Minority report from UK's masonic police 27 Nov 2006

High ranking masons in the police use domestic abuse excuse to read the future.We want to know how many bullying senior policemen are using worst case scenarios to bring in their big brother state. The police buying up houses repossessed on false domestic abuse claims. ANYONE SHOUTING DOMESTIC ABUSE IS TRYING TO STEAL YOUR HOME.EITHER AN EX-WIFE,LAWYER,JUDGE,MASONIC POLICE OR POLITICIANS
Police target dangerous suspects before they can offend

Domestic violence offenders singled out
Psychologists build up 'high-risk' profiles

Criminal profilers are drawing up a list of the 100 most dangerous murderers and rapists of the future even before they commit such crimes, The Times has learnt. The highly controversial database will be used by police and other agencies to target suspects before they can carry out a serious offence. Pilot projects to identify the highest-risk future offenders have been operating in five London boroughs for the past two months.

The Soham murderer Ian Huntley and the serial rapist Richard Baker have been used as examples of the type of man police will identify. However, the database will increase concerns at the growth of official surveillance and anxieties that innocent men are being singled out for offences they have no intention of committing.

Experts from the Metropolitan Police’s Homicide Prevention Unit are creating psychological profiles of likely offenders to predict patterns of criminal behaviour. Statements from former partners, information from mental health workers and details of past complaints are being combined to identify the men considered most likely to commit serious violent crimes. The list will draw comparisons with the Hollywood film Minority Report, in which suspects are locked up before they can commit a predicted crime.

Laura Richards, a senior criminal psychologist with the Homicide Prevention Unit, told The Times: “My vision is that we know across London who the top 100 people are. We need to know who we are targeting. “It is trying to pick up Ian Huntley before he goes out and commits that murder. Then we have the opportunity to stop something turning into a lethal event.” The team is concentrating on reducing the risk of those with a history of domestic violence turning into murderers. About a quarter of murders are related to domestic violence.

“There are some pretty dangerous people out there, so you need these risk models to wheedle them out, separate the wheat from the chaff,” she said. “If you add up all the information, it tells us which people are risky.” Ms Richards said that once an individual had been identified, police would decide whether to make moves towards an arrest, or to alert the relevant social services who could steer those targeted into “management programmes.”

The project will be closely watched by the Home Office. However, civil liberties groups and human rights lawyers will be concerned at the plans to intervene in the lives of men before they actually commit a crime. Details of the database emerged after Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, said that Britain had “sleepwalked” into a surveillance society. Simon Davies, director of Privacy International, said yesterday: “It is quite right that the police should keep intelligence on suspected criminals, but it is obscene to suggest there should be a ‘crime idol’ list of those who might commit an offence.

“The police are systematically moving the boundaries as to where they can exercise their powers. The Minority Report syndrome is pushing the boundary of criminal intervention further into the general community.” There was also concern that the database would be ineffective if the authorities continued to fail to act on the information already available to them. Ray Wyre, a sexual crimes consultant, was supportive of the database but said that it would only work if police acted on the information.

“Of course you have to know your enemy, but it is what you do with the data that matters,” he said.


Britains masonic parking gangsters 27 Nov 2006

Most of the council systems for parking restrictions come primarily from masonic councillors who instigate hardline parking regimes to bully and abuse victims for extortionate amounts of money.Not for parking dangerously,but for parking anywhere these councillors think double yellow lines will make a quick buck.

The gangster firms multi nationals use also bully victims into parting with large amounts of cash.Behind every bullying traffic warden and clamping firm are high level masonic councillors,managers,directors and lawyers who have sold their souls to the devil and use car owners as a multi billion pound money making racket for the masonic kitty.
Wheel-clamping nightmare - the £4.50 pair of tights that cost £500

A charity worker has told how a 10-minute parking blunder cost her more than £500 at the hands of wheel-clampers.

Emma Holland, from Fulham, knew she was taking a risk when she parked in a courtyard backing on to the Marks & Spencer store in Kings Road, Chelsea, instead of using the shop's car park while she rushed inside to buy a £4.50 pair of tights. Mrs Holland, 40, was due to attend the charity premiere of the new James Bond film Casino Royale attended by Prince Edward. But by the time she returned to her BMW, it had been clamped.

A ticket on the windscreen said that to free the car she would have to pay £120, or £60 if she paid immediately. However, a clamper approached and demanded £160. Mrs Holland queried the amount and insisted on calling the telephone number printed on the ticket to check. However, she said the clamper, instead of waiting, jumped in his van and drove off. Mrs Holland, a fund-raising manager for the Stroke Association, had to abandon her car.

Despite making more than 10 calls to the clamping firm's headquarters during the day, she was unable to get through. That evening, she had to walk to the premiere. The next day she tried again to contact the firm, Hexagon Parking Control Limited, but her calls still went unanswered. In desperation, she called the shop where a manager told her the car had been removed and offered to call Hexagon. Eventually, the firm called back and said her BMW was locked in a pound. Despite Mrs Holland's protests that the clamper had driven off and her calls were not answered, the Hexagon official said if she wanted her car back she would now have to pay £505.

It was then that Marks & Spencer stepped into the row. The shop offered to pay the excess after Mrs Holland said she would pay the clamping fee of £100 and the parking ticket fee of £60 which, despite misleading wording on the ticket, was what she discovered she was liable to pay. Mrs Holland told the Evening Standard today: "I am extremely glad that Marks & Spencer helped out but it is absolutely outrageous that motorists who make a tiny mistake can be treated like this.

"I admit I got it wrong but I felt I was being ripped off and I was only there for 10 minutes. The amount demanded by the clamper did not seem to make sense so I had to check first before paying. "As it happened, it turned out to be correct but he did not try to explain and wouldn't wait for me to call his office, he just went. It has all been extremely unpleasant and stressful." Today, Marks & Spencer confirmed it employed a contractor to manage land at the back of the store. It said Mrs Holland's experience "had not been handled in the best way".

A spokesman for Hexagon said: "We have done nothing wrong. She parked illegally and, as a result, was clamped. "I do not dispute our clamper drove off but she was becoming abusive and that's what we're trained to do. "She may say she called 10 times but we were available and dealt with several other cars that day. "The car was not towed away until 10pm. If she had really wanted to pay the fine and get her car back, it would have been perfectly feasible."


British success built on 'misery and suffocation' of slave boats 27 Nov 2006

The same evil mindset still control the UK except its not in slave boats they create the misery its UK's civil courts .With a judiciary that is as monstrous as those responsible for the suffering on the boats. Also there are NO marks to show the physical abuses, they now use psychological torture as the modern day equivalent.
British success built on 'misery and suffocation' of slave boats

Some 562 men, women and children made up the human cargo of the slave ship Feroz. Crammed beneath grate-covered hatchways between the decks, left to stew amid the stench of faeces and rotting bodies, each bore the mark of their owner, branded on their skin with a red-hot iron. After boarding the ship bound for Brazil, Reverend Robert Walsh wrote: "The space was so low that they sat between each other's legs and [were] stowed so close there was no possibility of their lying down or changing their position by night or day. The [children] seemed indifferent as to life or death, and when they were carried on deck, many of them could not stand. "It was not surprising that they should have endured much sickness and loss of life in their short passage. They had been out but seventeen days, and they had thrown overboard no less than fifty-five, who had died of dysentery and other complaints. Many of the survivors were seen lying about the decks in the last stage of emaciation and in a state of filth and misery not to be looked at." In 1829, Reverend Walsh patrolled the seas off the coast of Africa on behalf of the British government, enforcing the law prohibiting the slave trade passed two decades earlier in 1807. He confiscated slave ships and sent their prisoners back to Africa.

Yet before abolition in 1807, the "misery and suffocation" endured on board those ships was widely ignored by Britain. Trading in African slaves allowed Britain to become a world economic power and financing the Industrial Revolution. Some 28 million Africans were transported and sold into slavery between 1450 and the early 19th century.

British slave vessels alone sailing between 1698 and 1807 carried more than three million slaves, according to estimates by historian David Richardson. Liverpool was the principle slaving port and half of all vessels would dock in the north west of England. London, Bristol and Glasgow shared the remaining spoils. Ships laden with metal goods, textiles, guns and alcohol would set sail from one of the British ports for the West African coast. The goods would be traded for a cargo of people picked up from slave forts from Senegal to Nigeria, and transported across the Atlantic to the Caribbean or North America. Of the 50,000 slaves transported each year, up to 20 per cent would die from starvation, suicide and disease during the "middle passage". Reverend Walsh wrote: "Many destroyed one another in the hopes of procuring room to breathe; men strangled those next them, and women drove nails into each other's brains. Many unfortunate creatures took the first opportunity of leaping overboard and getting rid, in this way, of an intolerable life." Olaudah Equiano, a slave captured from Iboland in Nigeria by the British and carried to Barbados in the 1770s, wrote that the "loathsomeness of the stench" and "brutal cruelty" of the white people on his passage to Barbados led him to "wish for the last friend, death." Accounts of slavery by Equiano, Ignatius Sancho and Ottabah Cugoan were persuasive in swaying public opinion. William Wilberforce, MP for Hull, founded the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade in 1787 In 1807, after 20 years of lobbying, the slave trade in the British colonies was abolished. The US followed in 1808. And in 1833, the year of Wilberforce's death, the Abolition of Slavery Act was passed.

Some 562 men, women and children made up the human cargo of the slave ship Feroz. Crammed beneath grate-covered hatchways between the decks, left to stew amid the stench of faeces and rotting bodies, each bore the mark of their owner, branded on their skin with a red-hot iron. After boarding the ship bound for Brazil, Reverend Robert Walsh wrote: "The space was so low that they sat between each other's legs and [were] stowed so close there was no possibility of their lying down or changing their position by night or day. The [children] seemed indifferent as to life or death, and when they were carried on deck, many of them could not stand. "It was not surprising that they should have endured much sickness and loss of life in their short passage. They had been out but seventeen days, and they had thrown overboard no less than fifty-five, who had died of dysentery and other complaints. Many of the survivors were seen lying about the decks in the last stage of emaciation and in a state of filth and misery not to be looked at." In 1829, Reverend Walsh patrolled the seas off the coast of Africa on behalf of the British government, enforcing the law prohibiting the slave trade passed two decades earlier in 1807. He confiscated slave ships and sent their prisoners back to Africa.

Yet before abolition in 1807, the "misery and suffocation" endured on board those ships was widely ignored by Britain. Trading in African slaves allowed Britain to become a world economic power and financing the Industrial Revolution. Some 28 million Africans were transported and sold into slavery between 1450 and the early 19th century. British slave vessels alone sailing between 1698 and 1807 carried more than three million slaves, according to estimates by historian David Richardson. Liverpool was the principle slaving port and half of all vessels would dock in the north west of England. London, Bristol and Glasgow shared the remaining spoils.

Ships laden with metal goods, textiles, guns and alcohol would set sail from one of the British ports for the West African coast. The goods would be traded for a cargo of people picked up from slave forts from Senegal to Nigeria, and transported across the Atlantic to the Caribbean or North America. Of the 50,000 slaves transported each year, up to 20 per cent would die from starvation, suicide and disease during the "middle passage". Reverend Walsh wrote: "Many destroyed one another in the hopes of procuring room to breathe; men strangled those next them, and women drove nails into each other's brains. Many unfortunate creatures took the first opportunity of leaping overboard and getting rid, in this way, of an intolerable life." Olaudah Equiano, a slave captured from Iboland in Nigeria by the British and carried to Barbados in the 1770s, wrote that the "loathsomeness of the stench" and "brutal cruelty" of the white people on his passage to Barbados led him to "wish for the last friend, death." Accounts of slavery by Equiano, Ignatius Sancho and Ottabah Cugoan were persuasive in swaying public opinion. William Wilberforce, MP for Hull, founded the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade in 1787 In 1807, after 20 years of lobbying, the slave trade in the British colonies was abolished. The US followed in 1808. And in 1833, the year of Wilberforce's death, the Abolition of Slavery Act was passed.


Was a lawyer responsible for Russian poisoning? 26 Nov 2006

Exclusive: Sushi bar man is nuclear waste expert
Mysterious past of last man to meet dead Russian

The last person to meet Alexander Litvinenko before he succumbed to the agonising effects of radioactive poisoning is a self-professed expert in nuclear materials.

• In Alexander Litvinenko own words: Why I believe Putin wanted me dead...

International 'security consultant' Mario Scaramella, who joined Litvinenko for the now infamous clandestine meeting in a London sushi bar, headed an organisation which tracked dumped nuclear waste, including Soviet nuclear missiles left over from the Cold War. Litvinenko, an ex-KGB agent who became a trenchant critic of President Putin's Russia, fell ill after the sushi lunch - as exclusively revealed by The Mail on Sunday last week - and died 22 days later from poisoning by Polonium, a radioactive substance derived from uranium. Yesterday other customers of the sushi restaurant answered an appeal by health agencies for them to undergo medical checks. Some 200 worried members of the public came forward, also including customers of a Mayfair bar where Litvinenko held another meeting on the day he was poisoned. Sources revealed last night that renegade Russian billionaire Boris Berezovsky had also been checked for radiation. His car, in which he ferried the stricken Litvinenko to hospital, was also tested. It was further disclosed that the tycoon has been interviewed twice by police investigating Litvinenko's death, but not as a suspect. Prof Scaramella has strongly denied any involvement in the murder and Litvinenko's family, who blame President Putin, say they do not question his loyalty. Having given an interview to The Mail on Sunday earlier in the week, Prof Scaramella yesterday said he was unwilling to say any more because he was 'co-operating with the authorities'. Earlier, he had acknowledged that 'something very strange is going on'.

Our investigations have established that:

l He has a deep knowledge of nuclear materials and their whereabouts around the globe.

l Although he describes himself as an environmentalist, he has detailed knowledge of the activities of Russian agents.

l Some of the institutions listed on his impressive CV appear to have no record of him, prompting questions about a career involving a large number of posts around the globe.

Prof Scaramella agreed to meet us in his home city of Naples to respond to allegations circulating on the internet that he was an intelligence agent in the pay of several secret services. Arriving in the lobby of a hotel flanked by two bodyguards, he produced a professional-looking dossier detailing his career. As the meeting progressed, Prof Scaramella denied he had links to any secret services and became irritated. "You are sounding like the police,' he said. "Do not use this information against me." Prof Scaramella's knowledge of atomic materials is clear, however. The Mail on Sunday has discovered that in June last year Italian police launched an investigation into an alleged plot to smuggle uranium into the country after being tipped off by Prof Scaramella. He told officers that the uranium was hidden in a suitcase and had originated from an undisclosed country in the former Soviet Union. Within just 24 hours, police in Rimini made four arrests. At the time all Prof Scaramella would say was: "I was investigating the activities of former KGB activities in San Marino [a tiny independent republic near Rimini]

"I was also looking into the trafficking of arms from the former Soviet Union and possible links with Italian terrorist groups. During this I was passed a document that said there were former KGB men in San Marino looking at selling nuclear military material. "I told the police that 10kg of uranium was hidden in a suitcase and on its way to Italy on June 2; and on June 2 the arrests were made and the uranium found. It was enriched uranium 90 per cent capable of making a small atomic bomb. Also an electronic target device was seized." The uranium plot came a year after Prof Scaramella announced that he had information that 20 nuclear warheads had been lost by a Soviet submarine in the Bay of Naples. Prof Scaramella told the Mitrokhin Commission, which investigated KGB activities in Italy, that he had been passed the information from Russian intelligence sources. Scaramella told The Mail on Sunday that his career began in his hometown of Naples, where he qualified as a SOLICITOR in 1995. He set up his own company, and started specialising in environmental law.

In 1996, Prof Scaramella, who is unmarried with two children, says he started work as a professor of environmental law at Externado University in Bogota, Colombia, before moving the following year to the University of Nuestra Senora del Rosario, also in Bogota. At the same time, between 1996 and 2000, he also held a post specialising in environmental crime at the University of Naples. Between 2000 and 2002, Prof Scaramella was secretary general of a little-known organisation named the Environmental Crime Prevention Programme. The ECPP describes itself as an organisation which 'provides environmental protection and security through technology on a global basis'. It has offices at the Fucino Space Centre in Italy to deploy 'aerial surveillance to detect environmental crimes in Eastern and Southern Europe'. On its website, the ECPP described itself as a 'permanent intergovernmental conference' with a secretariat in Naples and rotating presidencies held by countries such as Angola and Samoa. None of the contact details listed for the organisation on its website work. When Prof Scaramella was asked where the group's head office was he said there wasn't one - you had to contact the general secretary, who currently was a Professor Papadopoulos from California's San Jose university.

A Dr Perikles Papadopoulos - listed as an assistant secretary general of the organisation - could not be reached. And last night, neither the campaign group Greenpeace, nor the Environment Investigation Agency, which campaigns against environmental destruction, could recall working with the organisation. In 2003 he made the jump from environmental expert to KGB specialist when he was appointed as a consultant to the Mitrokhin commission. It was that work which put him into contact with Litvinenko and led to the sushi lunch, which he says he arranged to discuss a 'death list' which named both him and Litvinenko Prof Scaramella explained that Professor Papadopoulos was key to his appointment on to the Italian parliamentary commission, facilitating a meeting in London with Italian legal officials setting up the inquiry. Italy was a nest of CIA and KGB agents during the Cold War: Washington regarded the socialist-leaning country as the West European country most susceptible to influence from Moscow. Vasili Mitrokhin was a senior archivist for Russia's foreign intelligence service. His records of the period have led to inquiries across the globe, including the UK. One of the conclusions of the Italian inquiry was that the former Soviet Union was behind the assassination attempt on the late Pope John Paul II in 1981. Prof Scaramella explained that he had been approached by the commission because his career had given him a passing connection to Russia. "My work involved a lot of Soviet issues - the dumping of radioactive waste, which can be detected from space, and the loss of nuclear devices,' he said.

"I said to them, "I am not an expert on security services, only nuclear waste." But the commission said they wanted people from outside to investigate. So in 2003 I looked at the operations of the KGB and Eastern bloc countries on Italian soil, including the funding of Italian journalists by the KGB." In 2004, Prof Scaramella also led an investigation on the illegal dumping of waste by the mafia in an Italian lake. Despite being only a civilian environmental consultant, he led two armed police agents to a villa where the suspects lived. They were greeted by a hail of bullets. One mafioso was arrested, and an arms cache seized. Scaramella also told us that he also found time in 1999 to become a visiting scientist at Stanford University in California, and was made director of a university Nato programme which involved visiting Lithuania. In 2002, at the same time as he says he was completing his duties for the ECPP, he also started a school of national security in Colombia to train local police. The same year, he says he was also based for four months at Greenwich University in London, again working on environmental law. It is hard to corroborate details of Scaramella's career.

A spokesman at the University of Naples said last night: "There is no record of a Professor Mario Scaramella working here. He may well have been hired internally as an independent working within one of the faculties but our system has no record of him." And Dr Maria Scaramella, a namesake at the university, said: "I used to get all this post for him but I could never actually find him. He was supposed to have an office on the third floor but I was never able to find it. He was supposed to have some sort of European funding for research but I never knew exactly what." A spokesman for Greenwich University also said they had no record of him on its books. None of the American or Colombian universities responded to messages asking whether Prof Scaramella had worked for them. Internet discussion forums have buzzed with theories about Prof Scaramella this week - the most damaging claiming that he is a secret service operative with split loyalties who uses a range of political and business interests as a front for his activities. But he insisted: "I have never been to any security service headquarters or met any acting officers."

Prof Scaramella says he struck up an association with Litvinenko during his work for the Mitrokhin Commission, and they had met several times before in the Itsu restaurant to discuss intelligence matters. He claimed that tip-off from Litvinenko had helped to foil a bizarre assassination attempt last year on Paolo Guzzanti, an Italian senator who headed the Mitrokhin inquiry. It led to the arrest of six Ukrainians who were said to have been trying to smuggle grenades into the country hidden inside hollowed-out Bibles. "He was my friend - that is why he gave me this,' he said, brandishing a picture of Litvinenko training as a young KGB officer. Even Prof Scaramella's father, Amedeo, was perplexed about his son's career. "I think it's best you talk to Mario,' he said. "I don't really want to say anything. He divides his time between Naples and Rome and he also spends a lot of time overseas. I don't ask too many questions." Prof Scaramella said: "I am not willing to say anything else. I am co-operating with the authorities. If you want any information ask Scotland Yard."



The UK judiciary are MONSTERS

Family law is the biggest fraud ever created by Britains judiciary and emulates Hitlers mob in its utter corruption and the fleecing of a families entire estate using draconian measures that line the pockets of utterly corrupt lawyers and judges.

We know that MASONIC judges who bankrupt individuals estates repossess ,through third parties, land and properties of those they sequestrated .
You can't silence justice
by Melanie Phillips

The secrecy surrounding the proceedings of the family courts has long been a blot on the face of English justice. These courts decide some of the most painful issues affecting individuals and their families. They are where households are divided between warring husbands and wives, or where decisions are taken which may involve removing a child from one or both of its parents. The sensitivity of such proceedings has always been used to justify the secrecy in which they are held. Neither Press nor public are allowed into court. The reason invariably given is the need to protect the interests of vulnerable people — particularly children — from the prying gaze of a prurient public. Such an excuse, however, has never held water. It is perfectly possible to report such cases anonymously, thus protecting the privacy of everyone involved.

It has long been suspected that the real reason was the instinctive desire to keep from the public gaze proceedings where power largely resided with professionals such as social workers, who did not want to expose their often all-too-flaky evidence to the cold light of day. This went against the principle that justice should be seen to be done, and created the ineradicable suspicion that such courts were presiding over an intolerable measure of injustice. Now, at last, things are changing. The Government has said it intends to open up family court proceedings to accredited journalists. This week, an Appeal Court judge, Lord Justice Wall, told a legal conference that he was in favour of giving the media access to family court proceedings, provided the cases were reported anonymously, in the interests of public accountability. So far, so gratifyingly enlightened.

But no sooner had he said this than the judge lurched into dubious and alarming territory. For he went on to express his 'cynicism' about allowing the Press into the family courts because of what he called the sensationalism, distortion and irresponsibility of some reporting. In particular, he singled out this newspaper — though not by name — for the way it reported a key case last year, in which the two children of an Essex couple were removed for adoption by social workers. As is argued on the facing page, this paper stands by every word of that report — which brought to light the hitherto unrecognised scandal of social workers routinely removing children from their families on account of nothing more than the presumed impact upon them of their parents' low IQ.

But with this story uppermost in his mind, Lord Justice Wall went on to say that to minimise such "tendentious, inaccurate or sensationalist" reporting, the issue for the judges was: "Which journalists do we admit to the courtroom?" His solution, it would appear, was to use the system of accrediting journalists as a threat. If newspapers were to continue to "sensation-alise" or "distort" such proceedings, the courts might withdraw accreditation — whether from individual newspapers or all of them was not clear. This was an astonishing suggestion for a judge to make. Although he added: "This is not a road down which I wish to travel", the threat was all too plain.

If newspapers produce reports which the judges don't like, their journalists will be barred from the courtroom and prevented from reporting the proceedings. The idea that the judges would allow in those journalists whom they deem a safe pair of hands while excluding those of whom they disapprove is an outrageous abuse of power. The principle of a free press is that it is indeed free, not that such freedom is conditional upon its message being agreeable to those whose professional activities are under media scrutiny. This would lead to a manipulation of the media by those in authority, which is totally unacceptable in a democratic society.

Indeed, in some ways it would be even worse than the policy of excluding the Press from the courtroom altogether. Permitting only an approved reporting of proceedings would open the way to the Press being forced to censor itself in order to keep on the right side of the judges — thus producing a truly distorted picture with a likely collapse altogether of public confidence. And if the threat is to withdraw accreditation from the Press in general, this would equally be an abuse of authority by imposing a blanket denial of access on the grounds of perceived misbehaviour by certain sections of the media.

This is not to say the media are always lily-white in their conduct; of course not. But if the Press oversteps the bounds in reporting cases in other courts, it is rebuked or even punished by established procedures such as actions for contempt of court, where newspaper editors can be fined or even jailed. No one has ever suggested that those newspapers should be barred from future court reporting. That would rightly be considered utterly oppressive. Deciding that people with learning difficulties make inadequate parents is an issue which ignites strong passions.

The essence of Lord Justice Wall's complaint, however, was that the Essex children were not taken away because of the low intelligence of their parents, as he said Press reports claimed, but because of evidence of the harm these parents might do to them. But this evidence was itself deeply questionable. The courts empha-sised that the parents had done nothing wrong. The charge that they might nevertheless harm their children was frankly bizarre. This included claims that the mother in particular failed to stimulate the children, that the parents failed to set appropriate boundaries and had not established "consistent and appropriate routines around mealtimes and bedtimes".

For heaven's sake, about how many thousands of other parents might these things also be said — and worse? Yet no one suggests their children should be taken away for adoption — even when they are brought up in conditions infinitely worse than the loving, clean and orderly home provided by the Essex couple. So it was entirely reasonable to infer that the real issue was the parents' allegedly low intelligence. And this was said not just by the media, but by the chairman of the Essex social work panel and by a local councillor - who fought a gagging order to bring the case to light because he thought it was so disturbing.

Incidentally, the Press reporting of this case made clear that only the mother had a low IQ; the father was mistakenly classified as such by social services. This error was itself only brought to light by the "tendentious and illicit" reporting of this case. Is it not more than a little worrying, therefore, that a Lord Justice of Appeal, threatening to fetter Press freedom because of "distorted" reporting, himself misreported the media and also failed to note the sloppiness of the social workers' false description of the father in the case?

Is it not equally alarming that the Appeal Court itself, which dismissed the couple's appeal, was preoccupied not by the many contradictions in the evidence, but instead by the same perception of media misreporting as Lord Justice Wall? It is hard not to conclude that what is going on here is merely a rearguard action by a hidebound judiciary which, while paying lip-service to the opening up of the family courts, is determined to keep its hands on the levers of power and secrecy which have served the cause of justice so ill for so long.


British Empire causes so much social,physical and psychological damage 26 Nov 2006


The EVIL british establishment and their legal and political systems still to this day cause enormous psychological harm to its citizens. IT HAS NEVER BEEN DEMOCRATIC BUT ONLY GIVES AN ILLUSION OF DEMOCRACY.Blair and every prime minister before him is a hand picked secret society devil worshipping mobster that allows the establishment to remain heading the monstrous system controlling UK citizens,with total support from Britains lying devious media owned almost exclusively by forelock tugging establishment multi millionaires.

Britains judiciary are masonic monsters as are its political leaders Blair is a Bilderberger . New tory boy Cameron is an old etonian one of the establishent forelock tugging lackies brainwashed at ETON to bow to the demands of the establishment.

ETON is sited within the ramparts of Windsor castle home of the establishment responsible for the evil that UK citizens endure under their ruthless rule. We know how many citizens they have gotten rid of using psychiatric wards to lobotomize then murder inmates inside UK concentration camps like Carstairs.
Blair: Britain's 'sorrow' for shame of slave trade

· Historic statement condemns 'crime against humanity'
· Critics say Prime Minister has fallen short of full apology

Tony Blair expresses 'deep sorrow' for Britain's role in the slave trade. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty

Tony Blair is to make a historic statement condemning Britain's role in the transatlantic slave trade as a 'crime against humanity' and expressing 'deep sorrow' that it ever happened. The Prime Minister plans to go further than any previous leader in seeking to distance himself from the actions of the British Empire, nearly 200 years after the 1807 legislation that led to slavery's abolition. However, he will stop short of making an explicit apology despite years of pressure from some black campaigners and community leaders. 'It is hard to believe that what would now be a crime against humanity was legal at the time,' the Prime Minister will say. 'Personally I believe the bicentenary offers us a chance not just to say how profoundly shameful the slave trade was - how we condemn its existence utterly and praise those who fought for its abolition, but also to express our deep sorrow that it ever happened, that it ever could have happened and to rejoice at the different and better times we live in today.' The ground-breaking remarks will appear in the black community newspaper New Nation, which has been campaigning for an apology for slavery, and in a statement to Parliament tomorrow.

Blair was praised last night for breaking decades of official silence to acknowledge the grievance and resentment still felt by many towards the empire's exploitation of Africans. Paul Stephenson, a black activist in Bristol, said: 'It's historic for a British Prime Minister to say this and it is to be welcomed. It shows a recognition of the importance of human rights and challenges the deniers who don't admit that the British Empire caused so much social, physical and psychological damage.' The Prime Minister's decision to make a statement on the issue will reignite the debate on the role of apology in modern politics. He was criticised when, in 1997, he said he 'reflected' on the deaths caused by the Irish Potato Famine. The move will be seen by some as an attempt by Blair to shore up his legacy both domestically and on the world stage.

According to notes seen in the possession of Baroness Amos, the Lead of the House of Lords, earlier this month, the Prime Minister wanted to make a bold gesture that will be 'internationally recognised'. He will back a United Nations resolution by Caribbean countries to honour those who died at the hands of international slave traders. The notes suggested that Blair was willing to accommodate the requests of many campaigners and is 'prepared to go further than [he is] being asked to' on the issue of an apology.

The slavery issue has come to a head in the build-up to the bicentenary next March of the parliamentary Slave Trade Act. Estimates vary that between 10 and 28 million Africans were sent to the Americas and sold into slavery between 1450 and the early 19th century. By then Britain was the dominant trader, transporting more than 300,000 slaves a year in shackles on disease-ridden boats. An advisory committee chaired by John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, whose Hull constituency was once represented by anti-slavery campaigner William Wilberforce, has been planning the 200th anniversary commemorations and addressing the problem of how Britain should acknowledge its past. It was reported that Whitehall advisers had warned that a full apology could open the door to claims for reparations from the descendants of slaves. Louise Ellman, MP for Liverpool Riverside, who has been campaigning for an annual slavery memorial day, welcomed the statement as ' major step forward. It says that slavery is a "crime against humanity". It uses the word "shameful". It entirely disassociates all of us from what happened.'

The Observer revealed the campaign for an apology two years ago when Rendezvous of Victory, a group which seeks to combat the legacy of slavery, said it would call on the Queen to issue an apology. Its joint co-ordinator, Kofi Mawuli Klu, said he was disappointed by Blair's suggestion that slavery is a thing of the past: 'He's missed the point. They do not understand contemporary enslavement. There is nothing in this statement about the enduring legacy of slavery in terms of racism and global injustice.' Klu criticised the absence of the word 'sorry', claiming: 'It's adding insult to the lingering injuries of the enslavement of African people by the European ruling classes. The message is that if you commit crimes against African people you cannot be held responsible; even when you acknowledge that you have done wrong, you do not feel it necessary to apologise.'



The EVIL british establishment are still doing the same to their OWN people in Scotland ,England,Ireland and Wales and controlling much of the political and legal systems in the USA despite their so called independence.

The British Establishment ,crown and monarchy has been founded on ruthless barbarism and the same mind set are still operating in every court room the length and breadth of the UK.The British judiciary that provided the laws to rape and pillage the world still in operation in every court in the land.
The brutal story of British empire continues to this day.

All around the world, from Sierra Leone to Sri Lanka, the violent legacy of colonialism can still be witnessed

Many of the present conflicts in the world take place in the former colonial territories that Britain abandoned, exhausted and impoverished, in the years after the second world war. This disastrous imperial legacy is still highly visible, and it is one of the reasons why the British empire continues to provoke such harsh debate. If Britain made such a success of its colonies, why are so many in an unholy mess half a century later, major sources of violence and unrest? Top of the list is Palestine, a settler colony that Britain abandoned in 1947 after barely 30 years, having imposed a population of mostly European settlers on the indigenous people - one of the typical characteristics of imperial rule. Unfortunately for the settlers, arriving during the imperial sunset, they had insufficient time to achieve the scale of defeat of the local people, amounting to extermination and genocide, that characterised the British conquest and settlement of Australia.

While the native peoples of Australia, drunk and demoralised, survive in shanty towns or reservations, those in Palestine have had some capacity to struggle against such a fate, organising a lasting resistance to the settlers, inspired by their own ancient religion and sustained by the support of a vast Arab hinterland. The Australian settlers suffer from little more than a guilty conscience - if that- while the Israelis face a permanent and ineradicable threat. Like the medieval crusaders, whose ruined castles dominate the landscape of the eastern Mediterranean, they will be lucky if their state lasts more than a century. Many will surely abandon ship in despair. A similar imperial trouble spot is Sierra Leone, another settler colony where the British imposed an alien, largely Christian, black population from Britain and Canada on to a congeries of native peoples already in thrall to Islam. The original colony dates back to the 18th century, but much of the country was secured through military conquest at the end of the 19th, to which there was energetic resistance. The recurrence of civil war, though suffocated recently by a return of British troops, remains a permanent probability.

Other victims of settler colonialism where unresolved problems survive from the time of empire include South Africa, Zimbabwe and Kenya, and of course the tragic statelet of Northern Ireland. In these countries the settlers are all now on the back foot, outnumbered and outmanoeuvred, yet the baneful legacy of the colonial regime - in social customs, and in the forms of government designed to protect settler society - lives on. Much unfinished business remains. Settler colonies of a marginally different kind were established in Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and Fiji, the victims of continuing trouble. In both islands workers from India were imported in the 19th century for the white-owned plantations, creating the basis for an endless civil war that can never be resolved. Here, as elsewhere, endemic violence and conflict have proved to be the lasting legacy of empire.

In India itself Britain's speedy and disastrous scuttle in 1947 led to partition and the creation of the "moth-eaten" Muslim state of Pakistan (and eventually of Bangladesh), making nonsense of two centuries of British dominion designed to maintain the unity of the subcontinent. Abandoning India without a clear and agreed decision on the future of the princely state of Kashmir has created a scenario of disaster that has lasted from that day to this. One troubled imperial outpost, often forgotten and now brought to life as a temporary haven for refugees from Lebanon, is Cyprus, miserably divided like India as a result of imperial misrule, and still under British military surveillance today from two "sovereign" bases.

Others are Nigeria and Somalia, the first unnaturally cobbled together in a unitary state for imperial convenience, the second occupied and abandoned for purely strategic reasons. Both are currently simmering on the stove. Finally come Iraq and Afghanistan, two modern disasters that have their roots in the experience of empire. Iraq was last in and first out of the British empire, though British military bases were not finally removed until the 1950s. Fifty years later the British are back, British soldiers replacing the Indian sepoys who invaded the country on Britain's behalf during the first world war. The British left in a hurry in the 1930s, and they will doubtless do so again.

Although nominally independent, Afghanistan was effectively within the imperial sphere for most of the 19th century, though successfully fighting three wars of resistance against the British. The fourth Anglo-Afghan war is now in progress, to be followed as before by an Afghan triumph. It seems that the story of the empire is being re-enacted over much of the globe, bringing violence and destruction on a scale barely envisaged in the imperial era. How fortunate we would be to have a government in Britain that would help to bind up the wounds of the past, by at least recognising what really happened, rather than to have one that endlessly pours petrol on the flames.

· Richard Gott is author of Cuba: A New History, and is writing a book about imperial resistance Rwg...@aol.com




Deputy First Minister guilty of expenses fiddle - Wrist slapped & told not to do it again. Firstly, let me congratulate Mary McDonald of Glasgow, for winning her battle against Glasgow Housing Association who terrorised her with a court case over a £277 repair bill which was due to thugs regularly vandalising her tenement block. In a quote from the Scotsman report you can read here: OAP wins legal fight after being charged for vandalism - "Sheriff Martin Jones QC brought cheers from her supporters as he found in her favour. He agreed GHA had let down Mrs McDonald - and that she should not have to stump up the cash."

I think Mrs McDonald should be entitled to some compensation from the GHA over their actions towards her. What a disgrace, to terrorise a pensioner with a court case, over something which was no fault of her own, and I hear the GHA lawyers really sunk their teeth into this case. The GHA must have felt they were in 'legal bully heaven', taking on an 86 year old lady who was the sole home owner in a tenement. What was the real motive ? Take poor Mrs McDonald to court for years so they might be able to force the sale of her flat to pay the legal bills of a case which she might not win, and the GHA would end up with the property ?... It's been done before, you know ... oh yes .. a regular tactic is this. Well Done Mary McDonald, and well done to all your supporters.

Now back to today's article on the lurid goings on at Holyrood by way of milking the expenses. Some people have been asking me if the recent stream of news related to MSPs fiddling their expenses for mortgage payments & dodgy house purchase deals, might be linked to the forthcoming vote on the Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill. Well, one could say .. Yes .. to that one, but not just because of the LPLA Bill ... it seems that some are taking revenge for both the Executive & Parliament's interest in certain areas of legal & public life, shall we say ? However, what has come out so far, on the expenses fiddles, isn't anything which hasn't been known about for awhile ...

Since the LPLA Bill was announced earlier this year, the likes of the Law Society of Scotland, and it's regulatory allies, have been collating as much information on all msps as possible. Ah .. you say I rant on this one ? Not at all .. It seems that a request was put out to all solicitors, Solicitor Property Centres, & Estate Agents, for information on property transactions involving Scotlands politicians .. and also, their legal affairs .. to name but a few points of interest being taken in oor politicians. How do I know this ? One of the memos was read out to me, as it passed through a legal firm I have a source with. I'm sure some MSPs now know what I am talking about - after all, they aren't stupid. I'm sure they worked out awhile ago, their property transaction details ended up, shall we say, less than confidential ? .. and fell into the hands of certain people who are going to be seriously curtailed in power by oncoming legislation ... motive enough, I say .. and a plot almost worthy of a movie, if it didn't have so many leaks. I wonder, for instance what JHR would do if I told him that certain lawyers were babbling his legal business all over town ?

On the subject of leaks, there arrived a plain brown envelope on my desk this week, containing information & photographs on none other than, David McLetchie. Ah .. my old friend McLetchie from Tods Murray Solicitors - the legal firm which was first assigned to defend crooked lawyer Andrew 'Fraudster' Penman of Stormonth Darling Solicitors, Kelso .. thus giving me an interest in Mr McLetchie's career. Obviously, someone wants to ruin Mr McLetchie's political career, and knowing how I feel about his legal firm's interference in the Penman case, along with McLetchie replacing the galant Mr Gallie on the Justice 1 "Regulation of the Legal Profession" inquiry in 2001, because Phil was going to ask some hard questions of the Law Society, they assume I will do the dirty deed and leak it. Oh well, why not leak it then.. but there is a time for everything, as they say.

Anyway, I see Nichol Stephen was,found guilty, of his mortgage expenses fiddle, so I will briefly cover that one today. Read my earlier article here : Scottish Parliament withholds documents as Deputy First Minister faces allegations of questionable mortgage arrangements. Try making a false claim to the Benefits Agency .. and you may find yourself with a fine, or even jail .. but what happens when the Deputy First Minister fiddles his mortgage payments ? ... answer, not much, as you can see.

I don't think blaming the Bank for mistakenly sending papers to Mr Stephen's home instead of the Parliament will wash to the public on this one ... it certainly would be laughed out of court if introduced as evidence in a criminal case .. what is it they say .. ignorance of the law is no excuse ? but the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body certainly wont scold Stephen too much .. after all, he's one of their own .. and there are many more at the expenses fiddling.

A quote from the Scotsman article today :

In March 2003 Mr Stephen's office gave Holyrood's allowances office a document which showed that his was the only name on the mortgage papers. However, this was sent to Mr Stephen in error by his bank and the actual mortgage agreement - only given to the authorities on Thursday - showed that he and his wife held the mortgage jointly. I understand that is a lie. Officials at the Parliament (and the newspaper which originally broke the story) had actually seen this document much earlier than last Thursday ... lie after lie after lie ... that's not much of a point scoring position for the office of Deputy First Minister, now, is it.

Tommy Sheridan is quoted in the Scotsman today saying "This is yet another example of MSPs using the rules to suit themselves and getting away with it. If Nicol Stephen had been a social security claimant wrongly getting benefit he would be in court or in jail by now but the parliament is lightly rapping his knuckles. "This is the final nail in the coffin of the expenses scheme; it should be suspended immediately and the profits handed back to the parliament." Sheridan is probably saying what the public feel on this one ... time to suspend the milking scheme and hand back the money .. but let's have it all out in the open and see who has abused their expenses accounts at Holyrood.

As for Nichol Stephen .. a Fibdem .. well, he lied about his mortgage expenses milking to begin with .. yes, he lied. He denied it .. so, let's be having him out please ... no liars needed at the Scottish Executive or the Scottish Parliament .. but, come to think of it .. if we go by those terms ... the debating chamber of the Scottish Parliament will be empty .. from the Speaker down to the clerks ! I think what we need to see now, is some leaks over the undeclared stuff, because there are a lot more fiddles going on in the background than has been publicised so far. Time for some more revelations then ?
Deputy first minister is guilty of breaking Holyrood expenses rules

NICOL Stephen, the deputy first minister, was yesterday found guilty of breaking Holyrood's expenses rules while he was claiming thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money to buy a flat in Edinburgh. The mortgage on Mr Stephen's home in one of the Capital's most sought-after areas was held jointly with his wife, Caris Doig - a clear breach of Holyrood's regulations, parliamentary authorities ruled yesterday Mr Stephen, who has risen to power on the back of a squeaky-clean image, yesterday admitted that he regretted the "error" but stressed that the investigation by Holyrood's governing body had found that neither he nor his wife had gained from the arrangement.

Last night the latest controversy over politicians' expenses led to a warning from the parliamentary authorities to MSPs to follow the rules and further calls for the allowance scheme to be scrapped. Mr Stephen's joint mortgage was first revealed by a Sunday newspaper six days ago. At first, both the deputy first minister and the parliament denied that he had done anything wrong. But members of the Scottish Parliament's Corporate Body, which manages Holyrood's budget, were given fresh details of the mortgage arrangements by Mr Stephen on Thursday.

They showed the names of both the minister and his wife on the agreement, contradicting an earlier document, lodged with the allowances office, which showed that he was the sole mortgage holder. As MSP for Aberdeen South, Mr Stephen is entitled to claim for the interest on a mortgage for a second home in Edinburgh's exclusive Morningside. A spokesman for the parliament said: "The SPCB found that the member had failed to follow the guidelines for the scheme by having a joint mortgage in place, post 2001. "At this point, the guidance was clear that members were entitled to reimbursement of interest if the mortgage arrangement was in their name only."

The SPCB found that neither Mr Stephen nor his wife had gained from the "error", as the mortgage payment would have been the same if it was just in his name. Mr Stephen, who has been claiming £9,000 a year allowances on the £190,000 home he bought with his wife in February 2002, said: "I fully acknowledge there has been a breach of the guidance. "I very much regret this error. I sincerely believed the arrangements I had put in place were acceptable." He said he had "acted promptly" to resolve the issues with the parliament and he had made the claim "in good faith and with no financial gain". Mr Stephen said he had already taken steps to transfer the property and the mortgage into his name.

The parliament's spokesman added a warning to all MSPs last night. He said: "The SPCB concluded that this breach served as a reminder to all members to ensure they are alert to every detail of the allowances scheme and the handbook issued to them as guidance." The allowance scheme has attracted heavy criticism with other ministers and MSPs under the spotlight for their claims. Tommy Sheridan, the Solidarity MSP, said: "This is yet another example of MSPs using the rules to suit themselves and getting away with it. If Nicol Stephen had been a social security claimant wrongly getting benefit he would be in court or in jail by now but the parliament is lightly rapping his knuckles. "This is the final nail in the coffin of the expenses scheme; it should be suspended immediately and the profits handed back to the parliament."


A REVISED members allowances scheme was agreed by the parliament in June 2001. It said that MSPs could claim the Edinburgh Accommodation Allowance (EMA) provided they were the only ones named on the mortgage of the property. In March 2003 Mr Stephen's office gave Holyrood's allowances office a document which showed that his was the only name on the mortgage papers.

However, this was sent to Mr Stephen in error by his bank and the actual mortgage agreement - only given to the authorities on Thursday - showed that he and his wife held the mortgage jointly. Before they pay out the EMA, officials require MSPs to show them their loan agreement or a loan offer along with a statement of the payments being made.

Some MSPs are still claiming allowances for mortgages entered into jointly with spouses before the rule change. MSPs whose home is in one of 32 constituencies beyond easy reach of Holyrood can claim up to £10,900 a year in mortgage interest payments.

Link : http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1747072006

LAWYERS Bringing harmony to divorce? 25 Nov 2006

The main cause of acrimony in separation are the legal crooks stealing the family silver while the couple fight over the custody of the children. This is the most evil system EVER conjured up by the monsters who control the multi billion pound divorce industry.

Notice the reference in the article to the involvement of OTHER EXPERTS? These are the myriad of other hangers on who make a killing out of divorce the most dangerous being the child psychologists and psychiatrists wheeled in to court to analyze divorcees after the judges and lawyers have driven them to the point of insanity.

These evil bastards are EXPERT at psychological torture and will NEVER allow amicable separations as it is not in their financial interest to do so. The multi billion pound land and property fraud centred in the Law Society of England ,Scotland,Wales and Northern Ireland will continue unabated as long as their buddies in the UK's national media continue to provide them smokescreens for their utter corruption. Hitlers spirit is alive and well in every court room up and down the length and breadth of the UK.The MASONIC CONTROLLERS wont allow cameras into their star chamber courts to show how they psychologically torture men and their children and women who dont belong to their secret society devil worshipping cults.
Bringing harmony to divorce

By James Stewart and Charlotte Bradley

Collaborative law is not an easy option but it does offer reduced costs and more flexibility

BREAKING up is never easy and, no matter how the breakdown arises, litigation over the terms of the separation will make things even more difficult. Sir Paul McCartney’s divorce from Lady McCartney demonstrates the most extreme example of an acrimonious break-up. However, the publicity obscures that, throughout the UK, family lawyers and separating couples are striving to reduce acrimony in divorce. Resolution, an organisation of almost 5,000 family solicitors, has actively sought to ensure that family law disputes are dealt with in a way designed to preserve people’s dignity and to encourage agreement. Resolution also encourages the use of dispute resolution methods other than litigation, such as mediation and collaborative law (www.resolution.org.uk).

One of the best ways to achieve a dignified split is to use the collaborative law process. It is relatively new to this country, the first family collaborative lawyers having trained in October 2003. Three years on there are 1,000 trained family collaborative lawyers in the UK and Ireland. With the growth in their numbers in London, the time has come to mark the development with a formal launch in London. This takes place tomorrow, supported by Sir Mark Potter, President of the High Court Family Division. The central feature of process is a pledge by the couple and their lawyers not to litigate the issues in court. This provides a commitment from all sides to resolve disputes through co-operative and respectful negotiation, allowing the couple and their lawyers to focus on what is important to them, rather than the strict requirements of the court’s procedures and timetables.

By avoiding expensive litigation, the approach can reduce costs. But its main advantages are speed and flexibility. After a long and painful relationship breakdown, many clients arrive in their solicitors’ offices seeking a speedy resolution. The collaborative process offers the flexibility for people to go at their own pace and, for some, the issues can be resolved quite quickly through a series of face-to-face meetings that all attend. The sense of control clients gain aids negotiation and the reduced confrontation helps to preserve family relationships in the longer term — a huge benefit, given the evidence that children do much better after divorce if their parents can co-operate over their care and upbringing. An important element of the process is the involvement of other experts, where appropriate, including accountants, financial advisers and family consultants (those from a therapeutic or counselling background) who can work with the couples to help to deal with the emotional fallout of the family breakdown and the arrangements for the children. It is clear from the cases upon which we have collaborated that the clients’ desire to co-parent in the future was every bit as important as the achievement of a financial settlement that was fair.

Clients who consult with a family lawyer usually have no experience of divorce. They have little knowledge of the divorce process and are often unprepared for the psychological challenges that inevitably accompany divorce and the effect their emotions may have on their decision-making abilities. They know little about the impact of divorce on children and may have given little thought on breaking the news to their children. A divorcing client may be fearful about the future and regard his or her spouse with suspicion and mistrust. The collaborative process is clientdriven and designed to empower clients to take responsibility and acknowledge all the family’s needs but with the support and advice of lawyers who are representing their interests but working within a team.

An important element of the process is agreement that, should it break down, both clients need to appoint new legal teams to take the matter to go to court. While this may seem punitive, we have found (supporting the experience in the US and Canada) that this is a powerful tool to encourage clients to remain at the negotiating table. While the collaborative approach may not be suitable for all, it is clear that it can suit all types of divorce, ranging from families of limited means to the big-money cases that are all too frequently reported in the press. As Central London solicitors, many of our cases involve families where assets are substantial and where there is an international dimension. While these cases are potentially litigious, they do not have to go through the courts. A number of big-money cases have been successfully concluded collaboratively basis: by way of example, we have recently completed a case where we acted for an international couple with assets of more than £35 million — possibly the highest value collaborative case in the UK.

We should emphasise that the process is not an easy option for the clients or the lawyers. But with the right attitude, even the wealthiest clients can avoid the risks of publicity and unpredictable outcomes that can result from taking their case through the courts. James Stewart is a partner of Manches LLP and Charlotte Bradley a partner of Kingsley Napley. They were two of the first solicitors in this jurisdiction to train as collaborative lawyers


Friendly divorces introduced? Yeah right 25 Nov 2006

What and cost crooked lawyers and judges MONEY

DIVORCE is a racket for crooked lawyers and judges and they will do their damndest to avoid friendly break ups. THEY have given themselves the god given right to legally tear up the family silver and re distribute it among themselves. The supposed sacred ceremony of marriage and its religious and spiritual joining of two human beings has turned into a spectacle of a scrum by the monsters controlling our courts.How many legal papers can be shuffled about over a period of a decade or more running up enormous legal bills and cause appalling harm to children caught up in the upheaval?

It is masonic judges and their footsoldiers lawyers who are destroying the institution of marriage like the debacle over music legend Paul McCartneys divorce from golddigger and non entity Heather Mills would put most people off the whole idea of why they should marry in the first place.The legal system using peoples misfortune to plunder the assets accumulated over a lifetime in a very short space of time.
'Friendly' divorces introduced

An approach to divorce that avoids acrimonious allegations and accusations of blame will be launched by judges and lawyers today. More than 1,000 family lawyers have trained in so-called "collaborative law", which aims to preserve dignity in divorce and to avoid the kind of battle already seen in the break-up of the McCartneys. One recent confidential divorce involving the division of around £35 million in assets was achieved through the collaborative method - thought to be the highest value divorce settlement under the new approach so far.

James Stewart, a partner with the London law firm Manches and one of the pioneers of "collaborative law" said: "Unlike Britney Spears, British residents can’t simply cite irreconcilable differences to obtain a divorce as we do not have a ‘no fault’ divorce system." "There is one ground for divorce, the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage...and to obtain a divorce without waiting for two years or more, the law demands that the petitioner must make allegations of adultery by their spouse, or criticisms of his or her behaviour." In 2004, 75 per cent of divorces were granted on the basis of adultery or unreasonable behaviour.

"But many clients are surprised and dismayed by the need to make allegations when, in their view, they and their spouse have simply drifted apart and the split is amicable," Mr Stewart said. The new collaborative approach, which offers greater speed and flexibility and is likely to be cheaper than traditional divorce proceedings, was designed in part to address this issue. "People can go at their own pace and for some the issues can be resolved quite quickly through a series of face-to-face meetings. The sense of control clients gain aids negotiation and the reduced confrontation helps preserve family relationships in the longer term," Mr Stewart said. *Ministers are to press ahead with the first reforms to open up the family courts pending full-scale change through legislation. They have been consulting on how to protect the anonymity of children and keep out nosy neighbours.


London the illuminati capital of the world 24 Nov 2006

There are more rich secret society mobsters per head of population in London than any other city in the world. RICH MASONS their wealth created thro their criminal lodge system are protected by crooked masonic police,judges and a corrupt legal system dominated by judicial masonic crooks.

London is magnet for world's super-rich
Capital in home to 23 billionaires
Most attracted by friendly tax breaks

London has become the world’s most appealing refuge for the super-rich, according to research that shows that no other capital city can rival it for attracting billionaires from elsewhere. Other large cities, such as New York, Moscow and San Francisco, may compete with London for resident billionaires, but their elite are homegrown. Of the 23 billionaires in London, only 12 are British. The rest come from countries as varied as India, Iceland and South Africa. New York is home to 34 of the mega-rich, who are mostly American. Trailing behind are Moscow and San Franciso, with 20 billionaires each.

Forbes, the house magazine for the rich and powerful, believes that London’s appeal lies in its accessibility, stability, low-taxation and the global standing of City institutions. Paul Maidment, from Forbes.com, said: “Many cities vie for the title of the world’s capital, but London still attracts the elite of the world’s rich and successful. And it can lay claim unchallenged to one title: it is the magnet for the world’s billionaires.” At the top of the London list is Lakshmi Mittal, the world’s fifth richest person, according to Forbes’s current league table of the global elite. The Indian steel mogul has an estimated $23.5 billion (£12.27 billion) at his disposal. He is ahead of Roman Abramovich, the Russian owner of Chelsea Football Club, who is the world’s 11th-richest person with a fortune estimated at $18.2 billion.

In third-place is Leonard Blavatnik, the Russian-American oil magnate, and Charlene de Carvalho-Heineken, a Dutch heiress to the Heineken beer fortune. Only then does the first British London-based billionaire make an appearance. David Reuben, who with his brother Simon, who lives elsewhere, has a net worth of $3.6 billion. They rank 185th on the list. Both were raised in Britain, but born in Bombay. Mr Maidment said: “Billionaires are, by nature, a peripatetic lot. They can afford to own property on many continents and do. Their business interests and their investments are global. “Their money travels the world as much as they do. On any day of the year, they are as likely to be in London or New York or Shanghai or Monaco. In a sense, they are citizens of no country but the self-contained universe of the super wealthy.

“Yet they do have to have the occasional points of contact with the rest of the world. London offers them a welcoming ecosystem.” Other billionaire ex-pats in the capital are Philippe Foriel-Destezet, the Frenchman who founded the Adecco temp agency and the South African property developer, Donald Gordon. Also in London is Iceland’s first billionaire, Bjorgolfur Thor Bjorgolfsson. “Low taxation is a big attraction. It is not stretching a point too far to say that for the super-rich London, is a tax haven,” Mr Maidment said.

“The UK’s tax laws contain provisions that enable non-British-born individuals who live in London, for some but not all the time, to be taxed only on their UK earnings.” London is not just a good place to do business. It boasts a luxury industry designed to cater for every whim of the wealthy, Mr Maidment added. “There are elegant shops, luxurious private clubs and good schools for the children, all expensive enough to keep the riff-raff at bay. “And the rich keep London’s estate agents in work. Foreign buyers bought more than half of the London homes that sold for more than £2 million last year.”

The Top Ten

Lakshmi Mittal, 55.
Worth $23.5 billion (£12.27 billion). Indian. Oversees world’s largest steel company

Roman Abramovich, 39.
Worth $18.2 billion (£9.5 billion). Russian. Oil, aluminium, land

Leonard Blavatnik, 48.
Worth $5 billion (£2.6 billion). Russian. Oil, plastics, Warner Music

Charlene de Carvalho-Heineken, 51.
Worth $5 billion (£2.6 billion). Dutch. Inherited 25 per cent stake in Dutch brewer in 2002

David and Simon Reuben, ages unknown.
Worth $3.6 billion (£1.8 billion). British. Carpets (Simon) and property (David)

Bernard Ecclestone, 75.
Worth £1.7 billion. British. Chief executive of Formula One

Anil Agarwal, 52.
Worth $2.8 billion (£1.4 billion). Indian. Mining and metal

Richard Branson, 55.
Worth $2.8 billion (£1.4 billion). British. Aviation and rail are among his many interests

Earl Cadogan, 69.
Worth $2.8 billion (£1.4 billion). British. Owns chunks of London

Bruno Schroder, 73.
Worth $2.5 billion (£1.3 billion). British. Fourth-generation banker


The evils of social work 24 Nov 2006

Social workers are EXPERT at removing children from GOOD parents,the motive?
Former social worker jailed for life after child abuse

A former social worker was jailed for life yesterday for an eight-year catalogue of abuse of children in his care. John Marshall, 61, abused 16 children, aged from five to 14, between 1974 and 1982 at Eversley Children's Home and Downcraig Care Home in Glasgow. Yesterday, at the High Court in Glasgow, Marshall, who was extradited from Australia to face his crimes, was told he must serve a minimum of 12 years of a life sentence before being considered for release. He stared straight ahead as the sentence was delivered while a number of his victims, who were in the public gallery, applauded and shouted "rot in hell". Marshall, of Lincolnshire, previously admitted 14 counts of abuse against 16 children. The investigation was spar-ked after Health Minister Patricia Hewitt, then a junior minister in the Department of Trade and Industry, wrote to Strathclyde Police in 2000 to say one of her constituents in Leicestershire told her he had been abused by Marshall at a care home in Glasgow.

Marshall had moved to Queensland by the time police began probing the abuse allegations. Sentencing Marshall, Lord Brailsford said: "These are appalling offences perpetrated against both male and female children, which were exacerbated by the fact these children were already vulnerable people and in your care for protection." He said Marshall had caused his victims "incalculable harm" and many of them had suffered "serious psychological consequences as a result". Lord Brailsford added: "You are a predatory paedophile who to this day still fantasises about pre-pubescent children. Society, in particular children, requires to be protected from you."

Marshall was arrested earlier this year. He admitted 14 charges of lewd and libidinous behaviour against youngsters in his care at the High Court in Glasgow last month. The victim who had written to Ms Hewitt said outside court he was pleased with the sentence. The man, now aged 38, said: "To be honest I didn't think he would get as much as 12 years because he admitted it. But today I am happy. "I was there from when I was four up until I was 10. Since then I've been anxious, I suffer from clinical depression and have had several suicide attempts. "This man not only deserves to be behind bars but for the safety of the public he has to stay there for a long time." Another victim, now aged 37, said she had been abused at one of the care homes when she was just five. She said: "He got what he deserved. He has taken so much of me. He fully deserves 12 years. I had to face him every day and live with what he did to me."

Cameron Fyfe, who represents several of Marshall's victims, has raised actions for compensation against Glasgow City Council on their behalf. He said: "My clients, who have gone through many years of suffering, are clearly delighted that this man has been given such a heavy sentence, which they feel is well deserved. We are proceeding with actions against Glasgow City Council for a number of clients who were abused by Marshall. "This very heavy sentence will help my clients in several ways. Firstly they will no longer have to prove there was abuse. Secondly the council is ...saying they cannot properly investigate after such a long time, but I believe there is no longer anything left to investigate. Finally the length of the sentence proves the severity of the abuse and will have an impact on the amount of compensation they can claim." A spokesman for Glasgow City Council said: "We will carefully examine the implications of this court case."



"GB - Neville-Jones, Pauline - Chairman, QuinetiQ (UK privatised military research/services company), governor of the BBC, Chairman Information Assurance Advisory Council, former Chairman Joint Intelligence Committee, former Managing Director NatWest Markets"
The 2004 List Of Bilderberger Participants

This list contains the list of people attending the next Bilderberg Conference.

URL: http://www.bilderberg.org

Participants 2004


We publish the list of participants in the 2004 Bilderberg conference. To understand the New World Order system, it is necessary to understand the Bilderbergers. The global capitalist system reveals itself quite openly in the matters discussed by this group drawn from the globalist elite. . Agenda and participant blurb from 2004 press release.... "The 52nd Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Stresa, Italy, 3-6 June 2004. The Conference will deal mainly with European American relations and in this context US Politics, Iraq, The Middle East., European Geopolitics, NATO, China, Economoic Problems and Energy......"


Honorary Chairman - Davignon, Etienne - Vice-Chairman, Suez-Tractebel
Honorary Secretary General - Taylor, Martin - International Adviser, Goldman Sachs International

Nationalities of participants followed by names and partial portfolios

N - Auser, Svein - CEO, DnB NOR ASA
D - Ackermann, Josef - Chairman, Group Executive Committee, Deutsche Bank AG
I - Ambrosetti, Alfredo - Chairman, Abbrosetti Group
TR - Babacan, Ali - Minister of Economic Affairs
P - Balsemao, Francisco Pinto - Chairman and CEO, IMPRESA, SGPS, Former Prime Minister
ISR - Barnavie, Elie - Department of General History, Tel-Aviv University
I - Benedetti, Rodolfo De - CEO, CIR
I - Bernabe, Franco - Vice Chairman, Rothschild Europe
F - Beytout, Nicolas - Editor In Chief, Les Echos
INT - Bolkestein, Frits - Commissioner for the Internal Market, European Commission, former leader of Dutch right wing Liberal Party VVD.
USA - Boot, Max - Neoconservative, Council on foreign Relations, Features Editor, Wall Street Journal
CH - Borel, Daniel - Chairman, Logitech International S.A.
I - Bortoli, Ferrucio de - CEO, RCS Libri
S - Brock, Gunnar - CEO, Atlas Copco AB GB - Browne, John - Group Chief Executive, BP plc
NL - Burgmans, Antony - Chairman, Unilever NV
F - Camus, Phillipe - CEO, European Aeronautic Defence and Space NV
I - Caracciolo, Lucio - Director, Limes Geopolitical Review
F - Castries, Henri de - Chairman, AXA Insurance
E - Cebrian, Juan Luis - CEO, PRISA (Spanish language media company), former Chairman, International Press Institute
TR - Cemal, Hasan - Senior Columnist, Milliyet Newspaper
GB - Clarke, Kenneth - Member of Parliament (Con.), Deputy Chairman, British American Tobacco
USA - Collins, Timothy C - MD and CEO, Ripplewood Holdings LLC, Yale School of Management, Trilateral Commission
USA - Corzine, Jon S. - Senator (D, New Jersey), Chairman and CEO, Goldman Sachs
CH - Couchepin, Pascal - Former Swiss President, Head of Home affairs Dept.
GR - David, George A. - Chairman, Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company SA
B - Dehaene, Jean-Luc - Former Prime Minister, Mayor of Vilvoorde
TR - Dervis, Kemal - Member of Parliament, former senior World bank official
GR - Diamantopoulou, Anna - Member of Parliament, former European Commissioner for Social Affairs
USA - Donilon, Thomas L - Vice-President, Fannie Mae, Council on Foreign Relations
I - Draghi, Mario - Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Goldman Sachs
USA - Edwards, John - Senator (D. North Carolina), Democratic Presidential Candidate
DK - Eldrup, Anders - Chairman, DONG gas company (becoming privatised) A/S DK - Federspiel, Ulrik - Ambassador to the USA
USA - Feith, Douglas J. - Undersecretary for Policy, Department of Defense I - Galateri, Gabriele - Chairman, Mediobanca
USA - Gates, Melinda F. - Co-Founder, Gates Foundation, wife of Bill Gates
USA - Geithner, Timothy F. - President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
I - Giavazzi, Francesco - Professor of Economics, Bocconi University; adviser, world bank and European Central bank
IRL - Gleeson, Dermot - Chairman Allied Irish Bank Group (currently being investigated for personal and corporate tax evasion)
USA - Graham, Donald E. - Chairman and CEO, Washington Post Company
USA - Haas, Richard N. - President, Council on Foreign Relations, former Director of Policy and Planning staff, State Department
NL - Halberstadt, Victor - Professor of Economics, Leiden University
S - Heikensten, Lars - Governor, Swedish Central Bank
USA - Holbrooke, Richard C - Vice Chairman, Perseus, former Director, Council on Foreign Relations, former Assistant Secretary of State
USA - Hubbard, Allen B - President E&A Industries
USA - Issacson, Walter - President and CEO, Aspen Institute
USA - Janow, Merit L. - Professor, International Economic Law and International Affairs, Columbia University
USA - Jordan, Vernon E. Senior Managing Director, Lazard Freres & Co LLC
USA - Kagan, Robert - Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
GB - Kerr, John - Director, Shell, Rio Tinto, Scottish American Investment Trust
USA - Kissinger Henry A. - Chairman, Kissinger Associates Inc.
TR - Koc, Mustafa V. - Chairman, Koc Holdings AS
NL - Koenders, Bert (AG) - Member of Parliament, president, Parliamentary Network of the World Bank
USA - Kovner, Bruce - Chairman Caxton Associates LLC, Chairman, American Enterprise Institute
USA - Kravis, Henry R. - Founding Partner, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., acquisitions financier
USA - Kravis, Marie Josee - Senoir Fellow, Hudson Institute Inc.
FIN - Lehtomaki, Paula - Minister of Foreigh Trade and Development FIN - Lipponen, Paavo - Speaker of Parliament
CHN - Long, Yongtu - Secretary General, Boao forum for Asia
P - Lopes, Pedro M. Santana - Mayor of Lisbon
USA - Luti, William J. - Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs
CDN - Lynch, Kevin G. - Deputy Minister, Department of Finance
USA - Mathews, Jessica T. - President, Carnegie Endowment for International War Peace
USA - McDonough, William J. - Cahirman and CEO, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, former president, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
CDN - McKenna, Frank - Counsel, McInnes Cooper, former premier of New Brunswick
I - Merlini, Cesare - Executive Vice Chairman, Council for the United States and Italy, Council on Foreign Relations, former director, Italian Institute for International Affairs
F - Montbrial, Thierry de - President, French Institute of International Relations
INT - Monti, Mario - Competition Commissioner, European Commission USA - Mundie, Craig J. - Chief Technical Officer, Advanced Strategies and Policies, Microsoft Corporation
N - Myklebust, Egil - Chairman, Scandinavian Airline
NL - Netherlands, Beatrix HM Queen of The - Lady Shell,
GB - Neville-Jones, Pauline - Chairman, QuinetiQ (UK privatised military research/services company), governor of the BBC, Chairman Information Assurance Advisory Council, former Chairman Joint Intelligence Committee, former Managing Director NatWest Markets
USA - Nooyi, Indra K. - President and CEO, PepsiCo Inc.
PL - Olechowski, Andrzej - Leader, Civic Platform
FIN - Ollila, Jorma - Chairman, Nokia Corporation
INT - Padoa-Schioppa, Tommaso - Director, European Central Bank
CY - Pantelides, Leonidas - Ambassador to Greece
I - Passera, Corrado - CEO, Banca Intesa SpA
USA - Perle, Richard N. - Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, former Likud policy adviser, former chair Defence Policy Board, former co-chairman, Hollinger Digital
B - Phillipe, HRH Prince
USA - Reed, Ralph E. - President, Century Strategies
CDN - Reisman, Heather - President and CEO, Indigo Books and Music Inc.
I - Riotta, Gianni - Editorialist, Corriere della Serra
USA - Rockefeller, David - Member JP Morgan International Council, Chairman, Council of the Americas
E - Riodriguez Inearte, Matias - Vice Chairman, Grupo Santander
USA - Ross, Dennis B - Director, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
D - Sandschneider, Eberhard - Director, Research Institute, German Society for Foreign Policy
I - Scaroni, Paolo - CEO, Enel SpA
D - Schilly, Otto - Minister of the Interior USA - Schnabel, Rockwell A. - Ambassador to the EU
A - Scholten, Rudolf - Director, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
D - Schrempp, Jurgen E. - Chairman, DaimlerChrysler AG
E - Serra Rexach, Eduardo - Head, Real Institute Elcano
RUS - Shevtsova, Lilia - Senior Associate. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
PL - Sikora, Slawomir - President and CEO, Citibank Handlowy
I - Siniscalo, Domenico - Director General Ministry of the Economy
P - Socrates, Jose - Member of Parliament
USA - Strmecki, Marin J. - Smith Richardson Foundation B - Struye de Swielande, Dominique - Permanant repressentative of Belguim, NATO
IRL - Sutherland, Peter D. - Chairman, Goldman Sachs International, Chairman, BP plc
USA - Thornton, John L. - Chairman, Brookings Institution, Professor, Tsinghua University
I - Tremonti, Giulio - Minister of Economy and Finance
INT - Trichet, Jean-Claude - President, European Central Bank
I - Tronchetti Provera, Marco - Chairman and CEO, Pirelli SpA
N - Underdal, Arild - Rector, University of Oslo
CH - Vasella, Daniel L. - Chairman and CEO, Novartis AG
NL - Veer, Jeroen van der - Chairman, Committee of Managing Directors, Royal Dutch/Shell
GB - Verwaayen, Ben J. M. - CEO, British Telecom; former director, Lucent Technologies
I - Visco, Ignazio - Foriegn Affairs Manager, Banca D'Italia
INT - Vitorino, Antonio M. - Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner, European Union
INT - Vries, Gijs M. de - EU Counter Terrorism Co-ordinator
S - Wallenberg, Jacob - Chairman, SEB investments (including biotech); Chairman, W Capital Management AB
D - Weber, Jurgen - Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutche Lufthansa AG
GB/USA - Weinberg, Peter - CEO, Goldman Sachs International
NL - Wijers, Hans - Chairman, AkzoNobel NV
D - Wissmann, Matthias - Member of Parliament
GB - Wolf, Martin H. - Associate Editor/Economic Commentator, The Financial Times
INT/USA - Wolfenson, James D. - President, The World Bank
RUS - Yavlinsky, Grigory A. - Member of Parliament
USA - Yergin, Daniel - Chairman, Cambridge Energy Research Associates
D - Zumwinkel, Llaus - Chairman, Deutche Post Worldnet AG


GB - Rachman, Gideon - Brussels Correspondent, The Economist
GB - Wooldridge, Adrian D. - Foreign Correspondant, The Economist




There are lies,damn lies and the radical feminist lesbian stats

Action urged over abuse of women


The government is not doing enough to tackle the problems of violence against women in the UK, a coalition of charities has warned. A report by the End Violence Against Women Campaign said government work to combat the problem was "patchy" and suffered from a lack of resources.
Bullying is rife at the BBC

Union targets broadcasting bullies

Bullying is rife at the BBC, according to a union survey. In a nation-wide survey of broadcasting journalists 87 per cent of those who had experienced bullying worked for the corporation. The survey was carried out by the NUJ. BBC staff told the union they had endured bullying by managers for periods ranging from four months to an astonishing 15 years. Several said things were so bad they’d had to leave their jobs. Virtually all said the BBC’s procedures for dealing within complaints was totally inadequate. The union is today publishing a 12-page booklet, "NUJ targets the bullies". It is being launched at a special session of the Edinburgh TV Festival. The findings come as the corporation is promoting a new set of values, which include staff trusting and respecting each other. But comments from employees paint a different picture. Staff spoke of: a culture of bullying from the highest level managers covering up for each other disciplinary procedures being a sham.

“I’m unwell with stress-related illness, have had almost a year off work and still have nightmares,” said one employee. “I felt hated,” said another. In the survey, almost half of the respondents came from local radio and regional television, an area where, to quote comments from participants, “short term contracts were used as a weapon to threaten your future,” and “people who lodge complaints are treated as trouble-makers.” Broadcaster Helen Reed, who collated the responses and is a leading light in the anti-bullying campaign, won an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal against the BBC after being bullied out of her job. “This shows my experience is far from unique,” she says. “And it’s just a sample of members who were not too frightened to fill in the form. Multiply it through the BBC and it’s a serious problem.” BBC Director-General Greg Dyke announced in May that he is sending hundreds of managers on courses. “Sending bullies on expensive training courses won’t solve the problem," says Helen Reed. "They need to be removed from ‘managing and damaging’ people. It’s not about money but taking real responsibility and wanting to end the culture of fear and intimidation. “Of the bullies identified, 92 per cent were known to be serial bullies – and 94 per cent of respondents said they had no faith in internal procedures.” NUJ National Broadcasting Organiser Paul McLaughlin said: ”Bullying is a serious concern in many workplaces and is prevalent in the media. As a public organisation, the BBC should lead by example and agree an independent procedure with the union to restore our members' faith and help to eradicate this scourge in our industry.” The NUJ is launching the results of the survey at the Edinburgh International TV Festival on August 22. There will be a special session on bullying, organised by Sky and the Media Guardian, called "Suffering in Silence", at 4.15pm that day. Helen Reed will be on the discussion panel.


Home secretary's relative in drugs bust 23 Nov 2006

Home Secretary Reid's father-in-law arrested in £280,000 drugs bust

John Reid: Further embarassment for the Home Secretary as his father-in-law is arrested The father-in-law of Home Secretary John Reid's son has been arrested over a £280,000 drugs bust. Ronnie Campbell - whose daughter Melissa is married to Dr Reid's son Mark - was arrested after police swooped on a car near his home.

He was charged with being concerned in the supply of amphetamine under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. The arrest will be a source of fresh embarrassment for Dr Reid, who was subjected to a humiliating police interview after cannabis was found in his home earlier this year. The minister, a reformed alcoholic who has repeatedly tried to give up smoking, insisted there was no suggestion that he or any of his family were involved, but was unable to say how the resin arrived at his home. Mr Campbell, a colourful businessman and former bar owner, rubbed shoulders with the Home Secretary at their children's wedding in London last September. After Mark Reid married his daughter Melissa at Westminster Cathedral, Mr Campbell chatted to the minister at the reception and thanked him for looking after his daughter.

The arrest, which took place in Lanarkshire, Scotland, at 8pm on Monday, followed a police operation in which officers recovered drugs from a car in Bellshill. Campbell, 47, also of Bellshill, appeared on petition yesterday at Hamilton Sheriff Court with his co-accused - Michael Keelan, 46, Thomas Baird, 39, and Pamela Green, 37. Baird, of Holytown, Lanarkshire, and Keelan and Green, of Bellshill, are also charged with supplying amphetamine. At a short hearing held in private, no pleas were entered. The accused were ordered to attend for DNA and fingerprint testing at a local police station within 24 hours. No date has yet been set for a future court appearance.

Mr Campbell ran a Rangers supporters pub in Tenerife for five years before returning to Scotland last year. On his return, he gave an interview in which he told how Dr Reid had looked after his 25-year-old daughter while he was abroad. 'I was in Tenerife for one reason or another and I have a lot to thank John Reid for,' he said. 'He treated Melissa like his own daughter and looked after her when I wasn't there for her. 'Just after we came out of the cathedral he came up to me, shook my hand and said "Hi, I'm John, pleased to meet you". 'He was a gentleman. He didn't exactly throw down the welcome mat but I think John Reid is a good man. I've never voted in my life but I think he is honest.' After a tiny amount of cannabis was found at Dr Reid's Lanarkshire home in May, assistant chief constable of Strathclyde Police, John Corrigan, said: 'The owner of the house has co-operated fully and is not suspected of having committed any crime.' Mr Campbell was released on bail with the condition that he provide fingerprint and DNA samples to the police. According to a Crown Office spokesman, the maximum street value of the drugs recovered is estimated at £280,000.


Fingerprinting children MUST STOP 23 Nov 2006

When are we going to stop these evil bastards infringing on our childrens liberties?
Thumbs down to school fingerprinting

David wants schools to ask for parental consent When David Clouter found that his child's fingerprints were to be taken at school, he started the campaign group Leave Them Kids Alone. It aims to prevent head teachers from fingerprinting children without parental permission I first discovered this was happening when I received a letter from my daughter's primary school on the last day of the Easter term. It said new library borrowing technology, which uses the pupils' thumbprints to keep track of library books, would be introduced in the new term.

What we object to is not necessarily the fingerprinting itself, but the way head teachers take it upon themselves to impose fingerprinting without consulting teachers and governors, and most of all without consent from parents. Fingerprinting is part of new biometric technology used to identify people. The process has accelerated in schools in the last few years. Biometrics can be used to monitor library book borrowing, as a way to pay for school dinners, and to record school attendance. Thousands of school children across the country have been fingerprinted.

Making a mark

Scanning prints has become commonplace in schools As soon as I heard about the school's plans I spun into action. The letter from the school said the new fingerprinting system would be in place on day six of the new term. I started my campaign on day three. A group of us handed out leaflets informing other parents about what was going at the school. We formed our campaign group Leave Them Kids Alone (LTKA). That gave us a collective voice which was soon heard by the school. It led to my attending hours of meetings with the head teacher. I argued that the school should ask parents first if it is OK for children to be fingerprinted. But he insisted that it was not necessary for the school to seek permission. Just three months ago, we created the LTKA website to further publicise our campaign. We have had 10,000 visitors to our website and published a poll to ask if parents are for or against fingerprinting without parental permission. More than 1400 people have voted and 94% of respondents said they are against it.

Spreading the word

Since our campaign began we have heard stories from many parents about their experiences - pupils being singled out and even the threat of suspension. There is a lot of pressure put on both parents and pupils to toe the line, and they sometimes feel isolated. Through our website we have put parents in touch with each other to show they are not fighting this alone. Our campaign group is supported by my local MP, David Howarth, who has discussed the issue with county councillors. Organisations such as NO2ID, Privacy International, and the children's campaign group Action on Rights for Children have also been helping us.

Fingerprinting outlook

Cases of identity theft may rise Schools don't perceive biometrics as a big deal. But what will happen in the future? I feel this is a start to a process of conditioning. Children who are getting used to biometric testing will grow up not thinking twice about divulging their identification details. And I also believe identify theft will increase.

So far, our campaign has raised a great deal of awareness. I would like to see the issue debated in parliament, so that parents can have a legal footing to fight against fingerprinting without parental consent. I am quite optimistic that our campaign will help us to win the argument.


UK's masonic police stealing our ID's 23 Nov 2006

Speeding: Now you will be fingerprinted

Motorists pulled over by police face the threat of being fingerprinted from today - further inflaming fears over the growth of the Big Brother culture. They will be asked to use a hand-held fingerprint reader which will check their identity against the 6.5million recorded prints of crime suspects.

Although the scheme, to be tried out by ten police forces, will be voluntary at first, the Government has admitted it is considering making it compulsory. It would work in the same way as motorists having to take a breath test to show whether they have been drinking. Laws would be brought in which would mean criminal penalties for drivers who are stopped and who fail to let their fingerprints be checked. The extension of fingerprinting to the roadside - at present such checks are made only on criminal suspects in police stations - comes amid growing concern at the spread of public surveillance.

Among controversial developments are the unchecked growth of a police DNA database and the Government's plans for an all-embracing identity card system which would record personal data on everyone in the country. The growing network of information systems based on credit and store cards and the presence everywhere of CCTV cameras have also added to the general unease. One watchdog group has already recorded Britain as the most spied-on nation in Europe. Tories warned that roadside tests must not become a means to bring the records of millions who have committed no crime on to the police National Automated Fingerprint System.

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: "While we have no problem with people voluntarily giving their fingerprints, this must not become a stealth gateway to storing the fingerprints of innocent people on some Government database." Giving fingerprints at the roadside will be voluntary for motorists for now. But the safeguards provided by the Home Office will be slender. The only guarantee that drivers are not browbeaten by officers into allowing their prints to be checked will be the police stop-and-search form, which must be completed by officers.

This includes a box in which officers record that procedures were carried out with the consent of the individual stopped. Home Office officials said yesterday that fingerprints taken from drivers would not be recorded and would only be checked against those of criminals and suspects which are already stored on the national computer. The Home Office's Police Information Technology Organisation said the new Project Lantern system could save more than £2.2 million a year.

If trials are successful the Government will prepare laws to make it compulsory for motorists to accept fingerprint testing. Police Minister Tony McNulty said: "This trial represents an important step forward in our commitment to ensuring we have an effective and efficient police service fully equipped for the challenges of modern policing. "The new technology will speed up the time it takes for police to identify individuals at the roadside, enabling them to spend more time on the front line and reducing any inconvenience for innocent members of the public." The Lantern device electronically scans the index fingers and sends an encrypted wireless transmission to the central fingerprint database.

It scans the database and identifies possible matches. PITO's head of fingerprint identification, Chris Wheeler, said: "This pilot will help us explore the accuracy and capacity issues around the device." The first trials will begin today in Luton and will involve those suspected of motoring offences. Other forces who will begin using the system over the next two months are British Transport Police, Essex, Hertfordshire, Lancashire, the Metropolitan Police, North Wales, Northamptonshire, West Midlands and West Yorkshire.


UK's democracy undermined? 23 Nov 2006

Whether its Murdoch or Branson ANYONE who owns a MAJOR media system in the UK requires a LICENCE .That licence revoked if any of them DARE to undermine the self appointed elite devil worshipping establishment .

Britain has NEVER had a TRUE democracy only an ILLUSION of choice.Its the hand picked illuminati candidates we are FORCED to chose from time and again .REAL democracy will never be achieved in Britain as long as the Masonic shadow government controls so much of mechanisms we rely on for survival.
'Don't let him get away with it'

Branson on Murdoch's undue influence

Ofcom steps in to probe ITV 'change of control'

Sir Richard Branson, the Virgin founder, has called for an all-party review of Rupert Murdoch's media empire, claiming it should be broken up to preserve democracy in Britain.

Virgin founder Sir Richard Branson insists that Murdoch's media empire has dominated the UK media for far too long In his second attack since the Murdoch-controlled BSkyB swooped on ITV, paying £940m for a 17.9pc blocking stake, Sir Richard said: "All of us know governments are scared stiff of Murdoch. If The Sun, The Sunday Times, The Times, Sky, The News of the World, just to name a few of the things that Murdoch owns, all come out in favour of a particular political party, the election is likely to be won by that particular party.

"If you tag on ITV to that as well, basically we've got rid of democracy in this country and we might as well just let Murdoch decide who is going to be our prime minister." He said Mr Murdoch had given an insight into his power in a recent interview when he was quoted saying that, when he visits England, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair compete to have breakfast with him. "Why are they competing to have breakfast with this person? Because he has such influence." Sir Richard owns almost 11pc of American cable operator NTL, whose plans to acquire Britain's biggest commercial broadcaster were left in tatters on Friday when Sky grabbed its stake at 135p a share. NTL will be rebranded Virgin Media next year. Yesterday, ITV rubbed salt in the wounds, revealing it had rebuffed a cash and paper takeover approach from NTL at 122p per share.

Sir Richard said: "Murdoch is a very good businessman. He's played a very good card and it's up to government to decide whether he can get away with it or not. "There comes a time when governments have got to draw a line in the sand. Every single time the Murdoch empire makes a move on more and more of the British media, governments don't have the courage to stand up to them." With an election looming, all parties should put up a united front, he said. "It should be an all-party situation where nobody tries to score any political advantage. Labour, Tories, Liberals should all stand as one and say enough's enough.

"These shares should be sold. If governments are so scared of this particular media baron possibly his empire should be re-looked at by competition authorities." He claimed such power stifles debate. "A lot of the press is controlled by Murdoch. It's difficult to get an impartial debate on this subject." He denied NTL's proposed deal could have created an equally dominant business. "The combined NTL/ITV is much less of a media build-up than the combined interests of Murdoch. Obviously the competition authorities would look at it, but all our advice is that it would not be a competitive issue. "At the moment Sky can come along and bid for the football rights and there is no-one who can compete." Sir Richard was "hopeful that the regulator will do his job and force Murdoch to sell the stake".

He denied the issue was personal. "I admire him as a businessman. He knows how to play poker. He's playing it on the basis that he thinks he can get away with it. "A businessman's job is to try to dominate but the Government's job is to make sure monopolies do not come about and if they do, break them up." News Corporation declined to comment.



Vulnerable children are being used to fill the UK data base before they are old enough to consent to taking their fingerprints and DNA samples.This is a perfect example of what the masonic system has been doing in the USA for years supposedly to protect children from being abducted.

When in fact as ever they use the worse case scenario to justify appalling intrusion into family life. It is for parents to decide on safety issues of a child not the satanists who control the child theft networks in the UK and USA.


MYCHIP (Masonic Youth Child Identification Program) has identified more than 226,284 children since its inception and it continues to assist families today. The program provides tools to help law enforcement authorities find a missing child during the most critical hours, and a permanent identification record in the event of a tragedy. The Masons of Massachusetts donate MYCHIP resources to make this service available to the public. All the identifying materials are given to the child's family.
Database details 'harm children'

Serious dangers exist from the growth of government databases on children, a report has said. The Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR) said guidelines ignored family values and privacy. The study was carried out for the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) which said the details on databases need to be "looked at carefully". The government said child protection was a top priority but it had serious reservations about the report.

Databases relating to children have recently been established across social services, education, crime and health. The report said one concern was so-called "e-discrimination" where police attention was more likely simply because of a child's records in areas such as education and health. Public trust and confidence will be lost if there is excessive unwarranted intrusion into family life Jonathan Bamford ICO assistant commissioner "This raises serious data protection concerns relating to the appropriateness of collecting, processing and retaining the data," the report said.

The study said there was a "cavalier interpretation" of data protection and privacy, which included police sharing data on a nine-month-old baby without the parents' consent using the excuse of "crime prevention". Sharing information can actually do harm, the report added. In a "disturbing" case a nine-year-old was wrongly taken into care after social workers misunderstood medical information. 'Risk of harm' ICO assistant commissioner Jonathan Bamford said there had been "substantial growth" in the amount of stored details. "Just because technology means that things can be done with personal information, it does not always follow that they should be done," he said. "Public trust and confidence will be lost if there is excessive unwarranted intrusion into family life or if some of the issues that have been identified actually materialise." Among the databases included were Information Sharing Index, due to be introduced by 2008, the National Pupil Database, and "ASSET", a database which contains profiles of young offenders.

Next year the ICO, an independent public body which promotes access to official information, is expected to help public sector organisations share information and make sure they adhere to the Data Protection Act. The ICO is also considering whether to provide more information - such as guidance for young people aged 12-18 on consent issues. "It is important to emphasise that there is a sharp distinction between child protection and child welfare," said Mr Bamford. "Data protection should never be used as an excuse for failure to protect a child from a real risk of harm."

'Respect privacy'

A Department for Education and Skills (DfES) spokesman said: "We have some serious reservations about this report's objectivity and evidence base. "It is important to remember that it is not the view of the information commissioner himself." He said the department took its responsibilities over data protection seriously and the databases had been developed in consultation with professionals. "The support, protection and safeguarding of children is our top priority but in fulfilling it, we are conscious of the need to respect personal privacy," he said. Liberal Democrat families spokeswoman Annette Brooke said: "This report raises real concerns that human rights and data protection laws will be violated." The report comes after "nanny state" concerns over experts being drafted into 77 areas of England to try to improve the standard of parenting.


Drug-dealing barrister is jailed 23 Nov 2006

A barrister who ran a cocaine factory from his apartment alongside a gangster has been jailed for seven years. Hassan Modjiri, 27, was secretly filmed in his south-west London flat discussing a drugs sale with arms dealer Paul Murdoch, 36, a court heard. When armed police raided the flat in Barnes they found nearly 1kg of cocaine with a street value of £150,000.

Modjiri and Murdoch, of Notting Hill, west London, who was given nine years, admitted possession and supply charges. Judge John Hillen, sitting at Blackfriars Crown Court, told them: "You are an odd couple indeed."

'Roman king'

Modjiri was filmed by a hidden camera discussing a lucrative drugs deal on the phone in the kitchen of his flat on 29 September. "This one is the cream," he told his would-be customer. "Who is the Roman king, mate, me. I am a face and a half. We are making bundles." Another camera caught him preparing and packaging the drugs for what the prosecution described as a "double-your-money" enterprise. Moments later, armed police burst in and ordered Modjiri and Murdoch to lie on the ground.

A car parked nearby and belonging to Murdoch was searched and found to contain 46 bullets of varying calibres. The pair pleaded guilty to one count of possessing cocaine and one of offering to supply on 29 September. Former milkman Murdoch, who has a previous firearms conviction, admitted six ammunition possession offences.

Cocaine factory

Modjiri, who worked for solicitors JD Spicer, had been the subject of a police surveillance operation, the court heard. John Elliott, prosecuting, said he had lived in a "substantial and comfortable" apartment which "in reality was a cocaine factory". "It was used by these two defendants for processing, packaging and distributing in wholesale quantities high grade cocaine," he said. Benjamin Squirrell, representing Modjiri, said his client had worked hard to improve himself, eventually winning a prized scholarship to the Bar but he became depressed when he failed to find chambers. "It was in that mindset he became involved in cocaine," said Mr Squirrell.


UK judges let women away with murder 22 Nov 2006

The British judiciary consistently let female murderers off with murder.

There is clear bias, discrimination and prejudice shown by a judicial system controlled by high level masonic judges. There is a reason why they are lenient to woman murderers as it is womens groups like Womens Aid who they use to fleece men of their life savings with lies and deceit in secret star chamber family courts.Judges dont want to upset the hand that feeds them and their masonic kitties.

Womens aid claim NO WOMEN ever commit murder and all men are potential wife beaters,rapists and child abusers.Also ALL woman are victims of mens abuse
Woman jailed for killing partner

A woman who killed her partner during an argument has been jailed for 40 months at the High Court in Glasgow. Margaret Kennedy, 41, admitted killing John Simpson, 65, at their home in Haldane Place, East Kilbride, in April.

Judge Lord Brailsford: "I'm sure that you have remorse but I can't ignore the fact that you have previous convictions for crimes of violence." Mr Simpson had 120 injuries. The court heard Kennedy was on bail at the time of the attack. She was originally charged with murder but the Crown accepted her guilty plea to culpable homicide.

Defence counsel Derek Ogg said: "This was a domestic fight between them which started with hair pulling and ended up with the death of Mr Simpson." Vinit Khurana, prosecuting, said: "The accused repeatedly punched and kicked Mr Simpson on the head and body, compressed his neck and struck him on the body with a shoe and on the head and body with a hairbrush."


TONY BLAIRS (fascist)BRITAIN 19 Nov 2006


In a recent article titled (This Article Could Get You Arrested) written by Henry Porter in The Independent, he wrote about the curtailment of civil liberties in Britain. He quoted from some e-mail correspondence he had had with Tony Blair, the prime Minister. In this article Porter twice stated that Britain was not a police state. Yet he then went on to describe some of the new laws brought in by Blair. These laws are amongst the most repressive introduced by any nation anywhere. For demonstrating in the street, for instance, and shouting your protest to anyone who cares to listen to them, you can be arrested and may face five years in prison. If you write e-mails complaining about the activities of some company or other you dislike, for whatever reason, it will be considered as ‘harassment’ and deemed to be a criminal offence. If you carry a banner saying that the government, or anyone else, stinks, it will be considered as being ‘anti-social’ and criminal offence. Which again means that you may be sent to prison for five years.

If you think that Tony Blair and his fascist cohorts are a bunch of assholes, which I most certainly do, and agree with whoever wants to get rid of them, which I do, you may well be put on file as a ‘terrorist suspect’. For being so you are subject to ‘house arrest’ which in no less than internal exile, which means that not only will you be confined to wherever you live but also denied the use of a computer, the Internet and a telephone. All your mail will be read and you will not be able to communicate with any friends who might still happen to be around. Your home will indeed become your prison. I was in South Africa during the Apartheid years, and like many other writers there I suffered under their repressive police state laws, which included 24 hour phone taps, daily harassment, persecution and torture by microwave weapons, supplied to them by the USA and their CIA. Law’s and repressive method’s which Britain has now duplicated in full. Blair admitted to Henry Porter that his intention was to ‘harass’ dissidents until they left the country. Strangely, Porter thinks Britain can’t be a police state simply because Blair e-mailed him. If Jack the Ripper e-mailed him I wonder if Porter would think that he was innocent of his crimes too?

By using the term ‘harassment’ Tony Blair has avoided the full implication of what MI5 actually does to political dissidents under his ‘harassment’ laws. So, being a British subject and also a political dissident, in that I hate fascism and have no hesitation at all in condemning it outright, (we did fight two world wars against fascism remember) I will tell you what really happens to dissidents under Britain’s so-called harassment laws.

1. MI5, Britain’s internal security service will at first begin a smear campaign against their dissident target. These smears include just about anything you can think of, but always include the allegations that their target is a communist, a liar, a thief, a plagiarist, a homosexual, a pornographer, a gross masturbator, and a consistent troublemaker. Their denigration of dissidents knows no bounds.

2. MI5 will warn off any of the dissidents friends who try to remain in contact with him / or her. Few if any friends do stay in contact. The dissident’s family will also be intimidated into opposing him.

3. The dissidents phone will be tapped for twenty-four hours every day. His /or her surface and e-mail will be intercepted. Even Blogs are censored in Britain.

4. The dissident’s computer will suffer many problems and their Internet connection will drop constantly. MI5 controls the telephone company in Britain, the post office, Radio, television and the press.

5. The dissidents home will be entered almost every time he leaves it by MI5 agents, who damage his property, steal books, book manuscripts, money and anything else they take a fancy to? They will also damage electrical appliances, including computers, tape recorders, video recorders and other items.

6. They will damage his car or cars.

7. They will openly have MI5 stooges follow the dissident and try to provoke him / or her into arguments and fights. These agents will also try and get other members of the public to physically attack the dissident. Whether the dissident retaliates or not he will be labeled as a troublemaker.

8. The dissidents home will be bombarded with loud and offensive music around the clock. Any close neighbors, as other people are, will be provoked into denigrating the dissident at every opportunity.

9. The dissidents home will be bombarded with microwave beam’s, which can and may cause many very serious physical ailments, and quite possibly a fatal heart attack.

10. If the dissident has a job he will probably loose it. If he is self-employed his customers will be intimidated into going somewhere else.

11. MI5 will ‘arrange’ motor ‘accidents’ in which the dissident may well be seriously injured or killed. These include being run down whilst walking on the street.

12. If the dissident finally does decide to leave Britain he will be pursued by Britain’s external security service MI6 who will then continue these actions against the dissident in whatever country he goes to.

13. These actions against dissidents are not temporary, they go on for years and years until the dissident either dies is killed or does in fact leave the country and keep moving on. I suffered these actions on a daily basis for well over ten years before my failing health forced me to leave Britain.

The above actions are by no means a full list of accounts of what British dissidents face when they speak and write the truth as they see it. Many other repressive actions against take place, and I must add that without some wide experience of ‘intelligence’ actions few people can be expected to survive them. Fortunately I gained such experience in South Africa.

Since I left Britain in 1999 many new repressive laws against free speech and dissent have been brought into effect, and thousands more MI5 agents added to those already infesting the country. Big brother is apparently everywhere with pubs, clubs, hotels and the city streets being surveilled by thousands of hidden ‘security’ cameras and bugs that no other country on earth can equal. Special Branch (Britain’s secret police) has their informers everywhere and talking openly in a public place may be very dangerous to your health. But, if like Henry Porter, you too believe that Britain is not a police state I suggest that you go there and try to write the truth about the gross repression and human rights abuses taking place there today. And if you manage to survive your stay there try writing about the same injustices taking place in America, because there isn’t much, if any difference at all, between the these two countries today. They have both become a blot on the face of the earth and neither can stand up to their boasts of being the ‘land of the free’. Forget the ‘brave’ bit. If the citizens of either country were as brave as they like to think they are they would both have thrown out and disposed of the monsters who rule them years ago.

David Shayler the ex-MI5 agent exposed Tony Blair as being an MI5 agent, and as such Blair knows exactly what MI5 does. He may try and further delude the British public by describing MI5 actions against dissidents as ‘harassment’ but I shall call them what they really are, torture. And Tony Blair is nothing less than a gross human rights criminal for allowing them to take place. If there is any justice at all Tony Blair will one day be brought before the International Criminal Court to answer for the crimes he had committed? We can only hope so?

There are some people in Britain who believe that a Conservative government would do better than Blair’s Labour party has. But they wouldn’t, indeed they never have. If it were at all possible for any British government to be worse than the one Tony Blair has dominated it would certainly be a Conservative one. Yet many people in Britain, cap in hand, still look up to the Conservatives. Probably because they have been serfs for so long their caps are inside their heads rather than being upon them. I would like to say more about Tony Blair and the retribution he should face one day, but I don’t want to give him and his MI5 fellow tyrants any further excuses to call me a terrorist, so I won’t. Although along with the thousands of other dissidents who have been persecuted, tortured and murdered in Britain over these many years I am no doubt on file as being something just as disreputable? And what’s more I’m proud of it. Indeed I am proud of anyone who resists the kind of insane rotten fascism that Blair and his mob of degenerate royalist government thugs represent. I believe that many British journalists agree with my views, however, were they to openly do so they would undoubtedly lose their jobs and quite probably be put into prison. After which they too would be regarded as ‘enemies of the state’ and suffer the consequences of being so.

Any country that outlaws free speech then persecutes and tortures people who resist such laws, cannot be viewed as a democracy, it is a police state pure and simple. Britain’s MI5 allows nobody into politics unless they agree to keep that state exactly as it is. Tony Blair’s period in office will soon be over and thankfully he will be gone, but don’t expect any changes for the better under anyone else who might follow him because there won’t be any.

Dr Les Dove
November 17th 2006

E-mail: lesdove@giga-red.net
Website: www.lesdove.blogspot.com


Urgent attention of your bully boy masonic directors at media@centrica.com

Eastern star for females

Scottish gas(centrica) bully boy directors will consist of top ranking masons who think they can get away with murder and are untouchable.


Roger Carr Chairman
Sir Roy Gardner Chief Executive
Helen Alexander CBE Non-Executive Director
Phil Bentley Group Finance Director and Managing Director, Europe
Mark Clare Managing Director, British Gas Residential Energy
Mary Francis CBE Non-Executive Director
Andrew Mackenzie Non-Executive Director
Patricia Mann OBE Senior Non-Executive Director
Paul Rayner Non-Executive Director
Jake Ulrich Managing Director, Centrica Energy
Paul Walsh Non-Executive Director
See all biographies

Pictures here of the MONSTERS who terrorize families


Scottish Gas bullies terrify family

MUM-OF-THREE Susan McGuire was hysterical with worry after receiving a gas bill for... £28,000. She was too frightened to open her front door in case Scottish Gas men carried out their threat to call the police to help them cut off her supply. The bully boys hounded Susan and her young family for three months.

And with winter starting to bite, they even threatened to call in the police unless she paid immediately. But Susan, 34, did not owe a penny... she pays for her gas up front by prepay card. A letter from Scottish Gas reads: "We've not received £28,308.94 for gas used. Payment is now overdue.

"Please pay this amount immediately or we may be forced to take legal action against you." They sent a tale-message which threatened: "Unless you pay your gas bill we will get a warrant to enter your home and disconnect your supply. "The police may be present when we call." This shocking case comes as Scottish Gas, now owned by London-based Centrica, was named the least popular firm in Britain after three huge price hikes in a year. Complaints against them have doubled to 400 a month and account for more than all other power firms combined, according to energy watch Scotland.

Susan was at her wits' end when she called me in. She said: "If I had used 1,084,000 units in just 34 days as they claim I'd have been heating the street. "I have three children, it's freezing outside and I don't know what to do. Please help me." Susan and husband Mark, 35, signed up with Scottish Gas when they moved to Barrhead, Renfrewshire, five years ago. The firm installed a prepayment meter and Susan topped up her card with £15 every week at the Post Office.

She said: "Pay-as-you-go was best for me because I wanted to know where I was. "I didn't want a huge bill through the letterbox that I couldn't afford to pay." So she got the shock of her life when the demand for £28,308.94 arrived. That works out at £800 A DAY. Susan - mum to Lauren, 13, Luke, 10, and one-year-old Millie - said: "I burst into tears when I read it. "I had received a previous bill for £76 and had been fighting with them for two months over that. I knew I didn't owe them anything."

She contacted Scottish Gas but they insisted the £28k bill was accurate and she should pay up or face the consequences. Susan said: "I told them I had a prepayment meter but they insisted I didn't. "They used every excuse under the sun - even claiming I had changed supplier and moved house without a forwarding address." Susan contacted me when she received a final demand threatening court action and the police. She said: "This affects the whole family. We are struggling to make ends meet. I jump every time I hear a knock at the door." Consumer body energy watch Scotland get 400 complaints a month about Scottish Gas accounts and bills. Spokesman Graham Kerr said: "They are in a league of their own when it comes to poor customer service. Many people are subjected to bully-boy threats of immediate disconnection. "Scottish Gas needs to start acting like it cares and stop causing customers frustration and distress." East Renfrewshire MP Jim Murphy said: "It is madness to charge one family £800 a day for gas. They have charged a family for the power supply of a whole town."

When I got on to Scottish Gas they apologised and wrote off the bill and at first offered Susan £20 compensation. But when I took them to task they increased the offer by £100 plus a box of chocolates and bouquet of flowers. Director Jim Needham said: "We sympathise with the position this has put the McGuires in and for any anguish caused. "We would like to reassure Mrs McGuire that we have taken the action needed to resolve this regrettable one-off occurrence." After Susan's shocking treatment it is no surprise they are the least popular UK firm.


UK's child stealers 19 Nov 2006

The Child Stealers

Revealed: The scandal of loving families whose children are being forcibly taken away to meet adoption targets SOCIAL workers were accused last night of tearing children away from loving families to meet ‘performance targets’ for adoption. Experts said there was clear evidence of social services targeting parents they branded ‘not clever enough’ to raise young children.

Tories demanded an inquiry, warning that the system appeared to be failing people with learning difficulties or low IQs. The call follows a Daily Mail inquiry highlighting the case of an Essex couple whose two small children were taken away and put up for adoption last year. Today the Mail reveals another distressing case involving a 32-year-old mother who says her baby girl was taken into care because she was deemed to have a ‘borderline learning difficulty’. Her daughter was adopted by a foreign couple and now lives abroad. In the case of the Essex couple, however, the chance of a successful adoption is fading. Their baby boy developed hydrocephalus after he was taken away from them, two prospective adopters pulled out and he may never find a new family.

There are fears that Government attempts to speed up the adoption process – social services are urged to see it as a ‘positive, responsible choice’ – are distorting decisions about vulnerable families. Councils are accused of being too quick to turn to adoption in a desire to meet ‘performance targets’.

Since Labour came to power, the number of children in care has increased almost 20 per cent. The Disability Rights Commission, the watchdog set up to stop discrimination against disabled people, said last night there was ‘serious concern’ that parents with learning difficulties were being unfairly targeted. Research suggested that one in four children subject to care orders had a parent with a learning difficulty. Tory spokesman Theresa May said it was ‘deeply worrying’ that the system was failing such children and their parents. She said MPs were being inundated with letters from people who had children taken away in similar circumstances. Parents with low IQs found it ‘impossible to cope with the system’. Mrs May said there were now more than 61,000 children in care, the highest figure in over 20 years and an increase of 20 per cent since 1997.

But the prospects for children taken into the care system were ‘appalling’. They were two and a half times more likely to become teenage parents and 66 times more likely to have their own children taken into care. Between a quarter and a third of people sleeping rough had been in care. Mrs May said: ‘Anyone can see that it must be better for these children for us to support their parents and try to prevent them from being taken into care.'

The Education Department said last night: ‘The decision to remove a child is not made lightly and responsibility for making those difficult decisions rests with the courts. All involved work on the basis that the welfare of the child is paramount.


What makes a father kill his children? 18 Nov 2006

The UK masonic press try below to rationalize on one of the most complex subjects fathers killing families. Until any man experiences the utter WRATH of Britains family courts run almost entirely by satanic masons ,no one can truly understand the EVIL that men endure through a court structure founded on destroying mens lives.

We know from our worldwide network of contacts how many men are pushed close to the edge as they see their lives being destroyed,their children STOLEN and their assets and property taken away by the monsters controlling our court systems.

The UK media have for YEARS been aiding and abetting a sinister system of asset transfer to a masonic structure founded on corruption and fraud.Once you understand the underlying EVIL surrounding family law then you can truly understand the destruction of families .The daily psychological torture of men being destroyed by hand picked establishment masonic judges and lawyers behind the closed doors of star chamber family law courts.Satanists doing untold harm to family life and the sanctity of marriage.

What makes a father kill his children?

A spate of terrible murders has shocked Britain. But where a child is the victim, the parent is usually the perpetrator It was the kind of phone call to chill even a seasoned police telephonist to the marrow. The man on the other end of the line announced that he had killed his "entire family". Inside a suburban house in Newcastle uopn Tyne the police this week found the bodies of the man's two children, Steven, aged five, and Abigail, 12, dressed in their night clothes, in separate rooms upstairs. Downstairs were the bodies of their mother and their uncle. Police said that they had been the victims of a "sustained violent attack".

You might like to think that such a case would be a shocking aberration. But consider the following. Yesterday an 35-year-old unemployed man, Perry Samuel, appeared in court charged with murdering his two children Caitlin, five, and Aidan, three, at their home in Bodelwyddan, North Wales, earlier this month while he was babysitting for his estranged wife. The children, who died from asphyxiation, were found in a bath. Earlier this month in Accrington, Lancashire, Mohammed Riaz, who worked for a back-street plastic bag manufacturer, doused the family home in diesel or petrol and set fire to it. In the blaze he killed his daughters Hannah, three, Alisha, 10, Sophia, 15, and Sayrah, 16, along with their mother, Caneze. The father later died of burns in hospital.

Around the same time in Northampton, 33-year-old Gavin Hall, a hospital radiographer, was jailed for life for murdering his three-year-old daughter, Millie. He had fed her antidepressant tablets and then placed a chloroformed handkerchief over her nose and mouth while strangling her. Another court, in Hull, this month heard that Angela Schumann, 28, jumped 100ft from the Humber Bridge with her two-year-old daughter, Lorraine, in her arms. The woman had written a note on her stomach, blaming her estranged husband. Miraculously, the pair survived. Weeks earlier, on holiday in Crete, John Hogan, a 32-year-old businessman from Bristol, hurled his six-year-old son Liam from a hotel balcony in Crete along with his two-year-old daughter, Mia, and himself. The boy died but the girl and her father survived the fall, with broken bones. For all the talk of "stranger danger" the harrowing fact is that most children who are murdered are killed by their parents. In 2004-05 of 58 victims only 16 per cent were killed by strangers. By contrast 43 per cent died at the hands of their father or mother - and in previous years the percentage has been even higher. Figures from the Home Office vary from year to year but broadly suggest that around HALF are killed by their mothers, and half by their fathers.

Among women the majority of cases are accounted for by postnatal depression. Indeed, the crime of infanticide in British law is defined as a child killed by its mother in the first 12 months of life. But what of fathers killing their children? Forensic psychologists who deal with such cases are divided on the subject. "It looks like a spate of incidents," says Ged Bailes, head of forensic clinical psychology at the Norvic Clinic in Norwich. "But we need to be careful. In the scheme of things this is still a fairly rare event." Even so, says Tony Black, the former chief psychologist at Broadmoor, "I get the impression that this kind of violence is on the increase". There are, psychologists agree, three main kinds of child-killings. "There are crimes of rage and anger," says Mr Bailes, "as when a drunken boyfriend shakes a baby to quieten it. There we are dealing with an unfeelingly careless individual who is unable to control his impulses." There are killings by those suffering from psychotic delusions - hearing voices - the seriously mentally ill.

And then there is a third category, says Dr Black, of individuals in whom a neurotic or psychopathic disorder interacts with a particularly stressful set of circumstances. This last category includes men who no one imagines could be violent - until they kill. Part of the problem is that most people's stereotype of a murderer is pretty inaccurate. In cases of domestic murder says the now-retired Broadmoor chief psychologist, "the typical killer is likely to be a quiet, retiring person, who wants to be accepted socially" but who "may have difficulty expressing or identifying emotions". "His action will seem totally out of character. When the police find him - he will be dazed and confused, which often leads to an initial diagnosis of schizophrenia. But what we are usually dealing with is a highly-inhibited repressed type who bottled up his feelings until he couldn't think of any other way of dealing with it."

What many child-killers are dealing with is their reaction to their wife leaving them. They struggle with feelings that are a cocktail of rage, jealousy, revenge and hatred. "They are people who lack strategies for giving vent to that turmoil in the way that many women can," says Dr Black - cutting the sleeves from their unfaithful husband's suits, destroying his favourite CDs, giving away his fine wine - "attacking whatever he values". A good example of that was the husband of Sarah Heatley. Outwardly he was a pillar of society, a local GP, intelligent, generous and affable. People said he was the perfect dad. But after his wife left him, on his first unsupervised access with their children, Jack, three, and Nina, four, he strangled them with a pyjama cord after videotaping them, responding to his questions about whether they wanted to "stay with Daddy" and whether they agreed that "Mummy was bad". His body was found hours later at the foot of a block of flats.

In the United States, where they now have 10 such "murder-suicides" a week, they have coined a phrase for such men. They are family annihilators. "The profile of a family annihilator is a middle-aged man, a good provider who would appear to neighbours to be a dedicated husband and a devoted father," says Professor Jack Levin, of North-Eastern University in Boston, who has made a study of such men. "Quite often he tends to be quite isolated. He is often profoundly dedicated to his family, but has few friends of his own or a support system outside the family. He will have suffered some prolonged frustration and feelings of inadequacy, but then suffers some catastrophic loss. It is usually financial or the loss of a relationship. He doesn't hate his children, but he often hates his wife and blames her for his miserable life. He feels an overwhelming sense of his own powerlessness. He wants to execute revenge and the motive is almost always to 'get even'."

Such men are often individuals who place a great premium on being in control. Sarah Heatley's husband was like that. As soon as Sarah gave up her job to become a full-time mother he began to dictate all the family decisions - "from financial ones to the children's upbringing, what car we had, how the house was furnished, what we ate," she has said of the murders which took place 12 years ago. "He turned into a control freak and it happened so gradually that I didn't realise until it was too late." Killing the children, says Mr Bailes of the Norvic Clinic, is a grotesque way of "regaining control". Just before John Hogan threw himself and his children from their hotel balcony he and his wife had been rowing over her announcement that she wanted to leave him, and take the children. No one will ever know what was going on in Mohammed Riaz's mind before he set the house in Accrington on fire, but neighbours spoke of the growing gap between him and his wife. He was a traditional Muslim who grew up in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan; isolated and poorly educated, he spoke little English. By contrast she had a successful career as a high-profile community worker - an anti-war campaigner, a governor at her children's schools and a diversity adviser to the local football club, Accrington Stanley - with an increasingly Westernised lifestyle. And he suspected she was having an affair with someone at work.


Bully boy MASONIC police caught on camera 18 Nov 2006

Camera phones focus on police use of force in L.A.

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - One cell phone video shows Los Angeles police beating a man repeatedly in the face. Another shows a handcuffed, homeless man being blasted with pepper spray in the face.

A third grainy video has campus police using a Taser stun gun on a student who refused to leave a Los Angeles university library. Once regarded as a toy for rich teens, the ubiquitous camera cell phone is becoming a powerful community tool in the debate about police conduct. Some Los Angeles grass-roots groups are training citizens to use cameras, video cell phones and the speed and Internet sites like YouTube to get their voices, and pictures, heard.

"We urge everyone to have a camera on them at all times so if anything happens it can be documented. The concept of patrolling the police is something we are trying to push as a form of direct action," said Sherman Austin, a founder of Cop Watch L.A., which launched its Web site three months ago. The three videos shot on cell phones or small recorders capturing Los Angeles police using apparently excessive force to restrain suspects all surfaced within a week. The images recall the 1991 beating of black motorist Rodney King by four police officers, which was caught by on home video by an Argentine plumber.


Fifteen years later, black and Latino activists in tough Los Angeles neighborhoods are leaving nothing to chance. "We have tried civilian review boards, we have tried going to City Hall and going to the police and all we have seen is more brutality," said Austin, 23.

"Technology makes it all the easier now. There are little digital cameras you can buy for 20 bucks in a drugstore that take good enough photos in daylight. And then there's the Internet that gets it out there." Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton is investigating the officers' conduct but cautioned against quick conclusions. "I cannot make judgments based solely on videos or portions of videos," Bratton said this week.

He contended there is no U.S. government agency that "has more policies, procedures, guidelines and independent oversight with respect to use of force than the LAPD." Ramona Ripston, executive director of the Southern California chapter of the ACLU, said the latest incidents underlined the case for more citizen oversight. "This police department was a cowboy department, a department that was very quick on the trigger and it is hard to root out those practices from the past. That's why the cameras are important," Ripston said.

"If the police were not overreacting there would be no photographs to take." Austin, a dreadlocked African-American with a police record, said he had been detained, followed and framed. "I don't remember how many times I have been pulled over by police or had the light shined in face because of the way I look. I am sick and tired of it. That's why I thought it was necessary to start this organization because I can't take it any more."


Decent judges 16 Nov 2006

You ask what percentage of judges are "decent". That requires a definition of "decent". By my definition, not many are.

It seems to matter little whether the judge is an "activist liberal judge", or a "conservative judge". Neither respect persons or property against government tyranny. The newer Republican judges, both federal and state (we have had Republican governors appointing judges for 16 years in Massachusetts, and many other states as well) seem just as committed to state hegemony as the old liberal ones. Judges of both parties are content to eviscerate the Bill of Rights with impunity, ignore family rights, push politically hysterical agendas in thrall to the radical feminist and gay lobbies (such as our "gay marriage" by judicial fiat in Massachusetts) , punish "crimes against the state" (like drug possession, failure to have a license for a car or gun, failure to pay leviathan its tribute) as more pernicious than crimes against persons or property, or interference into family autonomy.

In certain areas liberals and conservatives differ, but they are far more alike than not. Almost no judge will interpret the 2nd Amendment under its actual written terms, in historical context. Ditto the Eleventh. Almost no judge will restrain government spending under the Tenth Amendment. Almost no judge will buck the political hysteria surrounding "domestic violence" to require a genuine quantum of proof before issuing a restraining order or believing that there is "violence" without evidence. Almost no judge in a juvenile court will deny state social services its sacrificial victims.

Most of these judges are Republicans in my state, and more and more federal ones are as well. We are going to have to get another analysis framework for "conservative" and "liberal", because the "conservative" ones are anything but. I suggest that the correct paradigm to tell whether a judge is "decent" or not, is whether the judge favors STATE POWER over individual liberty, family autonomy, and religious rights, or whether they always find some "compelling state interest" that gets the state's snout into everyone's business. In criminal matters, does the judge simply favor protection of persons and property from intrusion by the state or other persons, rather than seek to do the bidding of anti-property and pro-state advocates, and the feminist and gay lobbies.

One of my favorite quotes of all time is from William Pitt, the British prime minister, who said in 1783, "Necessity is the pea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." This judicial invention of "compelling state interest" (the essence of "necessity") has done incalculable damage to persons, families, communities, churches, and the fabric of society. The state invents a compelling interest, and suddenly grants itself the right to intrude. It rarely figures out what it should have a compelling interest in, and almost always mucks it up when it legislates from the bench.

A "decent" judge respects private property as the foundation of rights. A "decent" judge respects family authority. A "decent" judge respects privacy and liberty. A "decent" judge does not pretend he is a legislature, and respects the separation of powers. A "decent" judge stops those who interfere with fundamental rights, whether by government agents, or private persons.

Under that definition, there are very very few decent judges indeed.

Gregory A. Hession J.D.

The way it really is in court 15 Nov 2006

Courts no longer abide by the rule of law, if a political agenda preempts them. Because they do not abide by the rule of law, they are horribly unpredictable. If the rule of law was paramount, the outcomes would be predictable and knowable. Going to court is now a complete dice roll. In fact, courts are so unpredictable, that fewer than 5% of cases are now tried - no one wants to risk the absurdity that is now gripping our system.

Federal judges now only try an average of 11 cases a year! All of the rest, both civil and criminal, are resolved by plea or settlement. This is proof positive that the rule of law has evaporated. Law has devolved into a miasma of shifting sand, ever since the "case method" began to dominate legal education. All that matters is what some judge said somewhere. Objective law does not matter, only what a judge thinks a law means.

A good example of how law is completely unhinged from objective, timeless principles is illustrated by how the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts found a right to "gay marriage" in our state constitution, written by John Adams in 1780. How could we have so stupidly missed that right, when it was obviously there in plain sight in the constitution for 225 years!!?? Mr. Adams must be proud, in his grave, that we finally figured out the actual meaning of his text.

How about campaign finance "reform", which deprived candidates of freedom of political speech, the very heart of the first amendment. No problem, said Congress, the president, and even the Supreme Court. Never mind that the First Amendment says that "Congress shall pass NO LAW . . . abridging the freedom of speech." How about letting social workers and police swat teams storm into homes and drag children out, based on anonymous tips of abuse? We don't need no stinkin' Fourth Amendment, says most courts. Hey, its "for the children".

In sum, there is almost no rule of law any more. It is rule by judges, with overt political biases, and a willingness to impose them, regardless of the facts or the law. Our system is now more akin to that of the Stalinist era in the Soviet Union, rather than that envisioned by the founding fathers of the U.S.A.

Gregory A. Hession J.D

UK and USA media promoting and protecting satanists 7 Nov 2006

Our organisations have been acutely aware for a long time of the sinister connections between the mass media and the promotion of devil worshipping agendas. Those who swear blood curdling secret society oaths are prevalent in most of the key positions of power in the UK and USA.Police chiefs,judges ,lawyers ,politicians,government bosses,civil servants, heads of the army ,navy and air force all swear oaths of allegiance to their luciferian secret mobster organisations.

Britain and America are in one almighty mess and a dangerous place for any man who has built up a home and possessions.Just simple trying to get the police to act to protect you from criminality is virtually impossible as they are to busy carrying out their masonic agendas.These may include dragging men from their homes on trumped up charges within a marriage,police being used as bully boys when disputes over custody of children are involved ,innocent men being targeted for asset stripping,eviction and home repossessions .Women separating from masons get similar treatment.

We know from experience why the police never seem to be in any hurry coming to our assistance when called as they are to busy on calls relating to family law and the multi billion pound racket of house theft .Where homes are being stolen to feed the legal vultures while senior police officers are buying these stolen homes at knock down prices . This massive fraud is going on implicating EVERYONE associated with the legal systems of both the UK and USA. Chiefs of police being the most important figures turning a blatant blind eye to massive property repossessions.

It may be hard for many to believe what the secret masonic controllers are doing behind the closed doors of their lodges.Satanic rituals and secret oaths of allegiance ensure the criminality they create is hidden from the general population with the British and American media complicite in the crimes commited by the mobsters running the show at the top. The ILLUSION that we are in some way protected by these gangsters has been built up over many years with the brainwashing and the propaganda pumped out by the devil worshippers who own and control most of the British and American media.Our organisations have members worldwide who have been victims of these devil worshipping monsters who make Hitlers mob pale by comparision.We will only get some sanity returned to our lives when the hidden agenda they have for their new world order is truly understood by people worldwide before anymore get sucked into their evil devil worshipping void.

One very good reason why NOT to call UK masonic police for HELP 7 Nov 2006

Increase in police-related deaths

There has been a rise in the number of people dying during or shortly after involvement with the police, new figures show. A report from the Independent Police Complaints Commission into such deaths has shown that there were 118 fatalities in 2005/06. This figure is up on the previous year's total of 107. Five died after shootings, 48 were killed after road incidents and 28 died in or after being in police custody. The remaining 37 died in a variety of situations, including self-inflicted deaths during sieges.

The annual report, published by the IPCC on Tuesday, showed there were 42 police-related traffic accidents which resulted in a fatality. This compared to 43 in the previous year, but four more people died in 2005/06 compared to the year before as a result of the incidents. Of these, 32 died after a police pursuit and seven died when a vehicle drove away from a patrol car or failed to obey an officer's request to stop.

94 of 118 case were male
101 were White
Five were Asian
Seven were Black
Four were mixed race
One 'any other ethnic group'

Males made up 40 of those who died in traffic accidents. Six of the deceased were from ethnic minority groups, and 16 were under the age of 21. According to the IPCC, the five men shot by police ranged in age between 24 and 47 years and three of them were white. The IPCC decided to be involved in the investigation of 95 of the 118 deaths, with the remainder being investigated locally by the force concerned.

IPCC chairman Nick Hardwick said it had been working on a system to try to reduce the deaths of those who become involved with police officers. He said: "The IPCC would much rather prevent than investigate a death. Over the last year we have sought to reduce these figures in a number of ways. "This includes developing a system that will collate, share and monitor recommendations from IPCC and police investigations into these deaths."


Lawyer dishes out fivers to addicts for legal aid work 7 Nov 2006


Record exposes lawyer who dishes out fivers to addicts for legal aid work

A LAWYER who bribes junkies to give him legal aid work is facing a fraud probe. Legal Aid bosses began a probe after the Daily Record gathered evidence of greedy Robert Taylor's actions. Taylor, 58, a solicitor for more than 30 years, dishes out £5 notes to heroin users who sign legal aid documents.

Each of the documents - known as advice and assistance forms - earns Taylor up to £80. He also pays addicts to bring new clients to his Glasgow city centre office to sign more of the lucrative forms. Taylor's shady practice is a serious breach of both Law Society of Scotland and Scottish Legal Aid Board codes of conduct. It could see him face criminal charges and be banned from working as a solicitor. One legal source said: "This is a clear abuse of the system and it must be stopped. "Taylor is a man whose integrity is supposed to be beyond question. It's shocking that he should take advantage of his trusted position." Married Taylor runs his own law firm from an office in Glasgow's Bath Street.

The Record decided to investigate after learning he paid members of the public who signed advice and assistance documents indicating they had asked him to perform warrant searches. The simple task involves a lawyer checking with the procurator fiscal whether a warrant has been issued for a client's arrest. Three of our investigators visited him a total of seven times during a two-week period and walked away with cash on each occasion. Their meetings with Taylor, during which he did not bother to check if the investigators were even eligible for legal aid, were secretly recorded. On several occasions, Taylor got our reporters to sign more than one form.

A solicitor can claim a fee of up to £80 from the Scottish Legal Aid Board each time a client signs one of the pink documents, known officially as AA/APP forms. SLAB bosses rarely examine the forms because solicitors are trusted not to abuse a self-certificate system. Investigator One visited Taylor at his office while he was on a break from court and asked him to perform a warrant check. Taylor then passed a folded £5 note to the investigator and said: "That'll cover your expenses." As our man was leaving the office, Taylor followed him out to the landing and said: "Tell your pals to come up if they've got any citations or indictments, things like that."

Our investigator asked: "You want me to bring guys up to you?" Taylor replied: "You can act as my agent, know what I mean?" Investigator Two then visited Taylor and also asked him to perform awarrant search. Again, Taylor reached into his left pocket and handed him a neatly folded fiver and said: "There you go." The pair then discussed whether Taylor wanted our man to also bring him new clients. Taylor replied: "Of course."

Our man asked: "Would there be something in it for me?" Taylor said: "Yes. But we'd judge each case on its own merits." As Taylor showed our man to the door, he repeated twice: "It's all confidential." Both our investigators visited Taylor again.

Investigator Two asked him: "Do you want me to sign one of those forms?" Taylor replied: "Can't. The last one is still lying on my desk but there's your expenses anyway." Taylor then handed our man another fiver.

The Record sent a third and final investigator to Taylor's office this week. Posing as a new client, our reporter was introduced to Taylor by Investigator Two. Taylor took Investigator Two into his office and asked about Investigator Three's background. He then gave Investigator Two a £10 note and said: "There's a double dose for you." Taylor then took Investigator Three into his office and gave him an advice and assistance form after being asked to do a warrant check. He then reached into his pocket and gave him a folded £5 note.

He said: "Thanks for coming up, that will cover your expenses for getting here." The Record has all the cash that Taylor handed to our investigators in safe keeping. A source said: "Robert has done so many warrant checks for me I couldn't even begin to give an accurate figure. "It's well known round Glasgow's drug addicts that he's good for money. "All you have to do is sign a form and he'll give you the cash. "He always makes sure you put the money in your pocket before you leave his office. "I've been in to see Robert twice a week for warrant checks before.

"Robert is just making more money from legal aid and he keeps addicts happy by giving them a fiver. "He's taking advantage of their addiction and the legal aid system to make more money for himself." Last year, Scotland's legal aid bill topped £152million. Experts say next year's figure will reach £168million. And lawyers such as Taylor have helped make sure this rockets.

The Scottish Legal Aid Board make it clear that solicitors cannot offer inducements, even expenses, for business. But Taylor, who lives with his wife in Bearsden, Glasgow, clearly ignores this rule. Our evidence has been made available to the Scottish Legal Aid Board and the Law Society of Scotland. Last night, a SLAB spokesman said: "The Scottish Legal Aid Board has confirmed that it will be investigating information provided by the Daily Record about solicitor Robert Taylor. "We thank the Record for bringing this to our attention. "We take allegations such as this very seriously. The board has an ongoing programme of monitoring and investigating legal aid expenditure involving both applicants and the legal profession.

"Under its powers, it can stop solicitors undertaking criminal legal aid work. "Where it has concerns about lawyers, it has made formal complaints to the appropriate regulatory body. It may also forward cases to the Crown Office for consideration of police investigation or prosecution." A Law Society of Scotland spokesman said: "The Society takes accusations of breaches of professional rules seriously and would welcome information about concerns people have about a solicitor. "The society can prosecute solicitors before the independent Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal for breaches of its rules and there are a number of sanctions available." Taylor refused to comment.


Britain is 'surveillance society' 4 Nov 2006

Fears that the UK would "sleep-walk into a surveillance society" have become a reality, the government's information commissioner has said. Richard Thomas, who said he raised concerns two years ago, spoke after research found people's actions were increasingly being monitored.
Researchers highlight "dataveillance", the use of credit card, mobile phone and loyalty card information, and CCTV. Monitoring of work rates, travel and telecommunications is also rising. There are up to 4.2m CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people.

But surveillance ranges from US security agencies monitoring telecommunications traffic passing through Britain, to key stroke information used to gauge work rates and GPS information tracking company vehicles, the Report on the Surveillance Society says. It predicts that by 2016 shoppers could be scanned as they enter stores, schools could bring in cards allowing parents to monitor what their children eat, and jobs may be refused to applicants who are seen as a health risk.

Produced by a group of academics called the Surveillance Studies Network, the report will be presented to the 28th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners' Conference in London on Thursday, hosted by the Information Commissioner's Office. The office is an independent body established to promote access to official data and to protect personal details.

4.2m CCTV cameras
300 CCTV appearances a day
Reg plate recognition cameras
Shop RFID tags
Mobile phone triangulation
Store loyalty cards
Credit card transactions
London Oyster cards
Electoral roll
NHS patient records
Personal video recorders
Hidden cameras/bugs
Worker call monitoring
Worker clocking-in
Mobile phone cameras
Internet cookies
Keystroke programmes

The report's co-writer Dr David Murakami-Wood told BBC News that, compared to other industrialised Western states, the UK was "the most surveilled country". "We have more CCTV cameras and we have looser laws on privacy and data protection," he said. "We really do have a society which is premised both on state secrecy and the state not giving up its supposed right to keep information under control while, at the same time, wanting to know as much as it can about us."

The report coincides with the publication by the human rights group Privacy International of figures that suggest Britain is the worst Western democracy at protecting individual privacy. The two worst countries in the 36-nation survey are Malaysia and China, and Britain is one of the bottom five with "endemic surveillance". Mr Thomas called for a debate about the risks if information gathered is wrong or falls into the wrong hands.

"We've got to say where do we want the lines to be drawn? How much do we want to have surveillance changing the nature of society in a democratic nation?" he told the BBC. "We're not luddites, we're not technophobes, but we are saying not least don't forget the fundamental importance of data protection, which I'm responsible for. "Sometimes it gets dismissed as something which is rather bureaucratic, it stops you sorting out your granny's electricity bills. People grumble about data protection, but boy is it important in this new age. "When data protection puts those fundamental safeguards in place, we must make sure that some of these lines are not crossed."

'Balance needed'

The Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) said there needed to be a balance between sharing information responsibly and respecting the citizen's rights. A spokesman said: "Massive social and technological advances have occurred in the last few decades and will continue in the years to come. "We must rise to the challenges and seize the opportunities it provides for individual citizens and society as a whole." Graham Gerrard from the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) said there were safeguards against the abuse of surveillance by officers. "The police use of surveillance is probably the most regulated of any group in society," he told the BBC.

"Richard Thomas was particularly concerned about unseen, uncontrolled or excessive surveillance. Well, any of the police surveillance that is unseen is in fact controlled and has to be proportionate otherwise it would never get authorised."



Nothing quite prepares you for your first experience of discovering you've been sold goods with RFID tagging.As I was sitting sunbathing from the veranda of my apartment on a beautiful sub tropical island ,using some suntan lotion to protect me from the heat of the midday sun I placed the plastic bottle of cream on the table and continuing basking in the sun. For some inexplicable reason I started picking at the bar code on the back of the bottle which came off with a sticky residue.However to my shock and horror underneath I noticed what was coils of fine strips of copper wrapped in an ever decreasing circle with a centre square of copper leading out to a triangular strip at the edge .

As a trained electronics engineer it didn't take very long to realise this was an RFID tag which had been secretly attached to a bottle of suntan lotion under the bar code .Now my every movement in and out of the country could be monitored and anywhere RFID tags could be scanned.Despite reading a great deal regarding this sinister piece of monitoring it truly only sunk in the depths the monsters controlling our planet are prepared to go to track us all. This is a WARNING to anyone who thinks this is FUTURE technology. This is here right now and ANY company prepared to attach these devices to items purchased at their stores should be boycotted .We will aim to build up a network of where these tags are coming from and use the internet to warn any innocent victim of what stores are acting as big brother conspirators.

Anyone who has recently purchased items that are generally taken on holiday should check these items in particular under the barcode labels and if one is found note the store where purchased and forward their name to all contacts as a warning of BIG BROTHER devices.


To see how these are being marketed look here