape this new world order in a way that is good for Britain and British values,” he said.

Earlier, when he and Alistair Darling, the Trade and industry secretary, visited companies which have invested in Britain and British companies, Mr Brown trumpeted the strength of the British-Indian partnership.

‘Without sounding like a bulldog, he nevertheless beat the drum for Britain’
Speaking to the Confederation of Indian Industry in Bangalore on his first visit to the sub-continent, he challenged institutions to reform to meet the needs of this century.

He pointed out that the institutions had dealt with the demands of the world during the Cold War, but now needed to change to meet the demands of the modern world.

He said: “I believe that it is only now, as we see the impact of globalisation, that we can also imagine the full shape of the emerging new world order – a new world economic, political and social order, driven forward not just by considerations of the balance of military strength and ordinary political power, but by the seismic shift in social and economic power brought forward by globalisation.”

Making no secret of his wish to let India join the United Nations Security Council, he said: “My theme today is how co-operating together and with a plan to reform our international institutions we can ensure that globalisation works to ensure proserity and opportunity for not just some of the people, but all of the people.”

His agenda is ambitious – he urged reform of the United Nations, the G8, Nato, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the European Union, which he said must move from looking inward to outward-looking internationalists in a global Europe.

Acknowledging India’s role as the third biggest UN peacekeeping force, he urged the UN to modernise to become an effective peacemaker in the modern world.

Aware that India was only slowly opening doors to foreign investors, he made clear he hoped that Britain and India would continue to co-operate to their mutual benefit.

“I am sure that India and Britain together – the world’s largest democracy and one of the world’s oldest democracies, with our shared history and culture, and common values of understanding and tolerance – can, working in unison, play a critical role as partners in addressing the great challenges of our times.”

Andy Griffith vs. Patriot Act

You Tube | Jan 26, 2007 


Salient comments from Sheriff Andy Taylor regarding one of the bulwarks of a free society: lawyer-client confidentiality, now under attack via provisions in the Patriot Act.

Babies taken from parents to meet adoption targets

BBC News | Jan 26 2007 

Children separated from parents without proper grounds.

Social workers gradually taking them away from the parents, step by step
In 2000, ministers set a target of a 50% increase in the number of children in local authority being adopted by March 2006.

Babies are being removed from their parents so that councils can meet adoption targets, MPs have claimed.

The MPs fear a rise in the number of young children being taken into care in England and Wales is linked to pressure on councils to increase adoption rates.

Lib Dem MP John Hemming, who has tabled a Commons motion on the issue, said it was a “national scandal”.

The government said the courts decided on care cases but there had to be evidence a child was being harmed.

A spokesman for the Department for Education said there were “no targets relating to the numbers of children coming into care”.

But Mr Hemming argued that social services departments are under pressure to meet targets set by government on children in care being adopted.

In an Early Day Motion, with cross-party support from 12 MPs, he warns of “increasing numbers of babies being taken into care, not for the safety of the infant, but because they are easy to get adopted”.

In 2000, ministers set a target of a 50% increase in the number of children in local authority being adopted by March 2006.

According to the latest available figures, the number of “looked after” children being adopted had gone up from 2,700 in 2000 to 3,700 in 2004, an increase of 37.7%.

The biggest rise was in the one to four-year-old age range.


These figures would be “laudable” if it meant children were being rescued from a life in care, said Mr Hemming.

But he said he had evidence from people who had contacted him, prevented from publication by contempt of court laws, that children were being separated from parents without proper grounds.

And he called on the government to reveal “how many of the children that are adopted would otherwise have remained with their birth parents”.

Mr Hemming pointed to figures showing an increase in the number of children aged under one being taken into care.

“A thousand kids a year are being taken off their birth parents just to satisfy targets. It is a national scandal,” said the Lib Dem MP.

He said children were increasingly placed under “care orders” – where they remain with their birth parents but are kept under supervision by social workers – rather than with foster parents.

And this supervision meant some social workers were “gradually taking them away from the parents, step by step, and giving them to someone else,” the Birmingham Yardley MP said.

He called for more transparency in the proceedings of Family Courts and an independent watchdog to scrutinise the work of social services departments.

In a statement, the Department for Education said: “The law is clear – children should live with their parents wherever possible and, when necessary, families should be given extra support to help keep them together.

Tony Blair gives personal backing to gay adoptions

Spero News | Jan 26, 2007

In a Thursday statement British Prime Minister Tony Blair, a practicing Anglican married to a devout Catholic, has said that he has always personally been in favour of the right of lesbian and gay couples to adopt, adding that proposals to resolve the dispute with the Catholic Church will be brought forward next week.

“Our priority will always be the welfare of the child,” said the PM, while alluding to a possible settlement – which may involve statutory referral, a period of ‘adaptation’ for Catholic agencies, or other similar measures. The cabinet is discussing these, but a majority seems to be against watering down the equality proposals.

The PM’s statement said: “Both gay couples and the Catholic agencies have a high level of success in adopting hard-to-place children. It is for that reason we have taken time to ensure we get these regulations right.

“How do we protect the principle of ending discrimination against gay people and at the same time protect those vulnerable children who at the present time are being placed through, and after-care provided by, Catholic agencies, who everyone accepts do a great job with some of the most disturbed youngsters?

Girl threatened with jail sentence for placing cardboard box next to recycling bin

BBC | Jan 26, 2007 


Diane Fountain’s daughter was warned about a jail term

A 12-year-old girl has been fined £50 for illegally dumping domestic waste after her name and address was found on cardboard beside a Kent recycling bin.

Diane Fountain, Anna’s mother, said the bin was overflowing at Christmas.

She said a letter warned them of a possible £50,000 penalty or jail term, fining them £50 “for clear-up costs”.

Tunbridge Wells Council said there was capacity in the bin, but they had not realised they had written to a child and would reconsider the situation.

Spokesman Gary Stevenson said: “Unfortunately we did find a box next to the recycling site.

“There was capacity in the bin, and we feel it should have been put in there rather than being left to blow around.”

He said waste levels in the bins were kept under control and sites kept clean and tidy with daily visits in the week, and twice-daily visits at weekends, while cardboard bins were emptied three times a week.