I have been musing for a while how to express my dismay about Child removal as a class war, as I am reading George Orwell’s 1984 who wrote in 1949 about the ‘underclass’ being expected just to be breeding and working… The public gravy train is used by all public institutions and the legal profession via ‘legal aid’.
This post in my daily email from The Tap confirms ‘from the outside’ what I’ve watched day in day out:
- the absence of Articles 1 and 13 in the UK Human Rights Act;
- Article 1 means that all articles are binding and Article 13 is about the ‘remedy against national authorities’.
- why haven’t any of our cries have been heard and taken seriously!?
- why don’t Early Day Motions make a difference??
- in other words: nobody in the establishment CARES, as long as they have their salaries, pensions and who knows what perks.
3. There are far too many organisations and committees that are supposed to remedy evil, but the situation gets worse, as nobody tackles the issue of money creation at its roots:
- ‘austerity’ and legal aid cuts are asking for more and more McKenzie Friends, but we who work pro bono are expected to pay for crown costs;
- judges and their judgements get bought not only in family but also civil and criminal courts;
- solicitors and barristers can be bought just as Police and Prison staff – as in the case of or Maurice Kirk in HMP Cardiff – just to protect the doctor who wrote a diagnosis to get him behind bars for life – and those Police Officers who are retired on pensions by now…
4. White collar criminals in public institutions operate across borders without hesitation:
- whether it’s kidnapping Melissa Laird’s son and deporting her;
- imprisoning Robert Green in Scotland because he is exposing the Scottish paedophile elite;
- kidnapping Grandma B in Austria to deprive her of her assets in the UK, as happens to many senior citizens…
5. When you read the comment on Victims Unite by Peter Oakes re fostering children, you ask yourself: who uses the public servants in public institutions for whose public or private interest?
- foster parents are paid £500 per week per child;
- Welcome to Filthy Britain seems to be the most logical answer – with the ‘breeding’ of paedophilia through the educational system in Eton and other such schools and universities…
Here is The Tap speaking:
Britain is on the brink of tyranny. The Justice and Security Bill, if it becomes law, will enable judicial trials to be held in secret, and it will even be illegal to tell anyone about them. The bill has now gone through all stages in the House of Commons, and will now go to the House of Lords for consideration. In other words, it’s nearly there .http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2012-13/justiceandsecurity.html.
The bill’s sponsor in the Commons is Justice Minister Kenneth Clarke, who is widely believed to be on the steering committee of the highly secretive Bilderberg meetings. In a foreword to a consultation document, he explains that the purpose of the bill is to enable the government to defend itself against civil claims, with claimants typically seeking significant amounts in damages, but where the facts of the case turn on highly sensitive information http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/justiceandsecurity/.
But it seems that’s just the gloss. Richard Cottrell, in his book ‘Gladio: NATO’s Dagger at the Heart of Europe’ (http://progressivepress.com/book-listing/gladio-natos-dagger-heart-europe) wrote a lot about this bill. At the time it had been rejected, but he rightly predicted that it would return. He wrote to me: “The Justice and Security Bill has been around for some years, since 7/7 hardly by co-incidence. It proposes that secret courts will inquire into any matters concerning individuals or events that the authorities decide they want to keep secret. This will apply in the case of the as yet unheld inquests on those blamed for 7/7.
“It was also to apply to living accused persons who would be denied under this Orwellian draft the right to represent themselves or have their own lawyers represent them. Nor will they be allowed to know what they are accused of. In the Soviet Union this was perfectly normal. In the place of legal representation the state will appoint Special Advocates who will not be under any responsibility to represent the accused, or explain to that person of what he is accused, and nor will they be under any responsibility to offer a defence.
“The Bill was savaged by the Lords, but returned to the Commons with all the Lords’ amendments struck out. On the day of the vote on gay marriages it slipped through the vote in the select committee with the vote of one backwoods Ulsterman rushed in at the last minute. (The vote was held at the same [time] as members were in the lobbies voting on the gay marriage Bill). … This law when passed, as it will be, can then be applied to all and any offence, even as lowly as a traffic accident. Accused persons will never be told of what they are charged and of course it is very unlikely they would be found ‘not guilty.’”
The British press is now very quiet on this, though the Daily Mail published an article on 10 February headed ‘Last week MPs revived the corpse of the ‘Secret Justice’ Bill. Here we spell out the full terrifying implications of life in… Secret Britain’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2276327/Last-week-MPs-revived-corpse-Secret-Justice-Bill–debating-gay-marriage-time-noticed-Here-spell-terrifying-implications-life–Secret-Britain.html. Interestingly, their sister paper, The Mail on Sunday, is about to take legal action to make public a secret judgement issued in an Afghan alleged torture case two years ago, which resulted from an earlier form of secret hearing, now deemed illegal by the Supreme Court http://www.leighday.co.uk/News/2013/January-2013/Secret-evidence-challenge-by-Mail-on-Sunday. Also, political campaigner Chris Mullin gave a warning in The Guardian website on 28 January, headed ‘Justice and security bill: last chance to back away from secret justice’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/jan/28/justice-security-last-chance-secret-evidence.
And now Big Brother Watch has launched a campaign, asking people to write to their MP http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/home/2013/03/write-to-your-mp-about-the-justice-and-security-bill-today.html. Someone commented “What’s the point?”. OK, write to your local newspaper then.
Whistleblowers gagged – and there’s worse to come
Another piece of legislation which could make it difficult to expose possible government crimes is a proposed amendment to the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act, as proposed by the Leveson Inquiry into phone hacking. This would make it easier for the police to seize confidential material from journalists, and it would weaken protection for whistleblowers http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/13/whistleblowers-press-new-police-powers. A leading barrister warned of a potential breach of European human rights law, the article states. But now the Government intends to do away with European human rights law http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/04/theresa-may-human-rights-stunt. It looks as if the question of UK membership of the EU is being used as cover for this.
An editorial in The Guardian four days later drew attention to the general vulnerability of whistleblowers, as in the case of a former chief executive in the National Health Service, Gary Walker, who had been told that he would have to pay back any compensation payment arising from his dismissal if he spoke out http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/17/journalistic-sources-law-editorial. But the problem was bigger than that. ‘NHS spends £15million (the same as 750 nurses’ salaries) on gagging 600 whistleblowers’ announced the Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2282600/NHS-spends-15million-750-nurses-salaries-gagging-600-whistleblowers.html, saying that this had cost the lives of 1 200 patients. The new legislation will make it even more difficult to blow the whistle, even when many lives are at stake.
“Democracy cannot work when secrecy exceeds its proper limits”, states the Guardian editorial, adding that hospitals, banks, corporations, meat producers and police forces alike must be open to scrutiny. I would add even humble membership associations to that list; that is something we can all do something about. Whenever we are met with indignation, having asked such basic questions as “Have these accounts been audited?”, “What is the basis of your proposal?”, or “How much money do we have?”, or in trying to raise perfectly legisimate issues, we need to stand up to such negative reactions. You’re standing up not just for your cause, but for your just cause of democracy.
The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.