This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The UK's Conservative Party Declares War On YouTube, Twitter, Free Speech & Common Sense
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
Some of the most memorable moments of my tabloid-filled youth consisted of watching Geraldo Rivera interviewing and confronting Neo-Nazis and racists both in his studio and on the streets. Often times, these heated encounters resulted in brawls such as the one in this video, which has over 600,000 views on YouTube.
Geraldo and many others gave “a voice” to countless hateful groups on a regular basis throughout my youth, and millions of my fellow Americans saw them and were exposed to their unenlightened and pathetic ideology. This didn’t result in hordes of youth turning to violent extremism or the beginning of a Fourth Reich. Rather, what these interviews successfully did was expose the idiocy of these groups and make them even more isolated than they were before. That is how things work in a functioning free society. You aren’t afraid of ideas, you exchange them.
On Friday, I woke up to headlines proclaiming that David Cameron had called for a criminalization of “non-violent extremism” during a speech at the UN. I thought this could be a good topic for a post, but after watching it, I decided to focus on something else. At the time, I figured it was just a politician spouting stupid nonsense as usual. It wasn’t until today that I realized his “war on free speech” was about to become a key platform of Conservative Party policy in the UK. We learn from the Guardian that:
Radical Islamist extremists and neo-Nazis could be banned from making public appearances including on television under a gagging order proposed by the Conservatives with echoes of the broadcast ban that once applied to the voice of Gerry Adams.
The home secretary’s new orders would be aimed at those who undertake activities “for the purpose of overthrowing democracy”, a wide-ranging definition that could also catch a far wider range of political activists.
May will also set out proposals to ban non-violent extremist groups that fall short of the current threshold for being banned as terrorist-related organizations.
The moves to ban extremist but non-violent groups and to introduce extremist asbos were blocked by the Liberal Democrats on freedom of speech grounds and so were not announced when Cameron proposed measures to tackle British jihadists travelling to Syria.
May will announce during the home affairs debate at the Tory conference that the new powers will be included in the party’s manifesto for next year’s election.
The restrictions are expected to include banning individuals from speaking at public events, protests and meetings, having to inform the police in advance of any public event, protest or meeting that they plan to attend, and banning individuals from particular public locations.
May also wants to include restrictions on banned individuals from broadcasting, from associating with named people, and restricting their use of social media or the internet by requiring them to submit in advance any proposed publication to the police.
Banning orders would be time-limited to ensure they were proportional, but breaching the civil orders would be regarded as a criminal offence punishable with a jail term.
The Home Office has always argued that banning such groups would do more harm than good, but May says that it is now needed. A home secretary’s decision to ban a group would be subject to an immediate review by the high court to ensure it was not “obviously flawed”. A ban would make it an offence to be a member of or to fundraise for the group.
There are so many things wrong with the above it’s hard to know where to begin. First of all, Teresa May wants to “ban non-violent extremist groups that fall short of the current threshold for being banned as terrorist-related organizations.” Think about that very closely. Essentially, she is saying non-violent groups that are currently not breaking any laws should be criminalized by creating new laws. Once this process begins, it will continue to be expanded and expanded until pretty much every form of expression other than government propaganda will be banned.
Secondly, she notes that the new laws are necessary to combat groups that undertake activities “for the purpose of overthrowing democracy.” Considering that the U.S. government changes the meanings of words at a moment’s notice, such as claiming that “imminent” doesn’t really mean “imminent,” I argue that an official government definition of democracy is necessary. Moreover, what if the UK is like the U.S., a state that claims to be a democracy, but in reality is an oligarchy? What are the rules about calling for the removal of an oligarchy?
Additionally, a government definition of democracy takes on increased weight in light of the bizarre statement by Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy that a Catalan independence vote is “anti-democratic.” Since such a vote seems to be the definition of democracy, it appears that politicians also have their own bizarre definition of democracy. I’d like to know what it is, but I think it’s safe to guess:
Democracy = Maintenance of control by the status quo at all costs.
Despite the glaring fact that banning people from non-violent free speech is obviously authoritarian and fascist, we must ask why now? Why are the UK government and many other so called “free and democratic” societies suddenly so terrified of free speech. Is it due to Islamic extremists, which are almost always funded by Western intelligence agencies or our allies in the Middle East, or is it something else? I think I know what it is.
One thing we know from history is that people in power tend to become very paranoid about losing it. People who hold power based on fraud and deceit, and who start to lose the support of the masses, are particularly vulnerable to extreme paranoia. This is exactly what I think is happening to people in power throughout the world. From Hong Kong to Scotland. From Catalonia to the Middle East. All across the globe, young people are uniting in protest to achieve the same goal. They see a status quo in power that has destroyed their futures. They see centralized power far from where they live primarily being used by the super rich to become super richer. They are sick of it and they want something else. In fact, they are now beginning to demand something else.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Islamic extremists or Neo-Nazis. In fact, attacks by such groups only serve to further expand the power of the entrenched ruling class. Nothing would be more useful to these people than violent attacks by extremist groups. No, what really scares them is thoughtful, rebellious, free-thinking citizens speaking their minds; and now they are trying to ban that…
In any event, if we really want to ban extremist, disturbing behavior, let’s start with David Cameron’s selfie at Nelson Mandela’s memorial:
Cameron thumbnail at top by William Banzai7.
* * *
We are sure - as Mike Krieger notes - that whoever posted this is guilty of extremism
»
- 25295 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
"All across the globe, young people are uniting in protest to achieve the same goal. They see a status quo in power that has destroyed their futures. They see centralized power far from where they live primarily being used by the super rich to become super richer. They are sick of it and they want something else. In fact, they are now beginning to demand something else."
I am not young, but I am sick of it too. And all the lies (Ebola, Syria/Iraq/ISIS, Secret Service).
Perhaps blocking Facebook would be good for us all...
http://www.planbeconomics.com/2014/09/its-complicated-facebooks-history-...
One of the problems with defending free speech is you often have to defend people that you find to be outrageous and unpleasant and disgusting.
Salman Rushdie
It seems that politicians are in favor of free speech as long as they are the ones speaking. Once in power, dissenting opinions are stifled. I care not what a man says because I trust my judgement and intellect to act as a filter to disseminate the useful information from the blather.
A basic human right is the right to speak. I may find what one says fatuous, but I will defend ones right to speak at all costs.
Gosh and gee whiz..
Oh yeah, they have every good reason to be even more than paranoid.
We think this is a good thing as it shows the need for people to adopt Tor and strong crypto. Government's unintended consequences have always been the crypto anarchist's best friend.
Censoring the internet is impossilbe. Have you seen all the porn? Cyberspace is the wild wild west. And there ain't a sheriff tough enough to tame it.
We have seen all of the porn, yes.
And it's still never enough.
Maybe it's not as innocent as it looks? Just do a Google search on " Pornographic Conspiracy " and you will get several articles which claim this porn revolution going main stream can be harmful for society.
Does this imply no ZH in the UK?
British Citizen Turns Himself In To Scotland Yard After PM Cameron’s Inflammatory UN Speech
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any way to tame the spread of blog pimps either. Go away.
Well you might want to start with your own site. From the page you linked to:
As the Irish like to say, fuck off you English cunt!
English is a stretch for boy cameron. he is a banker clan descendant...
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2013/06/camerons-torah-government/
How ignorant of you. As ever, the English peasant is tarred with the same brush. Will you ever be able to grasp that they detest the establishment just as much as you? :(
the English peasant was happy for centuries to colonize Ireland, and Wales and Scotland, murdering the natives for King and Country.
So go fuck yourself with that "they're victims too" nonsense.
Dont blame the English, man. They are some of the most nicest and hospitable people in the world. Any immigrant can go to an Englishman's house and fuck his children and he wouldn't say a word for the fear of being labelled a racist.
Even the police will not interfere, if you call them, they say "Oh, a nice immigrant is fucking your child? Keep calm gentleman and let him carry on for it will be racist to try to stop him. Now put the kettle on and go make him a cuppa."
An immigrant can even walk into a bank and go the cashier "Give me the money or I'll call you racist!"
Are some of you cunts really that stupid? The Scottish, Irish and welsh could always have put up a fight. They didn't. There isn't a country in Europe that hadn't been invaded by some other at some time in its history. Why single out England as a speciality. The average Englishman is getting just as screwed by the elite as the rest of the citizens in the west. The laughable thing is, while bigoted twats like yourself continue to spew your racist hate speak on here, the ruling elite continue to laugh at how divided we are. Only when gormless fucknuckles such as yourselves wake up and put down your prejudiced idiocies will we finally be able to rise up against these tyrants. Otherwise, love your slavery....
Bob, LULZ is referring to a certain strain of "underground news" among British right-wingers that there were rapes that the local authorities did not tackle because of fear to be labelled racist. it goes hand in hand with another strain about pedophiles, and another with foreign moochers getting free housing
from a "local council" perspective, England is a special case. it has to do with the fact that compared to the rest of Europe, the English local councils are very autonomous and voluntaristic and have very little oversight. they might be giving housing to foreigners, orcriminals, or whatever. they are sitting ducks for this kind of attack, be it true or false, because they have very few systemized records
contrast this with the continent, where they are strongly regulated and systemized. couple this with continental police laws and continental use of IDs, and a continental councillor has a very clear idea of who is living in the territory, and where, and what nationality it belongs to, and a decent one on who is doing what, etc. etc., with strong mandates from the capital about what he is supposed to do, to whom, and how
in short, when English local councils are under attack of wrongdoing, Theresa May can only shrug. any continental counterpart can blast back with plenty of statistics
nope, I'm not advocating anything, just trying to explain
With respect - That's utter Bullshit. Having grown up in England (but an expat of over twenty years) I would counter that british local councils are populated by self serving right wing epitomes of tow-the-line-gravy-train-riding-Zionist-apologist-self serving-arseholes.
Don't confuse complacency with complicity.
In a recent phone call to relatives back in the UK I asked why huge civil unrest hadn't already exploded in Rotherham following the recent revelations. The answer I got was 'because people are much more intested in which talentless idiot wins x-factor'.
As Orwell once wrote - 'Ignorance is Strength'.
You don't need to be English to be Ignorant.
I might be somewhat ignorant on English matters, but I'm not English. Being Continental, you could say I'm the opposite ;-)
my comment was on how local councils operate, in England, technically. again, on the continent I get nothing from a local council without showing my ID first
I was not commenting on the kind of people that populate british local councils. I needed twice papers from them in my life, and was treated very corteusly, but no, it was not in Rotherham. I'd go as far as saying that my impression is that they are each quite unique. that's my message, they are not "uniform", while if you go for example to France or Germany they are
I am having a hard time believing this was possible for 30 years only because of fear for being called racist..
This BS excuse can only be distraction, there must be more behind this.. 1400 kids, 16 years coverup. It would be more intresting to know if there were some high profile "customers" making use of the "services" of this gang?
You can read about it here, but if you are a decent human being, you're going to be upset:
Rotherham child sexual exploitation: Victims raped, beaten and doused in petrol if they threatened to tell: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11057622/Rotherham-child-se...
Rotherham council staff 'seized files and wiped computers to cover up scale of child sex grooming' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2737234/The-childrens-chief-clinging-115-000-job-despite-mounting-evidence-complacency-period-child-abuse.html#ixzz3F5fmKCtTRotherham sex abuse victim: I told police names of 250 men who raped me but they did NOTHING Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rotherham-child-abuse-scandal-victi...
Yes, English Councils are fairly autonomous within a legal framework passed by Parliament which can be quite onerous. But this still allows councils plenty of freedom to spend local taxpayers' money as they see fit, usually on Left wing monuments to socialism since many local councils are controlled by Left-wingers**. Incompetence among permanent staff (local civil servants/public service workers) is a major problem for local councils and the elected councillors are some of the dumbest people on earth. I say that having met one or two over the years. They are mostly people who want to peddle their own pet ideas.
In the UK, a person is not required to register in the place where he lives nor to show any ID etc. But a legal requirement to register for voting and Council Tax bills essentially cover a large part of that in other ways.
Overall, local councils suffer from the same problem that central government suffers from: the government machine is owned and run by unelected civil servants/public service workers, not by elected politicians answerable to the electorate.
** there was an incident some years ago that the Welsh Windbag Neil Kinnock railed about where Liverpool Council (a hotbed of revolutionary commies at the time) sent out redundancy notices to hundreds of its workers by taxi.
Bobby from Baghdad: How much more obvious and silly do I have to make it so that you don't miss the sarc and highlight the false narrative being spun on the wholesale violation of those kids.
is there solid evidence for the "wholesale violation of those kids"? this is a honest question, I just know what I read in the internet(s), and it's very conflicting. which source on them do you trust?
Solid evidence :)
They will be conducting a thorough investigation to find out, as I heard, unless it will be deemed racist.
Don't flatter yourself mate. Sarcasm, although purile, is often backed by intelligence. Vielded insult is just plain fucking rude.
Insult, only to those who bought into the naraitve that nobody stopped the violation of kids for the fear of being labelled a racist.
Try to play the racist card when it comes to money or robbing a bank and lets see if the police and local councils turn a blind eye.
'gormless fucknuckle'
...simply awesome.
Just like most Americans are more than happy to bomb the shit out of other counties and drone strile weddings. It seems to most people as long as it is YOUR team doing it, then it's OTAY.
Just like most Americans are more than happy to bomb the shit out of other counties and drone strile weddings. It seems to most people as long as it is YOUR team doing it, then it's OTAY.
Just like most Americans are more than happy to bomb the shit out of other counties and drone strile weddings. It seems to most people as long as it is YOUR team doing it, then it's OTAY.
Just like most Americans are more than happy to bomb the shit out of other counties and drone strike weddings. It seems to most people as long as it is YOUR team doing it, then it's OTAY.
But the same thing can be said for American peasants soon to be. They been living well of the lucre gained while making the world safe for freedom and democracy as opposed to Englands God, Queen, and Kuntry.
Ah, another plastic paddy.
All hail the king.
"The King Will Come", by Wishbone Ash .... :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tna0Mmu1XlI
The next Doctor Who and his new digs?
I hope I don't eventually regenerate into that! lol Moar like degenerate!
Fukushima BOOBS :=D
What's going on here is that the Brits realize they've been cornered by the Islamists in their own country due to their ridiculous appeasement policies. To stop this, they can't go after just Islam without making a stink so they've decided to punish everyone.
Stop! Or I'll shoot myself!
Political correctness taken to its ultimate end, deeming ones self redundant or disposable.
The 9/11 Truth movement, among others, is bringing the heat -- the truth will out. This speech by Cameron is evidence of desperation. The plutocrats are mobilizing and organizing the bureaucracies to protect their corrupt asses and maintain their control, what they like to call "protecting democracy".
British PM David Camoron, the man who knows Islam better than the Jihadists. The Right Honourable Mr Clueless and Useless.
Seeing Cameron wiggling at the end of a rope would brighten up my year. Am I allowed to say that?
So right Van Halen...
To keep the white genocide going, they need to shut up the Islamists and the ones, who have been calling for decades everything that is happening today, the "Nazis".
Britian is much more cornered by the Jews - and does Cameron want to ban the Talmud as maybe the most extreme and hatred religious book ever?
First they installed this regime in Germany, and since the genocide of the Germans goes so well, they need to remove free speech in Britain and the USA, too.
And please, dear Americans, do not tell me, this could not happen, because there would be a revolution: no, there will be no revolution, because the mass is only interested in the new iphone, that the refrigarator is filled.
Why do you think, that the Money Masters love Democracy? Because they know how dumb and phlegmatic the mass is and that it is without any ideals. Therefore they practice what every person who proposes marriage for fraudulent reasons, or every legacy-hunter does: they tell their vitcim, what it wants to hear: "you are so clever", "you are so intelligent and enlightened", "you are so beautiful",...
Btw, Cameron is Jewish himself. Every non-Jew should know it. Why don't you know it, that Cameron brags in Israel about his Jewishness, while you believe he was a CONSERVATIVE BRITISH politician?
That's the problem: the masses have no clue, who rules them and so they fall victim to the lies: "the Islamists cornered us!"
BS! Who is pumping millions of non-Whites into Europe? The Zionists. And who is even increasing it?
And what is the reason for the radicalization of Islam? Maybe it has something to do with Israel? And the more than 25 years of terrorizing and bombing and destroying one islamic country after the next?
Who has removed all stable and moderate governments? Gaddafi? Hussein? Who is supporting the extremists in Syria against Assad, another moderate and stable government?!
The Islamists are the useful idiots of the enemy of mankind! And he uses always the same principle: hiding with mimickry and make the others clash for the own benefit.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rA7Ymki71fM
What a damn shame. Now we gotta come and get you bastards. Make you squeal "I'm declaring war!" Last great joke for you.
a fifth column flooded UK and Europe with immigrants from vastly different cultures.... same thing going on the US., same fifth column, and the why part isn't so hard to figure out.
Slow news cycle... except for stocks taking a big dump.
Brits love their shit for brains empty suits just like Americans. The biggest threat on the planet is the GOVola Virus.
They are declaring Jihad on ZHers.
"So the question is simple: it is not "to be or not to be" but....NOT TO BE! Therefore I am banning Shakepseare forthwith and all other public displays of emotion, affection, hors de honoure and the like. We are decclaring war on complicated! (clapping, crowd cheering) yes, yes..we hereby ban innuendo and hearsay! (crowd roars). NO MORE WILL WE BE PUT DOWN BY ENLIGHTENED THOUGHTS OR BEINGS!!!!" (crazed crowd streaming out the doors to beat the crap out of anyone who just happens to be standing there.)
"Death to Skaespeare!"
It alls seems so V for Vendetta-ish.
They seem scared. I think they know that despite the feeling of omnipotence they realize anything can happen. I also think that because of today's technology and who has access to it concerns them especially when Obumfuk can't even keep crazies from running through his house. The brightest people don't all work for the NWO. I got the feeling that they were actually psychopathic when they thought putting up drones would help protect them. There is a reason that the military did not use drones since they were first invented near the turn of the 20th century (over 100 years ago).
Oh well maybe they will fracture quickly and begin to take up the idea of nationalism again. NWO failed. Dream is over.
Hitler just had a problem with erectile dysfunction. That was the real cause of World War II and all that other stuff. Since we have a pill for that now I really don't see any problems now...
Of course he did.
A goat bit part of his dick off when, as a young student, he peed on it.
Speaking of goats, the same thing would happen to you if you tried to pee on Victoria Nuland,
Whatever happened to Victoria Nuland?
For a spokesperson, she ain't doing much spoking these days.
She baking kosher cookies.
I see ur nose growing, so that might be a problem once you finally look in the mirror.
When the dream becomes a nightmare. They were so sure that multiculturalism would be the Utopian answer. To surrender ones position of superiority to your relative losers to demonstrate your big heartedness, and the losers only see your abdication as weakness. Multiculturalism did not lead to a blend or "oneness" that would unify people. Instead these groups have stayed relatively closed expressing little interest in assimilate. Now they are grouping to take power from their generous but stupid hosts. Will we be able to kick our ungrateful guests out before they remove us, or will we hang onto yet another idealistic but losing philosophy.
The statists, the collectivists, don't believe in freedom. They believe that the people need to be controlled. And the statists should be the ones in control. The very fact that they are in a position to control means they must exercise control.
I aim to misbehave.
The truth can stand up to a few good questions. If it was the truth?
Can the truth stand up to folks who think they know the truth, but are actually incapable of understanding what it is? Think this through carefully. I'm giving an extreme example just to make my point. But less extreme examples are all around us.
Assume Albert Einstein was still available and lucid. I'm sure any one of us could come up with some questions to ask him about his more famous theories. I'm equally sure that very few of us would understand his answers. So in this case, as in many others, what's truth got to do with it - if the truth is so complicated that few will understand it when confronted with it?
I married a red head. Trust me I can handle complicated. If Einstein cant explain it he prolly dont really understand it himself?
I've been reading some "stuff" lately that Einstein plagiarized all of his work, and propaganda was used to cast him as a genius.
I don't believe one way or another. It's just interesting to read different takes on things.
"People who hold power based on fraud and deceit, and who start to lose the support of the masses, are particularly vulnerable to extreme paranoia."
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you. I hope they are not paranoid.
This should be good for another £1m donation to UKIP. Keep it up, Cameron.
Elsewhere: Government's Ebola fiasco seems to have Rush Limbaugh, Anderson Cooper in rare agreement http://tinyurl.com/lmvvql2
Can Liberty Blitzkrieg edit their post and throw in a sentence or two about alleged threats from alleged governments and alleged corporations allegedly coercing certain websites into allegedly implementing policies that result in the limiting of everyone's alleged universal right to free speech under the guise of things such as racial, ethnic and religious discrimination?
How do any of these entities know when someone is or is not making statements that are asking questions, mocking, satirical, a parody or by some other similar means as a very effective way of learning or educating the public?
Government and corporations utilizing threats, duress and coercion as a means of forcing the implementation of detrimental policies that limit everyone's universal rights to free speech and free expression is tantamount to terrorism
Thank you for your consideration
And piss off David Cameron you bellend fanny slag nonce tosser - Love Benny Hill
I'm sure they have only the best of intentions.
I don’t think anyone should question their motives and what they are trying to accomplish.
Conservative Party? As if there was anything left to conserve.
@Coldfire
A'int moar than a handful left. David Camoron felt the old goats in the ole Conservative party lacked the political correctness for the enlightened New Age of liberal touchy feelyness.
They just keep expanding the definition of "terrorist" until something sticks.
"All across the globe, young people are uniting in protest to achieve the same goal. They see a status quo in power that has destroyed their futures. They see centralized power far from where they live primarily being used by the super rich to become super richer. They are sick of it and they want something else. In fact, they are now beginning to demand something else."...
Speaking as an American who has seen countless protests and organization(s) that have had good intentions who failed and were inevitably divided and co-opted by that "status quo", I'll believe it when I see it.
Best efforts of OWS didn't even make a dent, and I certainly don't see any resurgence to bring it back out of fear which means THEY won!...
As long as the U.S. government can continue to control, intimidate and manipulate through "fear" whether it's with ISIS/ISIL in our own backyard or Ebola, the paralysis to the rest of the World is inevitable unless Americans are also willing to sacrifice themselves for that desire for change as we are the biggest contributors to everyone else's problems with our military and our Dollar!
Things only change when citizens are willing to die, rather than see the status quo continue. Then, and only then. cf French Revolution, American War of Independence, South Africa, Gaza...etc etc.
The fact that US and UK citizens are not yet willing to die en masse tells you that they still wear their chains with sufficient comfort. But when those chains begin to chafe to the bone...then you will see real confrontation between citizens and the status quo.
sic semper erat, et sic semper erit
Reasonably speaking, Captain, US citizens have enjoyed a good life for the past few decades because of the plunder and looting around the world by the "status quo" and THEM.
I dont think most of them put a second thought to where their prosperity was coming from. A person digging a road in a third world shithole could hardly manage to make ends meet while a US Citizen doing the same in US could live almost live in luxury. (Not forgetting the amount of food and other resources wasted in US).
What gives fragrance to the Rose, also gives strength to the thorns.
People have become dumb and lazy and the corruption has gotten bold and rampant and I dont think Americans can now turn that all around with a few protests or in a quick revolution.
Most Americans dont even know what to revolt against or why.
You want to revolt against the status quo and change it? Imagine how the rest of hte world would feel and react to reading a headline "US citizens overthrow their government because of corruption and injustices comimtted aroudn the world," the alleged bastion of freedom and justice. And how many skeletons will be falling out of the closets and rugs being pulled to uncover what had been swept under the carpet for years.
The list of countries and people US has wronged is endless and once their is blood in the water, sharks come in.
Americans can wish for a quick and painless transformation but it will not be. Too many people depend on the system and will protect the system, even to their own detriment because there is no practical alternative for them.
Good point. As slovenian philosopher, slavoj zizek would say, "What about the day after?" This central question has plagued existence forever, & just because you remove someone does not necessarily mean things will improve. While I like Russell Brands youtube vids, can he really taste his own cooking? I do not mean to flame him at all by that statement, but too often in human relations, I see people saying, it is his problem not mine, and yet they may still be part of the problem. Can everyone see how very complicated this actually is?
As an engineer tech guy, I mostly see the solution in technology combined with some kind of communism without the seperate political class that becomes like joseph stalin.
Their are no easy answers, but in the vein of karl popper, I do think government should behave more like a scientific community.
Or being run by an elite of Philosophers, as Plato would have preferred but "Who will guard the Guardians?"
Eliminating the monopoly on issuance of credit and printing money would be the single best thing we can do.
No system is perfect, but this way no one entity can have unlimited financial means to fund the endless manipulation and oppression.
10 ¢<> fuky suky
.
They dont have an issue with free speach. Its questions that bug them. People are starting to ask the good questions more and more. The answers we get back are comedy gold. Basic logic boys they are full of shit call them on it. Then rip thier shit up.
This clown is trying to cover his tracks. Fuch him very much.
Conversely, the only thing I remember about Geraldo Rivera is when he tried to get a professional wrestler to admit it was all fake, and the guy smashed him in the face. I'm not gonna claim that what I saw really happened. Maybe it was fake. But I certainly enjoyed watching Geraldo getting punched in the face.
Just sayin'. Carry on.
How could you forget about Al Capone's vault? Geraldo even scored his own Weird Al parody for stunts like that one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdw1ZK585RU
Jesse Ventura admitted that wrestling is 100% scripted and his "enemies" in the ring actually all hung out with him at dinners and parties afterward. They would laugh and joke and have a good time.
However, Wrestling is dangerous, they do get roughed up bad, and in Owen Hart's case he DIED doing his stunt.
Politics are actually more fake though.
indeed. wrestling is fake/theatre, but it's also really hard work, and dangerous. check out 'the wrestler' movie with mickey rourke and marisa tomei.
Any "non-violent extremist groups," whether they really fit that description or are merely branded as such, will be able to easily avoid Cameron's dragnet by simply taking their communications offline, meeting in garages and passing handwritten notes and such, thereby evading detection by police who have forgotten how to do old-fashioned sleuthing, and shirking the notice of the general population who have been trained by their politically correct majordomos to studiously ignore any displays of difference. Cameron and his ilk will end up being the absolute masters of an increasingly empty echo chamber while "extremist groups" continue unabated around them.
cam moron is he jewish?
camoron and his rabbi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRjX9xbswW4
They're just might be a bit of" Hasidic Judaism" Tony
What fucking assholes
Cameron is an asshole. Didn't everyone already know that?
Yeah, thats some conservative party in Brittain. Cameron could write a sequel to Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. I pray the Brit "Tea Party" - UKIP - gives those "conservatives" a run for their money (loaned by the billions by Uncle Sam no less)
Non violent extreamist. Come on thats comedy gold. He has his panties in a twist over the extreamly non violent? Or is it extreamist that dont want violence? Idont think that means what you think it means.
how are you suppose to shackle people unless breathing is a teeeeerrrrrriiiiissssttt pre crime subject to 90 days in jail.
In general, people become rich by being very productive, receiving wealth rightfully from someone who is very productive, or by stealing it somehow.
Have you ever noticed how often some lump them all together, drawing no distinction between the producers and the thieves?
Why would you say they do that?
Could it be that they are aspiring to be in the last group, the thieves?
or maybe being angry at the thieves leads people to generalize. if so then the solution would be to deal with the thieves.
re people become rich by being very productive
And people become even richer thru owning the monetary "printing press", gaming the system, fraud, privatising profits / socialising losses, leeching off the productive, selling the "national assets" to themselves for a pittance & asset-stripping the rest, extorting multi-trillion dollar bailouts, laundering drug-money and global warfare - all backed-stopped by fear-mongering propaganda, austerity & a surveillance/police state to keep the peasants in line
Cameron should be restricted to the insignificance of their island.
At most try to get a piece of tree and try to cross the Atlantic to kiss the bag as well as Obama Holande France.
Europe believes that Germany is a cow of many teats but they are drying.
Putin to mate without the other cow calf will not be born next spring.
The USA did a phenomenal shit in Ukraine.
Now, hold out.
The Russians with wood and a little vodka, a good bed with duck down duvets and plenty of canned goods will not die, never died.
They know how to survive.
The Europeans in the Euro ... bonanza.
I do not know.
Probably many people will die of cold. ...
: - /
It's nothing to do with terrorism of course - they want to shut down internet critics - but as the good guys winning would always involve at least a phase where the banker state cracked down on dissent this was an inevitable stage.
"All across the globe, young people are uniting in protest"
Actually I think a lot of it is older people who have finally woken up to the fact that while they were enjoying life and not paying full attention their children and grand-children's future was being destroyed by the crooks they left in charge.
The pen is mightier than the sword. You can't stop an idea whose time has come.
Rosa Luxembourg told us so .. and look where it has taken her ... ;)
Under the now explicit threat of violence no one can say, "That the king has no clothes." Obviously, the fact that the king is naked is not what they are trying to hide. It is their extreme vulnerability that drives them to _attempt_ to silence their opposition. It is an admission of weakness. I think that it was not that "freedom of speech" was a high value, but a simple fact of life. Better ideas win arguments at lower cost. When the system has become so corrupt that the best idea they can muster to maintain control is, "Cut out their tongues." then it cannot stand because ideas come to people spontaniously when the conditions call for them. A hungry mob is an angry mob and when the king parades around it in his "finery" he'll get what he deserves.
wow, the rap is great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:)
Brilliant rap! More creativity please. Direction the kids need to understand and identify the issues so they can amend their futures.
A question for Mr Cameron (perhaps whoever at GCHQ is tasked with monitoring this site will do me a favour and pass it on):
Does the fact that I believe you personally to be a slimy duplicitous fascist cunt in the classic Tony Blair mode make me a "non-violent extremist"?
PS: Whoring your wife around with the personal tradgedy story to garner votes from a naive electorate gives an idea of how low you will stoop. Gordon Brown did the same pre-election - and we all know what a twat he was. Rock on, Nigel.
I didn't realize that both co-chairmen of the Conservative Party are Jews.
Cameron is part Jewish and an over-the-top sycophant of Israel.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2013/06/camerons-torah-government/
The PM of NZ, Key, is Jewish and the Jewish lobby in Australia has been said to control their foreign policy
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/10/bob-carr-accused-of-bigotry...
Whenever wildly disproportionate Jewish [Jewish - not Zionist] power is discusses, the reply is always that it is "anti-Semitic" - meaning one can talk about how many native, ethnic English are in Parliament - but not how many Jews?
What horseshit.
Trans-national, Organized Jewry has disproportionate power in the US, UK, Canda, Australia, NZ, France, and elsewhere. In every state, they are pro-open borders and absurdly pro-Irael, and anti-Palestinian. It is Organized Jewry 'as' Zionist that may be most problematic, of course, but let's be honest about Jews, per se, having extraordinarily disproportionate power in a number of countries - and that topmost on their agenda is what is "good for the Jews".
It usually is not good for the majority of their countrymen.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2011/06/20/the-outsourcing-of-infl...
Yea camerons wife and tony Blairs wife are both whores. probably been fucked by the pool guy ,the janiitor , in fact any guy that that gat can get it up long enough by imaginging a real woman to release his load They are probably desperate to have sex with someone who is not a paedophile english tory party member. How did these people become our leaders?
Yea camerons wife and tony Blairs wife are both whores. probably been fucked by the pool guy ,the janiitor , in fact any guy that that gat can get it up long enough by imaginging a real woman to release his load They are probably desperate to have sex with someone who is not a paedophile english tory party member. How did these people become our leaders?
Come on guys, Jews are people too, sort of...
;-D
Can't Jewish people be successful in their careers?
Have you not seen the lists of talented Jewish people who rose up to world fame because of their connections?
Thats BS that list, they get to the top by connections
Cameron is an absolute dickhead He heads a nation that has no global significance anymore more but pretends to be important by toadying up to america, a nation that does have global significance but by its immoral behaviour and out and out self interest is rapidly losing its mana (a maori word meaning stature and self respect and importance and validity) The award for the most inept performance of the year goes to ....tadaaaa David Cameron for declaring that 9/!! truthers were the equivalent of terrorists. What a wanker.
Ive been banging this drum for some time now. We free thinkers in the West absolutely need a strong Russia
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/09/75874-the-anglozionist-empire-is-at-war...
Well hopefully peeps are getting wise to the fact of what a complete sham, wars actually are.
It would be rather amusing if you really had the star trek transporter room so you could beam a blowhard like john kerry into the same room with some fanatical muslim politician, just to see what would happen. Although, my bet is that they are chickenhawks whom would do nothing.
The Conservatives are, I promise, doing this as much out of pro-Israel/Jewish Lobby pressure as much as anything. It's already CrimeThink to openly wonder if, perhaps, just perhaps, the 6 million figure was exaggerated (and it may surprise you but I don't myself actively believe so - I just think it is absurd to criminalize speech or a revisionist thesis).
They can grease the wheels by pointing to ISIS and the eeeevil Muslims, but its going to be 9/11 "truthers" and critics of Israel's state terrorism that will be targetted the most.
9/11 Activist Hands Himself in to British Police Over Cameron Remarks on “Non-violent Extremists”Bwitish Paedophiles in "High Places" don't like being exposed.
You mean its not about terrists?
Your lack of faith is disturbing, comrade.
Wait a moment, "ban non-violent extremist groups" would this include moderate rebels by any chance?
And what about people that fund these moderate non-violent terrorists? do we ban the state department, USAID etc?
"David Cameron had called for a criminalization of “non-violent extremism”"
Precision of language, please.
This is yet more proof that parliament and the executive are part of the Oligarchy since at least the period of enclosures. (The people in parliament (insiders) were given vast church estates after the state seized church land under Henry the VIIIs rule) IN their world view people like Belloc & CH Douglas who came to this conclusion a 100 and more years ago are enemies of the state. And indeed. they would be correct as the state is rotten to the core.
I totally agree with the sentiments in this article.
"Once this process begins, it will continue to be expanded and expanded until pretty much every form of expression other than government propaganda will be banned."
Theresa May is somewhat typical of the Conservative Party, especially nowadays under the PR stunt man and empty suit: David Cameron. Whilst they purport to be Right of Centre and into all those nice things like small government, freedom and accountability etc, in practice they are little different to the Red Ed Miliband Marxists. They're all dedicated to maintaining the current political power structure of ever expanding powers of The State where they have all the power and citizens are just muppets to be told what to do and "managed" accordingly. An elected dictatorship in all but name. The battle between them is "who" will run the giant machine known as "government".
It has always been thus in Britain. It goes back to before King Henry VIII. All that has changed since Cromwell's Civil Wars is that control of the day-to-day levers of decision making has passed from The Monarchy to the Executive. But with Prince Charles increasingly meddling in government in recent years (at least 20 private meetings with Ministers to influence policy and to hide his own tax affairs even deeper from the British people), one wonders if they want to revert to 1200AD.
As I've said many times over the years, the political system in Britain is beyond repair. It is utterly broken and needs replacing. The starting point is a proper written Constitution owned by The People.
you Britons could have had your first written constitution... but the Dutch and the French voted the EU constitution out of the sky ;-)
now, seriously, I see this move in the same light as the recent question if the UK should exit the ECHR* and the recent, similar law in Australia
I wonder what our dear friend's Rupert Murdoch's newsgroups are going to report on all this. if at all
(for our American Cousins: the 1946 ECHR is - for it's enthusiasts - the "European Answer" to the Bill of Rights. but recently the Tory's are chafing against it)
The EU Constitution - aka Lisbon Treaty - was signed by Gordon Brown if you remember. But in my view it's not worth the paper it's written on, having been drafted by the French who are known to be extremely Statist.
Whilst the ECHR has thrown up a few problems for the British political elites in recent years, most notably with them trying to deport Abu Hamza to Jordan, it is nevertheless a safeguard against grave abuses of power by the British State which would certainly follow if the ECHR was repealed as Cameron and Theresa May want to do. Or at least make it surbordinate to British law.
This article from Mike Krieger articulates the sort of blatant abuses that will increasingly arise if that were to happen. The very idea that a person could be issued with a newly crafted Tory ASBO - leading to criminal prosecution - for exercising their right to free speech or "non-violent extremism" as they will call it, is typical. It amounts to a gagging order to everyone who dares to speak against virtually anything related to the system of government. I am sure they could prosecute me for that.
That would just be the beginning. Returning justice into the hands of British courts - bought and paid for by the British State - is a recipe for injustice.
The British State is an utterly corrupt fascist oligarch construction which cannot be trusted. It has always been thus and will continue until it either implodes under the weight of its own corruption or is brought down.
smacker, could you please read and comment on my explanation on English local councils? I'd appreciate if you see errors and correct them
I disagree on EU Constitution being exactly the same as the Lisbon Treaty, though, but it's not very relevant, now
I still don't understand the ECHR deportation thing, to be frank. no far away islands sporting the British flag available? that's what I would do, as Home Secretary, if I felt that it is necessary
I'm surprised by your defense of the ECHR, at least in principle, or your low opinion of British courts. I hope they'll surprise you positively, in the future. take care, all the best
local councils: I've commented.
The Lisbon Treaty is not identical to the earlier Constitution but most people who have read them both say it's essentially the same thing.
The ECHR issue that got Theresa May rattled was that Abu Hamza was wanted in Jordan for terror charges or whatever and due to his record in the UK as a troublemaker, she wanted to deport him. He used the ECHR to fight deportation for years on grounds he might be tortured in Jordan and his right to family life in the UK etc. The irony is that he was eventually put on a plane and sent to Jordon. But last week he was found NOT Guilty in the courts over there. Theresa May has said he will not be allowed to return to the UK, regardless.
My defence of the ECHR (in part) is purely based upon my long held view that the British State cannot be trusted to dispense justice. The courts and CPS are two of the instruments used to achieve their goal of elected dictatorship.
There are plenty of cases of Brits fighting the UK Govt using the ECHR and winning. That is what really gets the likes of Theresa May/Cameron rattled.
thanks, smacker, I appreciate it very much
well, the earlier proposed constitution had a couple of ECHR-like "redundancies" built in, the rights of the EU citizen, for example
nobody was going ever to comment on them because HCHR membership was seen as a given. in fact I already hear voices saying that if the UK exits the HCHR, it has to leave various other clubs... including the EU. would't that be... hilarious? but it's all speculation
Abu Hamza, on the other side, is real. And a British Citizen. Now, many constitutions forbid banishment of the own citizens, though I don't know if this would flow as a good argument for a written constitution among the British electorate...
from the Telegraph: "British nationality is a privilege and the Home Secretary has the ability to remove it from dual nationals when she believes it to be in the public good.” Now citizenship is a privilege that depends on what the Home Secretary... believes?
Truly, we are living in astonishing times. This rattles my cage. Of course, that putting that guy behind bars is a different matter, I'm just talking about the ease of stripping him from his citizenship with a ministerial decree
I start to see your comments in a completely different light, and I think I have to beg for your pardon for some of my earlier comments. thanks again, and my best wishes for you and yours
"I disagree on EU Constitution being exactly the same as the Lisbon Treaty"
Ghordo, save your breath trying to explain, there is a documentary about it (2008), how it intends to bring down wages, social protection and wipe out the middle class:
End Of Nations - EU Takeover And The Lisbon Treatythanks, free_lunch, but I have already seen that video. the most damning parts are in the beginning, with the treaty being "unreadable and deceptive" and the part of "the real power of the unelected and unaccountable Eurocrats who run the organization"
now, I'm the very first to admit that it's... byzantine. It takes a while to understand the details. it's complex. and many MEPs are woefully inadequately prepared to this environment, at least at the beginning
and yet... the whole shebang is not that different from the environment of every continental parliament. which leaves the UK as the complete outlier, because there is no written constitutional framework which "spoils the works" of Westminster's elected MPs. which is exactly what smacker is complaining about
smacker is asking for a written UK constitution. this would bring the mother of european parliaments at par with her daughters on the continent... including the EU's
tell me one thing: do you really believe that the EU is designed or intends to "bring down wages"? if yes, wouldn't that be... not socialist? the biggest effect on wages is due to the freedom of working in all EU countries, btw. is that what you would like to change? meanwhile, social protection is still a national matter
Radical Islamist extremists and neo-Nazis could be banned from making public etc.
What a bugger the government press won't be able to report anything that the Ukrainian Government says.
"David Cameron had called for a criminalization of “non-violent extremism”
Extemism = disagrees with us.
If they were Fukishima boobs there'd be 3 or 4 of 'em.
Fascism in Britain? Hail Spode! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYWRu8uT8z8
To be fair, the police officer is a nice guy, considering he is put in an unpleasant situation. He seems too understands what's it all about, but also has his job to think about. He keeps calm and behaves like a decent person.
absolutely superb, Mr. Krieger.
too exhausted to share a more expansive endorsement at the moment...but i felt compelled to at least acknowledge this piece in some small way.
and to condense my sentiments i'll simply say that we're winning, gentlemen. tidal forces are flowing in our favor (and Fortune does indeed favor the bold). the world needs more Mike Kriegers; the world needs more ZHealots...and i sense a soon-coming abundance.
well, perhaps i'll add a thought or two...as this piece merits it.
y'all just meditate on this for a moment: particularly characteristic of the enlightenment era and up to present day, we often see this exact form of narcissistic/neurotic/delusional/paranoia symptomatic of a diseased body politic, the underlying condition being rank incompetence acting at the behest of cronyism conspiring and confederated to safeguard its status at all costs. 'the people' as they observe and conclude in concert, can sense this frantic weakness in power -- it's evident in their posture, their practiced and plastic ways, the artifice in their every aspect, and the confounding incoherence in their acts -- and once the people sense it and recognize it as such, they attack and lay waste to it (as they rightfully feel betrayed). and the point that's especially relevant is that the process is rather speedy once it gets going in earnest...but imagine for a moment how sudden and transformative will be the modern upheaval, in the age of the internet, and in a day and time when mankind is accustomed to reorienting their entire perspective (most now living in the west have reconfigured their entire moral framework multiple times in their life). and now understand the significance of all this within the broader context...that this is truly global, and in a fashion that is profoundly so relative to all eras past.
i mean, sumer barely extended beyond the fertile cresent, same for babylon; egypt didn't push much past cairo on one end and memphis on the other; greece was little more than a defensive pact of a few culturally enthusiastic city-states; rome was larger than all these, but by modern standards it's borders were relatively modest. this isn't specifically pax-americana or anglo-american-zionist super structure (though those things arent' imaginary); the critical flaw is that this is an elitism predicated on who's the craftiest of extortionists. and it ultimately blights what best and brightest in humanity. and the people are beginning to awaken to the truth that they don't need these high-priests of finance and money-lending to mediate their dreams. mankind can have a direct and unencumbered relationship with his money his property and his actualized liberty.
the most dangerous and rapacious of men are those who would place themselves between your relationship with your God and your property. if the new age is to yield anything, it's that each and every person shall have direct and inalienable sovereignty over those concerns. for there is no such thing as freedom of thought, speech, religion, action, association without absolute and inviolate individual sovereignty over property and faith...for the fear that they may be confiscated silences speech, contorts faith into servility to religionists -- it transforms a free-born man into a craven and docile piece of livestock.
and it's about time those of us who understand this carve out some portion of this Providential land and let the rest of them rot in their utopia of imposed 'equality', the homogenized offal of their new & old religions, their stifiling riechs and their usury-based rents.
we like to jokingly say, '...but this time it's different' around here at the Hedge; and i'll be the first to concede that humanity and the tendencies that define us in the aggregate are subject to cyclically rhyming harmonies...but then there are things called super-cycles -- grand resets as it were. we're in for one. and the magnitude of it is beyond reckoning. and so i this time say without the slightest whiff of sarcasm: bitchez, it is different this time.
but it'll be fun...if you take a broadminded view of things.
peace on earth & good will to men,
janus
janus
Thank you , Janus.
You may be a new friend, Kobe. Only time will tell.
Ya, Michael is good, no doubt- but you just hit a home run with the bases loaded, old friend. You by any chance familiar with Strauss & Howe? If not, maybe you could advise them.
Anyway, I logged in to look you up and tell you a true story-
A long, long time ago I had three fast friends. They were Kathy P., Alfred H. and Walter B. One fine evening we were rattin' the streets of a tiny burg in South Mississippi in my '69 Mach 1 listening to tunes (I think it was Pink Floyd) on the 8-track and inhaling the fumes from left-handed cigarettes.
So, as we motored along Dunbar Avenue Kathy P. admonished, "I wish you boys wouldn't talk so nasty."
As 'we boys' considered our guilt, I turned east onto Main Street, toward the beach.
At once, we were absorbed by the visage of a big ole red moon rising over the Bay of St. Louis.
Kathy P. exclaimed, "LOOKIT THAT FUCKIN' MOON!" Needless to say, 'we boys' were perplexed by this, but it was still funny as all hell.
Anyway, I was informed of Walter B's passing years ago. Shame on me, but I do not know the whereabouts or physical condition of Kathy P. or Alfred H.
If any are still here, they will remember this incident, I am certain.
I love 'em all, regardless.
If you had been born a generation earlier, you'da been there too. Much love, brother!
The definition of "extremist" will eventually include other religions that preach "hate", especially those that quote the Bible when it comes to sexual morality.
"create almost unlimited amounts of money"
What you mention is the power of FIAT and why the USA if things go against it economically it will use the power of FIAT to buy whatever it needs to keep itself at the top of the pile. You can also add no current government is going to give up using fiat ever to retain the position of elites with no control by the majority of the population on this process. Anybody who wants to propose anything otherwise unless you are prepared to use force you have no chance,
They are not using the fiat monetary system for my benefit and worse they are using the fiat monetary system to enslave me.
I believe you refer to 'reserve' currency, every country that prints it's own dollar has a 'fiat' currency.
The US is the reserve currency of the world at this time.
There's precious little of any morality from the bible or any other religious book.
Pretty much the one thing causing sexual immorality is to make sure that monogamy is punished easily (divorce laws) or discouraged completely (cultural, not necessarily any laws). It's fine if people don't want to be monogamous - fine - but not OK to really push it as a bad thing that was never natural.
Otherwise sexuality itself really has no morality and should have none.
Not bothered ... They legislate to frighten people to comply with their wants but this assumes a person has something to lose to begin with.
For an ever growing number of the population young or old in England they lose nothing and whatever path they choose they will be persecuted. Now if I was too kick someone wether they did or did not break something I reckon the person kicked understanding the situation will just break it anyway as the consequence is the same for both cases.
As for youth looking into the future and starting to realise they have no future so they now have a choice accept a no future or rebel. Go on what you going to do? Reckon rebel, lose that future that has not arrived like reshuffling the deck of cards likely it will not be worse only better.
There is another group those that were promised a future and that day has arrived with all the lies and deceit of government revealed. The consequence is I know they lie because I can show the lie and the manipulation economically to ensure they have everything whilst ordinary people get less and less.
Teresa May may be paranoid but being paranoid and passing legislation will not protect them from any of the above categories ... just a matter of time.
Suppose it means they can ban UKIP.
Stifling non-violent dissent makes violent dissent INEVITABLE.
gangster lizzards