Wednesday, 13 May 2015

Tim Veater.

Beware the weasel words of a politician – even of the Prime Minister or Home Secretary. At BEST we might label this proposal with Virgil’s: “facilis descensus Averno” (“the descent to hell is easy”) or our own “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”. At WORST, this is yet another intentional and sinister measure, to continue the transformation of Britain into a militarised, police state, of which we have many obvious signs on our streets and against which we should all be united. It is in the nature of politicians to say positive things but intend negative consequences.

To ‘sweeten the pill’ we note that only the guilty ‘bad men’ will be targeted and that these just happen to be those nasty Muslims again. The wholly concocted ‘war on terror’ is used to justify it, despite all that we now know of the criminal conspiracy of 9/11 and subsequent illegal invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, that has resulted in chaos and mass murder in both countries and elsewhere.

Mr Cameron has made his world view and rationale for these proposed new measures clear on a world stage. On the 25th September 2014 in his his closing speech to the 69th session of the United Nations General Assembly he said this:

“I want to focus on … the mortal threat we all face from the rise of ISIL. The peddling of lies: that 9/11 was a Jewish plot or that the 7/7 London attacks were staged. The idea that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy. The concept of an inevitable clash of civilisations."

“We must be clear: to defeat the ideology of extremism we need to deal with all forms of extremism – not just violent extremism. For governments, there are some obvious ways we can do this. We must ban preachers of hate from coming to our countries. We must proscribe organisations that incite terrorism against people at home and abroad. We must work together to take down illegal on-line material like the recent videos of ISIL murdering hostages. And we must stop the so called non-violent extremists from inciting hatred and intolerance in our schools, our universities and yes, even our prisons.” He also refers to the necessity of increased police powers to do this. (For the full speech see:
Of course he failed to mention the very existence of so called ISIL (as was ‘Al Qaeda’ before it) is the very child of Western policy, infiltrated, led, armed and financed by them! (See:

It should be noted that despite Tony Blair’s general disgrace regarding his actions in support of George Bush at the beginning of the 21st Century, and Cameron’s dismissal of him, it would be impossible to get a credit card between them on the issue. Much was made of how Cameron aped Blair in style and content, of which this is but the latest example. The trends in both domestic and international spheres were initiated by Blair and continued by Cameron. Rather amazing when we are led to believe they come from opposing political philosophies.

The fact of the matter is that across the Western World we are seeing imposed a wholly artificial narrative, specifically created by a group of American ‘Neo/Cons’, with oil and currency at their root, following an essentially Israeli master plan, that has plunged the world into one of its most potentially dangerous phases since Cuba. (See ‘Plan Dalet’ here: and as regards Yemen this:,7340,L-4641659,00.html)

Cameron has made his support for Israel very clear. In a speech to the Knesset in March 2014, to which he received a standing ovation, he said his belief in Israel was “unbreakable” and that he felt “some sense of connection” to Israel due to his “relatively limited” Jewish ancestry. This would all be well and good if it were not for the implications. An unbalanced attitude to the possession of nuclear weapons (he said Britain would not allow Iran to get them whilst ignoring Israel’s) and military action in the area.
In a recent (28.4.15) interview with the Jewish Chronicle, Mr Cameron defended Israel’s bombing of civilian areas of Gaza. He said Israel was right to defend itself in the face of “indiscriminate” attacks in Gaza last summer, and drew a moral distinction between the actions of Hamas and the Israeli Government. Of course the British Government’s silence over the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza at the time was deafening, and led to the resignation of Foreign Office minister Baroness Warsi, who said the Government’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had been “morally indefensible and not “in Britain’s national interest”. Rather interestingly, the West’s attention was somewhat deflected by the crash of MH17 over Ukraine, incorrectly blamed on the Russians, within minutes of the Gaza assault.

So if we return to the proposal for new legislation, we can see where it is coming from. The un-stated primary intention is to stop the internet being used to disseminate damaging leaks and analysis of government that undermine this dominant stance. We have all seen how recent legislation, promoted and passed for the most rational and sensible of reasons, is used and misused to limit free speech, whistle blowing and protest. Under ‘anti-terrorism legislation’, old men have been arrested for speaking up, police and local authorities have illegally pried and accessed phone records, there has been a crack-down on papers and alternative outlets, journalists have been purged, the BBC intimidated, GCHQ has exceeded its remit, Assange, Snowden and others have paid the price for letting us know what is going on, there are mysterious deaths a plenty of those who sought to bring us the truth of 9/11 and other nefarious activities of government. Harassment legislation has actually been used against victims of abuse to shut them up, the police, courts and prisons are gradually being transformed by stealth to serve private and not public interests, the police in Scotland has already been armed and amalgamated under effectively a one party state and moves have already been made to do the same in England. Our armed forces have been decimated, whilst a legally unqualified person has been appointed to the post of Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary.

No doubt Mr Cameron has been emboldened by his latest victory and his five-year security by virtue of another very questionable amendment to our constitution. Yet he should remember he is there despite 75% of the eligible electorate NOT voting for him and WE should remember to distinguish between polemic and truth. The general population must make clear it is not taken in by his oratory and reasoning and is prepared to defend to the last the ancient rights and freedoms that are the inalienable inheritance of the British citizen.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.