Archive for the ‘UK Politics’ Category

Why Are Our Political Elite So Obsessed With Lowering the Age of Consent?

January 15, 2013

Why are UK politicians so preoccupied with lowering the age of consent? Who asked for it to be lowered in the first place? Not parents in Britain, that’s for sure. Listen to this bit of common sense before you start your debate…

UPDATE: British PM Rules Out Lowering Age Of Consent To 14…
http://news.sky.com/story/1036565/pm-rules-out-lowering-age-of-consent-to-14

….

10 Reason to Cancel Your TV License and more…

January 15, 2013

BanTheBBC says:

Up until the last few years I used to be a big fan of BBC programming and would invest at least a few hours every day watching programmes like Eastenders, Top of the Pops, Only Fools & Horses, Question Time, Newsnight, Panorama, etc.

But these days I cannot bring myself to watch any BBC programmes at all. Even watching just five minutes worth makes me feel dirty. It’s not the quality of the programming that’s at issue, it’s the fact that the BBC is such a repulsive propaganda machine that seems to pay no attention to the concerns of the very people who are funding them.

The BBC has had it too good for too long. One of the major problems posed by the BBC is their lack of accountability to the very people who pay their wages — us. The BBC is never far away from controversy but nothing ever seems to change and no one in their corporation ever seems to be worse off as a result of their wrongdoing. Imagine for a moment that it was a completely different media company we were talking about, and not the BBC. For argument’s sake, let’s say it was ITV or Sky. What would happen is that the viewers would refuse to watch that TV station any longer and/or they would cancel their subscriptions. And if enough people did this, the company would go bankrupt very quickly. That’s because these company’s are directly accountable to their viewers who pay their wages via subscriptions or from watching the adverts. However, the BBC does not afford us this luxury to the people who fund them. It doesn’t matter how many people stop watching BBC programmes because the BBC will continue to receive £3.4 billion a year from our pockets. Therefore the BBC has no financial impetus to even want to change what they do. Even if a million people suddenly stopped watching the BBC, it wouldn’t make the slightest bit of difference to the BBC’s annual turnover, which means that they can continue to anger people as much as they want without any fear of redundancies, pay cuts or the company going bust through lack of consumer confidence in their products.

Therefore we only have one real option available to us and that’s to cancel our TV Licence…

More on ‘The Great TV License Scam’…

….

EXCLUSIVE: Was BBC presenter Jimmy Savile procuring Haut de la Garenne children’s home boys in Jersey for former PM Ted Heath?

January 13, 2013

Was BBC presenter Jimmy Savile procuring Haut de la Garenne children’s home boys in Jersey for former Prime Minister Ted Heath to sexually abuse on his boat ‘Morning Cloud’ – and were these victims subsequently murdered?

Assassinations of Princess Diana and former Labour Foreign Secretary Robin Cook with barrister Michael Shrimpton. Despicable failure of BBC Trust chairman & senior Tory Chris Patten to deal effectively with internal BBC censorship of the Jimmy Savile story…

Read and hear more at Tony Gosling’s Drive Time Show

More Baby P Schemes: Children Visiting A&E to Go on Database to ‘Spot Signs of Abuse’

December 28, 2012

David Icke says… “The prime motivation for this is not to protect children (if, only), it is to justify ever more children with loving parents being stolen by the State – the very State with a grotesque record of abusing children in ‘care’ and the covering up what happened – especially when it involves the rich and famous.

Don’t be fooled by the sales-pitch behind this ‘scheme’ – the State wants control of all children and this is only another stepping-stone to that end (see Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World).”

All children who visit hospital casualty departments or out-of-hours GPs will be run through a national database to spot signs of abuse by “devious parents”, ministers say.

By John-Paul Ford Rojas
Telegraph

Dec 28, 2012

Each emergency visit would be connected via an NHS computer system under the £8.6 million scheme, designed to help uncover abuse and neglect by revealing patterns of even minor injuries suffered by children.

Ministers want all hospitals to be using the system by 2015.

Baby P: Still being cited by gov’t agencies as reason for new state ‘schemes’, but no real reform to date of abuse of children in care.

It is part of a joined-up approach, which will also tie in records from social services and other parts of the NHS, designed to prevent a repeat of “terrible cases” of failures such as the deaths of Baby P and Victoria Climbie.

Doctors will be told they should ask questions if they see a pattern of suspicious injuries, or if parents have been taking their children to many different hospitals.

Dan Poulter, the health minister, told The Times that it would “stop those very devious parents who do abuse children from trying to pitch up at a number of locations and trying to hoodwink medical professionals into thinking everything’s all right when it’s not”.

Medical staff will also be able to see if the children they treat are subject to a child protection plan or are being looked after – meaning they are already identified as being at risk.

The plans were broadly welcomed by doctors though there were concerns it could be scuppered by the health service’s dubious record on IT.

Dr Poulter said: “Doctors and nurses are often the first people to see children who are victims of abuse.

“Up until now, it has been hard for frontline healthcare professionals to know if a child is already listed as being at risk or if children have been repeatedly seen in different emergency departments or urgent care centres with suspicious injuries or complaints, which may indicate abuse.

“Providing instant access to that information means vulnerable and abused children will be identified much more quickly – which will save lives.

“Baby P and Victoria Climbie were both shocking and tragic cases – we want to do everything we can to stop them happening again. This is a huge leap forward and will give the authorities a fighting chance of identifying abused children much sooner.”

The Department of Health said that at the moment it was difficult to tell if children have frequently had urgent treatment, but this could be important for spotting abuse, particularly if the child has suspicious injuries such as bruising, scratches, bite marks and burns.

Read more

Surprise: UK Minister Accuses Israel of ‘War Crimes’ Over Planned Settlement Expansions

December 28, 2012

Dec 28, 2012

Conservative British Minister has suggested that the Israeli regime is a war criminal for planning expansion of illegal settlements in East al-Quds (Jerusalem) and conferring university status to a college in the illegal settlement of Ariel.

The regime announced on December 24 that it is planning new illegal settlements in the Mordot Gilo South adding Ariel College will be upgraded to university status effectively creating the first university in an illegal settlement.

A positive step: British Foreign Minister for Middle East Alistair Burt breaks ranks condemning Israeli policy.

“Last week Foreign Secretary William Hague made clear our condemnation and deep disappointment at the approval of the East Jerusalem Ramat Shlomo plan. We also condemn the Jerusalem District Planning Board’s approvals for over 3150 units in Givaat Hamatos and 1242 units in Mordot Gilo South,” British Foreign Minister for Middle East Alistair Burt said.

“These are further profoundly provocative actions that run contrary to the Fourth Geneva Convention,” he added.

Burt also said that the Ariel College decision is “deeply disappointing” and called on Tel Aviv to stop such measures.

“We reiterate our call on Israel urgently to reverse these decisions and take no further steps aimed at expanding or entrenching settlement activity,” he said.

Burt’s remarks are and the reference to breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention are yet the harshest tone employed by a British official against the Zionist regime.

The Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, commonly referred to as the Fourth Geneva Convention require all occupiers to avoid transferring parts of their population into occupied territories.

Burt’s comments expose the growing international unease against the Israeli regime’s illegal settlement-building in Palestinian lands to the point that a western government has been forced to admit what human rights activists have been long trying to highlight, that is the Israeli regime’s settlement-building is a war crime.

Source: Press TV

SANTA DELIVERS A GIFT: ‘End of the Road’ for ACTA in Europe

December 22, 2012

Capture21st Century Wire says… The Orwellian ACTA regulations have been knocked back… for now. 2013 will see the continuation of wack-a-mole with regards to internet freedom, as the monopolists and corporate culture cartels will continue to push forward a never-ending series of restrictive statutory and administrative corporate legislation designed to curtail and narrow content and information available online. It is imperative that the public keep an eye on these and learn about them as they appear. Each bill brought forward will become more opaque and more complex, with the hope of creating ‘legislation fatigue’ on the public’s part. Don’t be lulled to sleep on this issue of internet freedom. The establishment’s aim in total control – nothing less will satisfy those who seek power and influence of the emerging global awakening.

By Jack Phillips
Epoch Times

The controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA, which was broadly rejected by the European Parliament earlier this year, had a final nail driven into its coffin: the European Commission has reportedly dropped its plans to get it confirmed by the European Court of Justice.

The European Commission, which is Europe’s executive body, said that there is “no realistic chance” that the trade agreement would be adopted in Europe, reported The Register.

In July, European parliamentarians rejected the treaty following Europe-wide demonstrations. There were concerns that the bill would impose harsher new restrictions that target all Internet users, not just people who engage in counterfeiting and piracy.

According to the website ZDNet, Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht said that he would consider reintroducing ACTA to the European Court of Justice, which is Europe’s highest court. But with the European Commission’s decision, that will likely not take place.

“I welcome this news from the Commission today,” European Parliament Member David Martin said in a statement.

“The EU cannot be party to an agreement without European Parliament ratification. MEPs overwhelmingly rejected ACTA in July and I am pleased that the Commission has acknowledged this is the end of the road for ACTA in the EU thanks to the Parliament,” he said.

President of the Socialists & Democrats in the European Parliament said in a statement, “It is about time that the Commission realized that ACTA was wrong.”

“It was the best decision, because the European Parliament’s vote last July had already made it a dead end for ACTA.”

Other than the EU, the United States—which was one of the driving forces behind the treaty—has not signed it yet. Japan is currently the only country that has given its final approval on ACTA.

British Court Blocks Lawsuit Over US Drone Killings in Pakistan

December 22, 2012

Pakistani Attempting to Sue British Spy Agency for Drone Attacks

By Jason Ditz
Dec 22, 2012

British Lord Justice Alan Moses has blocked Pakistani Noor Khan from suing the Government Communications Headquarters for providing spy data to the US that led to drone strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Khan’s father was killed in a US drone strike in North Waziristan last year, and argued that the GCHQ’s faulty intelligence was to blame for the attack which killed him. The Foreign Office has argued that the court had to scrap the case because it could harm ties with the US.

Lord Justice Moses said that the “real aim” of the lawsuit was to get the British High Court to condemn the US drone strikes for their large civilian death toll, and that the part about his father and the GCHQ was simply a way to get around to that.

British officials have regularly argued that national security cases could not be heard in British courts because they might conceivably offend the US. Generally the courts have rejected this argument, but today’s ruling may suggest that is going to change, and points to more secrecy in the UK…

Read more at Antiwar.com

Deutsche Bank Convicted in Italy Amid a Widening International Banking Scandal

December 22, 2012

By Valentina Pop
Dec 22, 2012

BERLIN – An Italian judge has convicted Deutsche Bank of fraud, as the bank struggles to save its reputation amid widening probes over tax evasion and rate-fixing after the departure of its former CEO Josef Ackermann.

Dr Josef Ackermann: Bilderberg head, and now subject of massive banking fraud through Deutsche Bank

Deutsche Bank was convicted together with US giant JP Morgan Chase, Switzerland’s UBS and a German-Irish bank, Depfa, for their role in overseeing fraud by their bankers in the sale of interest rate bets to the city of Milan. About €90 million are to be seized from the four banks, who will also have to pay €1 million each in fines.

The case is only the first in a series of similar complaints: around 600 Italian municipalities had bought such derivatives and lost about €4 billion during the financial crisis, according to the Italian central bank.

In parallel, Deutsche Bank is part of a worldwide investigation for altering the British benchmark interest rate (Libor) and its euro-counterpart (Euribor). Once the European Central Bank takes over the supervision of eurozone’s largest banks, Deutsche Bank will fall under the new scrutiny.

The Milan sentence, which can still be appealed, also comes after Deutsche Bank had its Frankfurt headquarters raided last week in a probe for alleged tax evasion on profits cashed in from trading with carbon permits.

Germany’s largest commercial bank, once renowned for its solid and risk-averse business, has been transformed over the last decade into an aggressive investor and speculator with risky bets known as derivatives, largely due to the leadership of Swiss top banker Josef Ackermann, who stepped down earlier this year.

The US Senate named the German bank alongside Goldman Sachs as the two institutions that played a “key role” in the financial crisis.

But unlike Denmark’s Danske Bank whose management apologised for its role in the financial crisis, Ackermann still got praise for it…

Read more at EU Observer

RELATED:

  1. Deutsche Bank among seven banks investigated for UK rate fixing
  2. A banker’s farewell party

IN BRITAIN THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN ARE ‘LOST’ BY CARE HOMES EACH YEAR

December 20, 2012

QUESTION: Where are they all disappearing to?

By Marco Giannangeli and Sonia Poulton

THE number of children who vanish from care homes has risen to record numbers, as local authorities across England and Wales continue to flout warnings.

A damning report by MPs earlier this year highlighted the scandal of thousands of youngsters across England and Wales, some as young as eight years old, who go missing shortly after reaching care.The report, described as a “watershed” by campaigners, revealed that most local authorities have no clear idea how many children have absconded because of “patchy record keeping”.

According to Ofsted, police have dealt with a record 11,900 cases linked to missing children in the 12 months up to April this year, compared to 10,000 over the same period the year before – a rise of 19 per cent.

However, in 2010-11 local authorities reported only 920 instances of missing children from care homes.

Worryingly most of the care home facilities are still given “good” ratings following Ofsted inspections.

Many children scarred by abuse are feared to become targets of sexual predators after they abscond.

While most are British, a minority are trafficked to the UK from abroad to work in the sex industry or as slave labour in sweatshops and cannabis farms, and feel pressured to escape and fulfil their bond with underworld gangsters.

The problem is made worse by the fact that almost half the children are being placed into care homes outside their home areas, giving them an extra temptation to run away. Despite warnings contained in July’s All-Party Parliamentary Group report, entitled Children Who Go Missing, many councils still don’t keep proper records.

In a survey of 20 local authorities conducted by the Sunday Express, just two – Devon and Cornwall – could pinpoint how many children had gone missing from care home facilities.

Last night the charity the Children’s Society revealed that only 19 out of 130 local authorities had responded to its proposals of a new standardised charter which would unify how figures are calculated.

Campaign director Lily Caprani said: “This is a very worrying situation. We are particularly worried by the high number of children who are sent to care homes away from their own local authority.

“July’s findings were a real watershed. We must assume that this very serious problem of children not being cared for properly by those very care homes that are supposed to keep them safe has been going on for some time, but went undetected because the figures just aren’t properly collated. Children that go missing from care are vulnerable to sexual exploitation and other shocking crimes.”

There are 65,000 children in care in England. According to recent figures, the cost of servicing those who run away has reached a staggering £82million a year.

Andy McCullough, head of UK policy for the charity Railway Children, said: “What is needed is someone in an overseeing role, such as a Children’s Commissioner, who can ensure that we know how many children go missing from care.”

Source: Daily Express

Guardian: How the Police Account of ‘Plebgate’ Was Cast Into Doubt

December 20, 2012

Nicholas Watt
The Guardian
Dec 19, 2012

The official police log, published by the Daily Telegraph on 24 September, reports that Mitchell raged at the officers when they blocked him.

Chief Whip Mitchell sporting the commoner’s push-bike avec wicker baskette.

The log said: “There were several members of public present as is the norm opposite the pedestrian gate and as we neared it, Mr Mitchell said: ‘Best you learn your fucking place… you don’t run this fucking government… you’re fucking plebs.’

“The members of public looked visibly shocked and I was somewhat taken aback by the language used and the view expressed by a senior government official. I can not say if this statement was aimed at me individually, or the officers present or the police service as a whole.”

Amid the battle between Mitchell and the police it is easy to forget that in some areas they are in agreement. Mitchell has admitted that he swore at the police, saying: “I thought you guys were fucking meant to help us.”

But then their accounts differ. Mitchell says the CCTV footage shows the log is wrong to claim that members of the public were present on the other side of the gates. This is seen as crucial because the account written by the off-duty police officer, which repeated details about Mitchell calling the police “fucking plebs”, also claimed that there were witnesses.

Mitchell also says the CCTV footage shows he could not have uttered the toxic word “pleb”. This is because the police log says that he uttered these words “as we neared” the pedestrian gate. The CCTV is inconclusive: there are no physical signs that he is speaking or angry, but his face cannot be seen.

As Mitchell wheeled his bike through the pedestrian gate the two accounts find common ground again. The police claimed in their log that he said “you haven’t heard the last of this” as he cycled away.

Mitchell admits that he uttered words to this effect. His friends believe this is the most likely explanation for the decision of the police officers to write up an account of the incident.

The two police officers who made the original report have remained silent – as they have to – as a whirlwind of allegations about conspiracies, fabrication of evidence and fit-ups swirls around them. The constables, one female, one male, remain in their positions in the diplomatic protection unit, SO6, and are determined, it is said, to get on with their jobs. Those who have had contact with the officers say that, in the immediate aftermath of the altercation at the gates of Downing Street, both officers made notes of what they say happened in their pocketbooks.

Putting it colloquially, sources who spoke to the officers afterwards said they were “bricking it” and were concerned that they needed to make as clear a note as possible of what happened and make sure that it was seen by those above them.

To cover themselves, they wrote a log of the incident from their pocketbook notes, and very soon afterwards emailed it up through the chain of command at the Metropolitan police to a sergeant, an inspector and – it is understood – even higher up the ranks. The Guardian understands a number of officers would have had sight of this emailed log – a tactic adopted by the officers for their own protection.

Mitchell’s friends believe that his warning of repercussions explains why the police – though not necessarily the officers on duty – felt the need for corroboratory evidence in the form of an eyewitness account. “They needed an extra voice,” one friend suggested.

At 9.52pm on 20 September, just over 24 hours after the incident, an off-duty member of the diplomatic protection unit sent an email to his local MP, John Randall, with an account that is almost identical to the police log. Randall was the deputy chief whip, who had strained relations with Mitchell. There were reports in the days leading up to Mitchell’s resignation that Randall had threatened to resign unless Mitchell went. No 10 sources have stressed that Randall acted entirely properly as an MP in forwarding the email from a constituent to No 10.

Friends of the chief whip say the email from the officer to Randall proves that there was collusion within the Met – though this did not necessarily involve the officers who wrote the police log. This is because the email was virtually identical to the police log, which did not appear in the public domain until four days later when the Daily Telegraph published it on 24 September.

The Metropolitan police are now investigating whether that officer fabricated evidence. It has made clear that the officer was not present at the time, as he claimed. Their investigation is also examining whether any third party leaked the information about the incident to the Sun. Scotland Yard would not comment on whether it would be interviewing Randall as part of this tranche of the investigation. Three days after the Sun article, what purported to be the full officers’ log appeared in the Daily Telegraph corroborating the Sun’s version of what had been said.

Scotland Yard has never challenged the accuracy of the officers’ log published in the Telegraph. On Tuesday the Metropolitan police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, publicly stated that nothing he had seen in the past few days had affected the original report of the episode by the officers in Downing Street at the time. He said: “There’s nothing I’ve seen in this fresh information that causes me to doubt that original account.” Sources said on Wednesday – after Channel 4 broadcast the CCTV, which Mitchell says casts doubt on the police officers accounts in their log of the altercation – that the commissioner’s comments still stood.

Inside Scotland Yard, 30 officers are now running a major inquiry into who leaked the information to the Sun and the Telegraph, and into the alleged fabrication of evidence by the third officer who posed as a member of the public in his correspondence.

He was arrested last Saturday night on suspicion of misconduct in public office and the unauthorised release of information. Scotland Yard said its inquiry would examine whether there was any evidence of a conspiracy between this officer and any other person.

The atmosphere inside Scotland Yard is said to be extremely tense as Hogan-Howe, an authoritarian commissioner at the best of times, demands answers in the face of a broadside by his political masters in Downing Street to “get to the bottom of the matter”.

The official police log, published by the Daily Telegraph on 24 September, reports that Mitchell raged at the officers when they blocked him. The log said: “There were several members of public present as is the norm opposite the pedestrian gate and as we neared it, Mr Mitchell said: ‘Best you learn your fucking place … you don’t run this fucking government … You’re fucking plebs.’

“The members of public looked visibly shocked and I was somewhat taken aback by the language used and the view expressed by a senior government official. I can not say if this statement was aimed at me individually, or the officers present or the police service as a whole.”

Amid the battle between Mitchell and the police it is easy to forget that in some areas they are in agreement. Mitchell has admitted that he swore at the police, saying: “I thought you guys were fucking meant to help us.”

But then their accounts differ. Mitchell says the CCTV footage shows the log is wrong to claim that members of the public were present on the other side of the gates. This is seen as crucial because the account written by the off-duty police officer, which repeated details about Mitchell calling the police “fucking plebs”, also claimed that there were witnesses.

Mitchell also says the CCTV footage shows he could not have uttered the toxic word “pleb”. This is because the police log says that he uttered these words “as we neared” the pedestrian gate. The CCTV is inconclusive: there are no physical signs that he is speaking or angry, but his face cannot be seen.

As Mitchell wheeled his bike through the pedestrian gate the two accounts find common ground again. The police claimed in their log that he said “you haven’t heard the last of this” as he cycled away.

Mitchell admits that he uttered words to this effect. His friends believe this is the most likely explanation for the decision of the police officers to write up an account of the incident.

The two police officers who made the original report have remained silent – as they have to – as a whirlwind of allegations about conspiracies, fabrication of evidence and fit-ups swirls around them. The constables, one female, one male, remain in their positions in the diplomatic protection unit, SO6, and are determined, it is said, to get on with their jobs. Those who have had contact with the officers say that, in the immediate aftermath of the altercation at the gates of Downing Street, both officers made notes of what they say happened in their pocketbooks.

Putting it colloquially, sources who spoke to the officers afterwards said they were “bricking it” and were concerned that they needed to make as clear a note as possible of what happened and make sure that it was seen by those above them.

To cover themselves, they wrote a log of the incident from their pocketbook notes, and very soon afterwards emailed it up through the chain of command at the Metropolitan police to a sergeant, an inspector and – it is understood – even higher up the ranks. The Guardian understands a number of officers would have had sight of this emailed log – a tactic adopted by the officers for their own protection.

Mitchell’s friends believe that his warning of repercussions explains why the police – though not necessarily the officers on duty – felt the need for corroboratory evidence in the form of an eyewitness account. “They needed an extra voice,” one friend suggested.

At 9.52pm on 20 September, just over 24 hours after the incident, an off-duty member of the diplomatic protection unit sent an email to his local MP, John Randall, with an account that is almost identical to the police log. Randall was the deputy chief whip, who had strained relations with Mitchell. There were reports in the days leading up to Mitchell’s resignation that Randall had threatened to resign unless Mitchell went. No 10 sources have stressed that Randall acted entirely properly as an MP in forwarding the email from a constituent to No 10.

Friends of the chief whip say the email from the officer to Randall proves that there was collusion within the Met – though this did not necessarily involve the officers who wrote the police log. This is because the email was virtually identical to the police log, which did not appear in the public domain until four days later when the Daily Telegraph published it on 24 September.

The Metropolitan police are now investigating whether that officer fabricated evidence. It has made clear that the officer was not present at the time, as he claimed. Their investigation is also examining whether any third party leaked the information about the incident to the Sun. Scotland Yard would not comment on whether it would be interviewing Randall as part of this tranche of the investigation. Three days after the Sun article, what purported to be the full officers’ log appeared in the Daily Telegraph corroborating the Sun’s version of what had been said.

Scotland Yard has never challenged the accuracy of the officers’ log published in the Telegraph. On Tuesday the Metropolitan police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, publicly stated that nothing he had seen in the past few days had affected the original report of the episode by the officers in Downing Street at the time. He said: “There’s nothing I’ve seen in this fresh information that causes me to doubt that original account.” Sources said on Wednesday – after Channel 4 broadcast the CCTV, which Mitchell says casts doubt on the police officers accounts in their log of the altercation – that the commissioner’s comments still stood.

Inside Scotland Yard, 30 officers are now running a major inquiry into who leaked the information to the Sun and the Telegraph, and into the alleged fabrication of evidence by the third officer who posed as a member of the public in his correspondence.

He was arrested last Saturday night on suspicion of misconduct in public office and the unauthorised release of information. Scotland Yard said its inquiry would examine whether there was any evidence of a conspiracy between this officer and any other person.

The atmosphere inside Scotland Yard is said to be extremely tense as Hogan-Howe, an authoritarian commissioner at the best of times, demands answers in the face of a broadside by his political masters in Downing Street to “get to the bottom of the matter”…

Read more here at the Guardian