Posts Tagged ‘Freedom’

Is George Orwell the 20th century Nostradamus

January 18, 2017

Is George Orwell the 20th century Nostradamus

Do young kids even care about Privacy anymore?
By Dark Politricks

The Snoopers Charter is now the most draconian Internet law in the world.

I bet at least half if not 70% of people today in the UK, don’t even realise what this draconian law is and that is now on the books. If you don’t you better start reading my friend before you are forced into intricate flag waving ceremonies and hand salutes for Theresa May.

Do you care or are you too busy playing candy crush and taking selfies of you on the toilet to worry about antiquated ideas like privacy.

Privacy was once something to be protected. Now it’s a commodity to be sold or to be used to track you down by private investigators, ex partners, the police, MI6/6 a

In the UK we are now living in George Orwell’s prophetic 1984.

This was the futuristic tale written by the author in 1949 by George Orwell  after the 2nd world war.

In the book, he imagined a world constantly at war, enemies to the North, South, East and West, millions of people working for the state apparatus, and a million people dying daily fighting on the front line.

The “Ministry of Truth” where old news stories were carefully amended to show an altered vision of history as alliances change and battles won. Oh and of course the thousands of spies and traitors who had to be weeded out by Big Brother and his double agents.

The book does remind me strongly of the present day.

Alliances swap and change so often, people you were told were eating babies yesterday and fighting tooth and nail against you are now your allies, standing shoulder to shoulder fighting alongside you on the front line against what are probably tomorrow’s allies.

Propaganda is news to be believed as it comes straight from the word of the Great Leader or the State in our case.

Of course any dissidents who try and provide actual facts or a non biased point of view on any conflict are labelled traitors, conspiracy theorists and jailed for long sentences if not silently killed.

A more subtle way in this age of information technology where a GPS chip in your arm, or more precisely your phone, tracks all your movements for the state our #altnews internet sites are taken down or dropped in the Google rankings after sitting at the top for years. Bureaucrats decide what is “fake news” and “real news” and then warn potential readers they may be entering a free thinking zone.

One day an ally in a war is to be against all forms of torture, killing of innocents and despises religious fundamentalism, child killers and suicide bombs. Just like the Syrian Free Army, who were a non jihadist, anti Assad force. The next thing you know they sold all the arms and equipment we had given them to ISIS , ransomed off American journalists to ISIS to be beheaded for cash and prayed to allah as they machine gunned down captors in the street or cut open their victims chests before eating their hearts and lungs.

Alliances change like snowflakes in the wind it seems and the globalist don’t give a shit who they are working with as long as it meets their objective.

We have even got to the stage where al-Qaeda our “mortal enemy” (2 men in a cave), are sometimes on our side. Using pseudo names like al-Nusra Front they are labelled as anti Assad fighters and not jihadists. I’d like to see the command and control structure in that office.

Of course who dies, which states crumble and how many millions of migrants enter Europe to carry out ISIS attacks on Paris night clubs doesn’t matter to the powers that be.

They get their kicks off on a Friday night lying naked in some open coffin wanking off to the names of their ex lovers (I wonder if that includes little boys and girls….) and have all their mates watch and cheer. Then they finish the night off with a nice “pizza” as they discuss the next destabilisation plan on the table.

Then as politics and the war changes, the idea to be at perpetual war to keep the citizens at home and frightened (sound familiar), the alliances change so that in the hall of records this previous alliance is airbrushed out of history and the strength of unity and purpose that our new alliance brings is fully documented.

George Orwell had an uncanny knack of seeing into the future or his tale was picked on as some sort of template to base our war economy on.

We already have the Telescreens in our rooms and the Snoopers Charter (and US Terms and Conditions) make it exactly that.

If you have a built in Web Cam for Skype or games just beware it’s two way. If you can use it, so can the police and MI5/6 use it to watch you, and with the new Snooper Charter Law they don’t even need a warrant. So when you send that next sex text to you baby mama just be on notice the local drug squad could all be having a giggle.

“They” are watching and listening to you through your digital accessories on TV’s, Phones, PC’s, laptops, tablets anything that can be hacked (most things) and profiling you just as in the book 1984.

You can get all techie about it as I write here about some of the ways to mitigate such surveillance or a quick list on journalists who were followed and harassed, some killed, but a quick list would be.

Encrypt your phone in the settings with a long upper and lower case passwords only you know.

Use patterns to access all your favourite apps. 4 digit pins are easily breakable in 5 mins but a pattern you have got wrong a hundred times before is a lot harder.

Turn your location off. Why do you need to see where you drove around for the last week or so or what time you stopped at the local McDonalds. Not very interesting but it just might be for people watching you.

Use Anti Virus tools on your phone. MalwareBytes is free and good for both PC and phone. Clean Master is also good and CM Security allows you to add patterns/pin codes/finger prints to open apps and files if you phone doesn’t have it built in.

Don’t use the default Text or Phone app you get on your phone. All these calls and messages will be saved at Vodafone HQ for a year or more in case the cops come calling. Just deleting them off your phone does nothing as they are still on your phone providers servers.

Install Telegram , Viber or if you must Wickr . A BT Sim only plan will get you on the internet in most place so you can video call Japan – encrypted – all without using up your minutes. Same goes for texts. Telegram / Wickr allow you to delete your texts after X days/weeks/months with a self destruct option that if you don’t use your app within X days or so it will delete the whole account.

So if your phone goes “missing” you can be safe knowing as they are dictionary cracking your passwordsock them out after 3 failed goes and attempting patterns that will l your texts will get deleted.

Also BT uses DCHP which means everytime I go on the web I get a new IP address this pisses me off no end as I need to add it into my firewall to SFTP or stop myself being blocked out my own site.

However it also means it makes it a lot harder over historical period to see what you were up to when they cannot trace the IP address to you especially when you went through a number of proxies.

That is of course unless you have already been hacked and all your history lies at GCHQ – the great hall of records, history, fake history and “we are all doing this for your own protection”.

So just use masking tape over your phones camera or webcam if you are not planning on using it and the same goes for your microphone.

Sometimes the best ways are the oldest. And if your really paranoid, which you should be as no-one, no matter what gibberish they spout has “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” – it’s about liberty and not living in a police state where anyone in a uniform can “demand your papers”. If you are really going off the grid then you should learn how to use pigeons to send messages up and down the country like the olden times of yore.

So what is it with all these shifting alliances, especially with the most barbaric country in the world, and biggest fund raiser of terrorism, Saudi Arabia.

Well we are doing it to keep one of the few UK industries that is actually not running offshore after BREXIT, the arms industry, booming.

By selling weapons to Saudi Arabia and Qatar who then use them to kill kids in Yemen and then allow them to pass on the equipment and supply them to ISIS to fight themselves – convoluted I know but apparently despite funding and arming ISIS like Turkey they are also in an alliance to destroy them.

This anti ISIS alliance means nothing of course and history like Orwell predicted will be rewritten, but the amount of US/UK arms being found in overrun ISIS positions just shows our duplicity and complicity in the whole nefarious debacle.

George Orwell’s 1984, a tale of fiction not a road map to future militarism and a police state

We are living in a surveillance state.
We are being watched.

George Orwells oath to Big Brother


Read the original article Was George Orwell the 20th century Internet Nostradamus on the main site


By Dark Politricks

© 2017 By Dark Politricks


Tory plans to make us all Terrorists!

June 10, 2015

Tory plans to make us all Terrorists!

By Dark Politricks

This is a recent video from Russell Brand about the new UK Tory governments plans for a new anti terror bill that will crack down on free speech and other civil liberties.

It seems that with every new government we get a new “anti terrorism” law passed, Tony Blair passed at least 2 that I can remember. They were mostly used for memorable things such as:

  • Freezing all Icelandic money in UK banks after the Iceland Banking crisis – something which the Icelandic people have never forgiven us for. From my recent trip to Iceland I would not be surprised to see a statue of Gordon Brown put up in Reykjavik just so that people could throw tomatoes at it.
  • Throwing out and then arresting OAP protestors from Labour conferences who dared shout out “liar” as the warmongers on stage defended their illegal war on Iraq.
  • Allowing M16 / MI5 Agents to pass questions to CIA torturers at “black site” prisons and Gitmo, who then proceeded to abuse, humiliate and injure the prisoners many of which were innocent. The ones that are not, including leaders of the now destabilised mess of a country we “liberated” called Libya, are even now trying to sue the government for their complicity in torture e.g Abdul Hakim Belhaj. This included one incident in which one British jihadi’s fingernails were ripped out after MI6 suggested that a notorious Pakistani intelligence agency detain him, and MI5 and Greater Manchester police drew up questions to be put to him.
  • Cracking down on tourists and other photographers within London taking photos of buildings as they could be “planning terrorist” attacks.

We should always be careful when “new” terrorism laws are proposed. Especially as with the current one it is to be “fast tracked” through government.

This means no proper debate over the merits of the bill and no proper time to propose amendments and changes to the bill.

Hopefully enough libertarian/liberal-minded Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and hopefully Tory back benchers will stand up against this act of tyranny.

As I said in my last piece, the UK Tory Government, freed of the shackles of coalition with liberals, are planning on repealing the Human Rights Act. A piece of legislation brought in by Tony Blair in the 90’s but created from the European Convention on Human Rights which was drawn up by the Tory post war government to show to the world how civilised we should all be in future.

It is sad that a future Tory government is now going to remove this legislation due to a minority of cases where they have not been able to deport criminal immigrants due to their “right to a family life”.

It seems that the Tories wish that if you are born in this country and your parents are not, that if they commit a crime they can now be ripped away from you leaving you with the choice to follow them to whatever horrible war-torn country they escaped from (Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Sudan…).

The question is what level of criminality requires this response. I can understand the Government wishing to get rid of terrorists, murderers and rapists but what about non-payment of Council Tax, a crime punishable by prison, which many British born OAPs have found themselves facing? What crimes would exact this level of response, does a list even exist?

It seems we English are sticklers for the rule of law even when we don’t agree with small parts of it.

Instead of just ignoring section 8 of the Human Rights Act like France does whenever it wants to do something the EU prohibits we decide to throw the whole law away.

Instead of just declaring that the house of Commons is the supreme will of the people, and that if it votes to decide to remove someone from these shores because of a REAL terrorist crime then so be it, family or not. The problem comes with all the guff these bills include that label you and me “domestic terrorists” for speaking out against the Government, war, its foreign policy, support of Israel, or other civil rights that are being chipped away bit by bit never to return.

I have no problem if a REAL terrorist who is not a British citizen is deported at the end of his or her sentence. The problem is that the Government is proposing to throw the whole Human Rights Act away to achieve this instead of coming up with another solution.

If the House of Commons IS supposed to be the supreme will of the people because we have voted for it – try to forget the UKIP member who got 0 votes despite voting for himself for a moment, we don’t have voter fraud in Western Democracies, it’s just nasty evil countries like Russia that do things like that. Then a vote in the house should be enough to override any appeal on Human Rights grounds due to section 8. This is as long as the case has been proved beyond doubt, the convict has had his chance at appeal, and the criminal does in fact pose a threat to the country.

I am perfectly happy to see a UK Bill of Rights on TOP of, not INSTEAD of, the Human Rights Act, to achieve such aims if needed. I just don’t want to see families ripped apart over nonsensical crimes or crimes that shouldn’t even exist e.g drugs, protest, freedom of speech that goes against popular view etc.

David Cameron has gone on record to say that the belief that if you as a citizen “just followed the law you would be left alone”, is now going to be turned on its head.

That in itself is worrying Hilter-esque language that could be taken to mean anything.

Wasn’t an Englishman’s home his castle?

Were we not the creators of law as it exists in many countries through the Magna Carta, Due Process, the idea that we are all innocent until proven guilty.

What about the social contract between citizen and state that meant we plebs had our rights and the government protected them and the country as long as we paid our taxes?

As Russell Brand says in the piece below, a similar piece of legislation which the Tories are basing their own law on, was recently brought into Canada and the people were appalled by it.

It meant that:

  • Innocent words can be interpreted as terrorism – make of that what you will.
  • Speaking “recklessly” which could lead to a terrorist act being committed is a crime. So speaking out about the increasing authoritarian nature of our world on this blog could lead to a mentally disturbed reader to go and fly a plane into a skyscraper and I would spend 5 years in jail – fair?
  • Protesting could lead to government surveillance. So any kind of protest by Unions, Students, Occupy, or anybody against the increasing Police State be warned.
  • Meddling with ANY CORPORTATE INTERESTS could be interpreted as terrorism under the new UK act. So protests that prevent Vodafone from opening their doors (UKUncut beware!) or the use of Bitcoin or other electronic currencies that stopped the banks from monitoring your money could now be considered a crime.

Watch the video to see more and spread it.

Our rights are being eroded and we could all soon be considered terrorists for speaking our minds, protesting corruption and the corporate take over of our life.

Is that really terrorism or just the rights we should expect to enjoy as a member of a supposedly free country?

View the original article at Dark Politricks.

© 2015 By Dark Politricks

My thoughts on the USA’s love of guns and the 2nd Amendment

January 25, 2013

My thoughts on the USA’s love of guns and the 2nd Amendment

By Dark Politricks

After all the furor of the last few weeks and the Sandy Hook shootings and the media debate afterwards what I want to know is what level of tyranny do Americans feel is enough to break the barrier and make their cherished 2nd Amendment useful.

As we are constantly told the 2nd Amendment is not so Americans can go hunting ducks with M16’s or use their AK47’s for shooting tin cans off the garden wall – no it’s for preventing an over reaching, tyrannical government from taking control of their country.

As Thomas Jefferson said in 1803:

“None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important.”

There are many levels to this debate and you can go on many tacks including:

1. American citizens have voted for the Congressmen and President that has then taken away their civil liberties. Therefore in a democracy the majority have spoken and it is their own fault for participating in their own loss of liberty and  freedom.

2. Obama is in no way like Hitler, Mao or Stalin. They just declared their laws and the deed was done. They didn’t have to battle for years in the Congress and Senate to get a health-care plan watered down and then passed after multiple compromises with political opponents. If Obama was truly a dictator he would have just clicked his fingers and used one of the “signing statements” to make “it so”, so to speak. A dictator doesn’t give in to an elected body he just says what he wants and it gets done.

3. For personal reasons I wouldn’t like to live in a country full of guns. For one I would probably be dead, in a wheelchair or in prison by now after my teenage tearaway years. The other is that I know in the UK, although more violent than the USA (as a recent study showed) at least when we fall out of the bars drunk we fight with our fists and not guns. With our love of alcohol and a plentiful supply of guns we would see every town high street full of dead bodies every weekend. That’s not even thinking about our bent dodgy police who I have seen on more than one occasion batter someone for no good reason. Bart Transport Police incidents would be occurring every day and I am thankful I have managed to fight our cops with my fists after they have attacked a young girl with batons just for walking out of a club with a beer, and didn’t end up with a bullet in my back. They knew they were in the wrong and 12 of us were let go without charge in the morning all gun shot free. Our criminals are even having to rent guns due to the short supply and most guns used in crimes have already been used in previous crimes and are only re-activated de-commisioned guns – likely to go off in your own hand as it is to fire properly anyway.

4. America has the most sophisticated and well equipped armed forces in the world. Despite the wishes of the founding fathers that there would be no standing army during peace time it seems the USA has got round this by engaging in a period of permanent war. The armed forces have replaced the militias and does any American think their handgun or automatic would take down an Apache helicopter if they turned on the citizens? What level of weapon should a citizen have anyway? Where does it say they can only have certain types of guns and not RPG’s or even anti-aircraft weapons? Where is the line drawn?

However ignore all that and just think that YOU ARE ALREADY LIVING UNDER TYRANNY!

Therefore why crow on about the real reason of the 2nd Amendment when you have done NOTHING to stop the rise of tryany over the last 10 years.

Ever since 9.11 you have:

Therefore if you don’t think that a few of these facts, out of many others I could have listed,  on their own reach the bar of tyranny that you are so fond of protecting then what level does the bar have to be raised for you to use to the 2nd Amendment as you see it designed?

Either stop voting for scoundrels and liars OR take people like Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Dennis KucinichGary Johnson, Jill Stein and many other politicians seriously.

These are just a few people from all ends of the political spectrum who believe the US has already entered this realm of tyranny in which the CIA/NSA, banksters and warmongers have already won over the common person and that serious reform is needed to roll back this Amerikan police state.

Either there is no level it can be raised to and you will accept all forms of tyranny and you just need to admit that you really really like your guns and just shooting shit. OR you honestly believe in the 2nd Amendment.

If it’s the latter then I really want to know – what will it take for you to do something?


View the original article “What level of tyranny will it take for Americans to make use of the 2nd Amendment” at the main site

Who will be voting for “more of the same under a different name” this year?

February 12, 2012

By Dark Politricks

I have already written about the lack of choice in the forthcoming US Presidential election as it seems whether you are Democrat or Republican you are saddled with the certainty that whoever you vote for a continuation of post 9.11 politics of fear, war and loss liberty is on the cards.

Ron Paul seemed to be the only member of the GOP standing for election who breaks away from this mapped out future but as recent Republican votes have shown he is either unable or being prevented from capturing significant votes. Whilst the other contenders for the GOP nomination are taking it in turns to lead the pack it is clear that the Republican party cannot make up their mind about who they want to lose against Obama in the forthcoming Presidential election.

Unless Ron Paul manages to miraculously win the GOP nomination it looks like the Republicans will either go for a candidate who is only going to appeal to a narrow selection of the general population as a whole. They will either pick:

Mitt Romney, a liberal, flip flopping friend of the 1% who doesn’t worry about the poor and puts people to sleep whether speaking, debating or singing awfully to his crowds of unadoring fans.

Newt Gingrich, a Pillsbury doughboy of a man with the bankrupt morals of a philandering hypocrite who wants to spend billions putting a base on the moon whilst millions of Americans are still on food stamps.

Rick Santorum, a religious conservative who although Catholic appeals to the large evangelical set of voters who chose their President not with logic and reason but on the likelihood that he will promote more end time activity in the Middle East, support anything Israel does in the belief that it will speed up the return of Jesus and who see Barack Obama as nothing less than a Muslim in Christian clothing who is trying to turn America into a Marxist state.

Add these three uninspiring fellows to the likelihood of an independent Ron Paul and it is very unlikely that a majority of people will vote enough to force the incumbent from the White House and that’s a real shame because whether or not you call Obama a Muslim, a Christian, a Marxist or a Liberal he certainly isn’t any good for the world at whole or America in general.

The question should also be asked then – “why can’t a real liberal Democrat stand for the nomination and appose Barack Obama’s very illiberal reign over the USA.”

It should not be a given that an incumbent always gets to stand for his parties re-election and it would be nice for the American people to be given a real choice instead of the current choice of “more of the same” or “more of the same under a different party”.

Whether you call yourself a liberal, a conservatives or neither, would it not be better if the choice before the American people was a real choice rather than just a change of figurehead. Would it not be a more interesting election if it were Ron Paul standing versus Dennis Kucinich or Pat Buchanan versus Cynthia McKinney. Wouldn’t there be more of a real choice, more interesting debates and more of a reason to get out and vote if proper choices were presented to the American people.

The sad thing is that even though Ron Paul is a libertarian and Dennis Kucinich a liberal they probably have more in common than most people think when it comes to the constitution, foreign policy, domestic policing, liberty and the American empire.

Which are all reasons why the establishment would never let them get near the White House with a full head of brain matter and all reasons why Barack Obama is on course to lead a second term preparing America for their new role in the 21st century as a workhouse for Chinese overlords.

Lets just look at all the things which Barack Obama has done which make him NOT a liberal and definitely NOT someone who follows the constitution.

These are also things that make him the perfect candidate to win the election on the establishments behalf and continue the expansion of the Amerikan empire and the destruction of freedom and liberty at home.

1. He has shown the capacity to break most of his pre-election campaign promises showing skills only a true politician could sleep at night with.

2. He has kept the country in a permanent state of war whilst claiming the opposite. American drones are killing civilians at a rate never seen before and across the skies of more countries than his predecessor. Whilst he has brought some troops home from Iraq, thousands remain and the war in Afghanistan rages on with no victory in sight.

3. He has also shown contempt for the constitution by involving America in the war in Libya without allowing Congress to vote on his decision.

4. He has kept the emergency powers which were enacted after 9.11 and which have seemingly placed America under a semi dictatorship in which the rule of law has been abolished in favour of executive orders. This can be clearly seen in the recent National Defense Authorization Act which took America one step further towards tyranny with the White Houses insistence that the indefinite detention of battlefield combatants applied to American citizens

5. He has not kept his pre-election promises to restore America’s standing in the world by closing Gitmo, ending the extraordinary rendition of suspects and acting as a fair and unbiased facilitator of talks between Israel and Palestine.

6. He has failed to prosecute anyone in the previous administration for crimes against the American people and the countries they went to war against. He has not investigated the events of 9.11 which still remain the catalyst for the transformation of America into the militarised Police state it has become and he has chosen to continue the worst of the Bush era excesses even extending them or putting them into law such as the execution of American citizens on the Presidents command alone. Drones are now flying the skies of America and not a week goes by without another story of brutality by the hands of the Robocops who patrol US streets pepper spraying students and grannies and shooting unarmed people in the back on camera.

7. He has failed to reform health care in a way that satisfied Liberals or Conservatives. Instead of introducing a system that would have enabled free health care at the point of use for all Americans through a national insurance scheme he has instead pushed through an unconstitutional bill that forces people to buy insurance from private companies. The insurance companies are happy as they now have a market place full of people forced to buy their product and he hasn’t solved the problem that there still remains millions of Americans who are uninsured.

8. He has allowed Wall Street to carry on with their high frequency trading and front running and his reforms are weak at most and will do nothing to solve the underlying problems that caused the financial meltdown in the first place. Instead of putting the banksters in jail he has continued to bail them out and the Treasury, FED and bankster operations are still engaged in a revolving door process which ensures the American tax payer foots the bill for the excesses, crimes and mistakes of a few.

9. He has allowed the national debt to rise to stupendous levels whilst doing nothing but massaging the jobless figures to make it look like the US economy is getting better. As more people leave the workforce permanently due to jobs disappearing offshore and the FED’s continuation of quantitative easing the purchasing power of the dollar in your pocket weakens month by month. It can legitimately be claimed that Obama has engaged the American nation in yet another war, although this currency war is fought with Credit Default Swaps, the printing of money and a race to the bottom. The huge amounts of American debt owned by China is now being re-invested as China starts buying up companies across the world.

10.  Despite claims to the contrary by people just itching to bend over backwards to support Israel in every way possible, Obama has kept AIPAC and the pro-Israel lobby happy by:

  • promising to wield his UN veto over Palestinian statehood.
  • helping Israel in their covert war against Iran with the Stuxnet virus and support of Iranian terrorist groups.
  • sent large numbers of US Navy ships to the Straits of Hormuz.
  • promised to help Israel in any war with Iran as long as they agree on a plan first.
  • spent billions of US taxpayers money giving military hardware to Israel in return for a short delay in their illegal settlement building programme.
  • and of course he has had to bite his tongue more times than he can count whilst the Israeli PM belittled and lectured him in public and private.

And that is just a list from the top of my head. I’m sure my American readers can provide many more examples of all the illiberal laws and regulations that the Obama administration has brought in over the last three years.

So lets not quibble with semantics, Obama is not a liberal in any sense of the word especially when compared with true liberals who are pro-constitutional freedoms, against wars drummed up in the press through lies and special interests, against the government telling the people how to live their lives, who to sleep with, what to eat, drink and smoke and against special interests foreign and domestic dictating policy and law.

Therefore we are faced with the prospect of a non liberal democrat facing off against a liberal conservative like Romney, a hypocritical borderline lunatic like Gingrich or a religious conservative like Santorum.

If I had a choice like that I think I would be ticking the “none of the above” box.

Why is it we in the west cannot see through the charade of democracy presented to us?

December 21, 2011

By Dark Politricks

It has been almost a year since the people of Egypt started their revolution and their inspirational stance at Tahrir Square has spawned similar protests including the Occupy movement which has camps in countries all around the world.

However even though the Egyptians managed to rid themselves of their leader Mubarak they are now finding out that the army they lauded months ago for standing between them and the security forces and thugs Mubarak had freed from jail is proving harder to remove.

Whatever form of democracy the Egyptians want, whether it includes Islamic parties that are hostile to Western foreign policy, or types of parties that have never been see before it is clear that the Egyptians are willing to fight and if necessary die for it.

They have been fobbed off with phony elections that have been crowed by Western media as signs of success when in reality they are nothing more than a sham.

“What is the point in voting for people who have no power?” say those Egyptians who are still trying to Occupy Tahrir Square and remove the military that have taken power of the country.

Whatever these people want, they are clear on one thing. They know what they don’t want.

Just like the Libyans who are now protesting the NTC as ex regime members with a new name who are too slow to enact real change. They want to taste real power for themselves that means doing what’s right for their fellow countrymen rather than everything that’s beneficial big western businesses, oil companies and other meddlers trying to ensure a beneficial outcome for the West and Israel.

All of this makes me wonder.

If the Egyptians and Libyans can see through the charade of fake democracy being dangled as a prize in front of them whilst the same power brokers play a big game of musical chairs. Swapping one set of worn out politicians with another from the same mould, then why can’t we in the west?

In America we have two almost identical parties who rotate power every few years between them. They shout and argue in front of the camera whilst play best friends off it.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties are:

  • pro war
  • pro Israel and anti Palestine
  • pro Wall Street
  • anti liberty and civil rights
  • against international law
  • against the constitution
  • anti free speech
  • against Internet freedom
  • pro FED
  • pro big business, especially those that fund their campaigns
  • anti-reform
  • willing to use tax payers money to pay for bail outs for their friends on Wall St

and the list could go on and on.

So if the two only parties capable of actually gaining power are so similar and things that really matter like whether or not your freedoms are going to disappear or whether you’re more or less likely to go into another disastrous war on behalf of an ungrateful ally that continuously spies on you and sells your secrets to your enemies then why don’t the American people care.

You could say that the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street groups are a sign that people are finally starting to awake but it is clear that the Tea Party once in power has forgotten it’s constitutionalist roots and just become a more right wing scarier version of the GOP and the Democrats are busy trying to co-opt the Occupy movement in the same way.

So our protests against the illusion of democracy seem nothing more than fodder for the news channels and they are all owned by the same big businesses that control our politicians anyway so we cannot and should not ever expect any fair and balanced reporting from anything that comes out that big box at the end of your room.

For many people in the Middle East they are experiencing freedom for the first time and it seems they are not going to settle for some fake illusion that we in the west have become so used to over the years. Signing a cross next to a name that means virtually nothing is just not going to cut it anymore and in this age of modern technology it shouldn’t have to.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out as the West’s fingerprints are all over the uprisings in the Middle East. If the people of these countries are able to see through our plays and create a new form of really representative democracy it will be an inspiration for us all to follow.

However by going on historical events it will also be a miracle. At this time of year I can only hope that miracles do come true.

Occupy Wall Street versus the Tea Party

November 7, 2011

By Dark Politricks

One of the things that keeps cropping up in online discussions is how divided the current anti-government protest movements are.

Conservatives and Tea Party followers attack the Occupy Wall St protesters as left wing hippies, socialists, communists, anit-capitalists and they are backed up by their right wing media shows like the FOX Channel which derides the OWS protesters at every opportunity.

Don’t the Tea Party protestors remember how the left wing media in the US attacked them in the same way as they are now doing to the Occupy Wall St protest?

How the nightly MSNBC talking heads or Daily Show clips laughed at their Tea Bagging quips and showed Tea Partiers turning up to Town Hall meeting with guns, the odd protester with a racist sign or old grannies equating Obama with Hitler and Stalin? We all know that a few bad apples don’t define a movement and the same should be said for OWS.

This is a classic example of divide and conquer and if only the two groups could see that they are both coming at the same issues albeit from different political perspectives then surely there is massive scope for getting a huge movement going that could make some lasting changes.

Obviously for many Tea Partiers it is too late as the original Tea Party movement started by people like Ron Paul and Karl Denniger has now been co-opted by the Republican party and as Karl Denniger himself says:

“Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Bob Barr, and douchebag groups such as the Tea Party Patriots” are to blame for the bastardization of a movement that now seems focused on “Guns, gays, God,” instead of the Tea Party’s original mission: to castigate the federal government for supporting the “rampant theft” of taxpayer dollars that went toward “propping up FAILED private businesses.”

“In short, The Tea Party was and is about the the corruption of American Politics and the blatant and outrageous theft from all Americans that has resulted. It is about personal responsibility and enforcement of the law against those who have robbed, financially ****d and pillaged the nation.”

Ron Paul and Karl want to End the FED, one of the main groups responsible for the massive financial bubbles that have caused the recent crisis and the rampant inflation that is increasing day by day through their excessive use of the printing press. There is a reason Chinese financiers are already declaring that the US has defaulted on their debts.

They want to see the Banksters who caused this huge mess that threatens to engulf the world tried and put in jail NOT bailed out with tax payers money and given cushy jobs in the government or the FED for their troubles.

They want to see a return to capitalism and abolish the crony corporatism that is the financial modus operandi of the current America financial system.

Ron Paul wants to end the wars and bring the troops home. Not only would this save billions if not trillions of dollars that could be used for the people of the USA it would help bring the dubious war on terror to an end.

That stupid war on a word that means the TSA gets to either see you naked or grope you every time you fly somewhere. You never know if your unlucky like ex Governor Jesse Ventura you might be considered an enemy of the state for wanting to uphold your rights as a free citizen and not be treated as a criminal without probable cause. Oh the land of the free…

If the terrorists did 9.11 because they hated our freedoms then we have done their job for them rather well. Bin Laden must be rolling in his watery grave.

Not only has the US been run under a form of martial law since 9.11, the Homeland Security department has risen to become a modern day Gestapo.

Security letters that prevent your from even discussing whatever you are supposed to have done and midnight kidnaps and free trips to overseas prisons where torture has been legitimised awaits those who may disagree with US foreign policy and attempt to do something about it and the rise of the Police State does not rest there.

In supportive countries like the UK we have restricted our own liberties, enabled everyone from the council to the environment agency to spy on us and we have no problem misusing terrorist laws to implement financial terrorism on countries threatening to default or on people daring to protest at Labour party meetings.

The MIAC report that means you are probably on some list just for visiting this site or owning a gun, supporting Ron Paul or Bob Barr or even for just displaying certain signs on your car or home schooling your kids – basically anything that draws you to Big Sis’s attention ensures a big black mark is put against your name for later use as a potential trouble maker.

If the original Tea Party was about liberty, bailouts and high deficits then surely there is a lot to be compared with current Occupy Wall Street protests who also want to end the crony capitalism that has made thousands of people homeless whilst bankers feast on their huge bonuses paid for by you and me as well as ending the wars and the loss of liberty that has occurred since 9.11.

Someone said to me the other day that the “enemy of my enemy is not my friend” but in this case I believe the people of the USA have a lot more to gain by forgetting the divisive two party system that is basically two sides of the same corrupt coin and come together to form a critical mass of protest that cannot be ignored.

The right supposedly respects the troops and wants a strong national defence. How do they feel about the wasted trillions in dollars building multi-billion dollar embassies in Kabul and Baghdad in their name and the wars that bypass the constitution that can be started at a stoke of the Presidents pen? Does the constitution mean nothing to them?

How do they feel when they see the service men they admire so much being beaten, shot at and arrested for standing up for all the liberty and freedom to protest that those terrorists supposedly hate us for?

Didn’t we fight the 2nd world war and many others so that we could enjoy freedom at home ?

Doesn’t that freedom include the right to protest? Or do we only support protest in countries across the ocean with massive oil reserves or geo-political goals to be gained.

Just because many groups those on the right might detest groups such as Communists and Unions who claim to support the Occupy Wall Street protests should not put them off joining in. The whole point of the protest is that we are the 99% being controlled by the 1% and the 99% is obviously going to include groups of people that not everyone agrees with or even likes.

Take 99% of your town, your street, your work place. Do you agree with everything all that those people say or do? Of course not.

Therefore don’t expect the whole of the Occupy Wall St protesters to meet your own standards of who and what you agree with as if they did then they wouldn’t be the 99% in the first place.

Times are a changing and the whole idea behind Occupy Wall Street was to camp out in major towns and cities in a similar way to those Eygptians in Tahrir square who managed to repel attacks by government goons and changed the status quo and hopefully their future.

You only have to watch a few videos on YouTube to see examples of our own goons in blue attacking the protesters and trampling over their constitutional rights.

Tea Party supporters, please just see past Sarah Palin and the other GOP stars who just want your money and votes at the next election and join in the Occupy Wall Street protests.

If you don’t agree with some of their demands then challenge them on their beliefs and debate with them to find common ground. Just don’t write them off by believing the MSM bull shit that FOX and Fools spoon feed their audiences.

You obviously wanted change when you supported the Tea Party, the Occupy Wall St protesters want change as well, lets come together to make that happen.

Why prisoners should be allowed to vote

February 20, 2011

By Dark Politricks

The Daily Mail‘s front page headline was this story today:

“Payback time for grasping prisoners: Inmates to pay £76 costs each as judge throws out vote-ban compensation claim”

Almost 600 criminals trying to make money out of the voting ban on prisoners were slapped down by a High Court judge yesterday.

They had sought £5,000 each compensation for being unable to vote at the last election. Instead, Mr Justice Langstaff ordered them to PAY £76 each towards the costs of their action.

In a decision hailed as a rare legal victory for common sense, he ruled that European judgments should never be allowed to trump laws passed at Westminster.

It was a decisive blow for the authority of Parliament over the European Court of Human Rights – and the legal vultures demanding millions of pounds in compensation for prisoners.

Read the rest here.

Whilst many people might agree with this sentiment and whilst it is probably the case that those prisoners who brought the case were looking for financial gain rather than the return of the right to vote it is also clear that the current attack on the Human Rights Act is not in any one’s interest when proper thought is given to the subject matter.

Unlike a lot of western countries we Brits do not have a written constitution and our own Bill of Rights is nothing more than a limit on Royal powers rather than a list of rights that we as “subjects of the crown” can enjoy. David Cameron is talking about bringing in such a bill but I doubt the reason behind it would be to enshrine in stone some of our liberties but rather to allow the UK to ignore or “opt out” from the current Human Rights Act.

It is clear from the recent feeble attempt at restoring some of the liberties stolen from us during Labour’s time in power that any such Bill would never be on par to the original US Bill of Rights. It would probably protect nothing of real value apart from ensuring that the right of our own parliament to reduce the common man’s ability to live free from oppression and undue assault by governmental power is elevated above that of the EU.

When we hear stories about how crazy the Human Rights Act is from papers like the Daily Mail and the Express we need to remind ourselves that something protecting our basic rights is better than nothing.

It was clear from the previous government that those who rule us have little concern over our liberty and basic freedoms so we should be glad that there is at least some form of legal recourse when our government goes too far.

Whilst the Daily Mail and other “political correctness gone mad” proponents decry the few examples of people trying to take advantage of the Act by bringing spurious cases they fail to mention that the majority of the time the bill is there to protect us from abuses enacted by our own government.

The right wing media in this country also seem to forget that the Human Rights Act is based around the European Convention on Human Rights that was drawn up in 1950 by British Lawyers after the horrors of the second world war.

This is not some alien concept that is being forced on us by those funny speaking foreigners as the Daily Mail would like us to believe. Instead it is a rather lofty ideal that we helped form which was aimed at spreading the concept of freedom and liberty through parts of Europe that had been subjugated by the rule of dictators and despots.

On the subject of the right to vote by prisoners which is the current tool being used to bash the Human Rights Act over the head I would agree that for prisoners serviving whole life terms there is little point in giving them the right to vote as they are never going to be free again.

However for those people who are to be released into society whatever their term of imprisonment I would grant them the right to vote primarily for the following reason.

Many people are in jail for crimes that have been committed that many people do not agree with and that a change in the ruling party would mean the difference between imprisonment and freedom. I am not talking about murder or child abuse but crimes such as drug offences and maybe in the future computer crimes such as “illegal downloads”.

In countries across the channel you can be locked up for disputing that exactly 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust and only the other day a UK judge denied an appeal by Muslim protesters at a military march saying that there were limits on free speech.

Whilst the number of people who are currently in jail for “thought crime” or computer crimes are small or even zero our jails are full to the brim of people who have been locked up because they like to smoke, snort or inject a drug of their choice.

The Liberal Democrats used to be a party that regularly debated legalising drugs at their conferences and who many people foolishly believed were actually “liberal” in nature. However it is clear from their watered down Freedom Bill that many liberties we were promised back have been deemed to dangerous.

Liberties such as the right to protest, the right not to be sent off in an orange jumpsuit to the US on a foreign countries say so and the right to consume or inhale whatever intoxicating products one wishes to do so. These rights continue to be unacceptable in the current day and age.

One can only imagine that a popular political party might one day exist that was truly liberal in nature.

A party that believed that as long as we were not going round hurting others the state should not be allowed to hurt us by locking us away in 19th century Victorian prisons.

There are many small parties that do have such beliefs but they have yet to make their mark on the political scene. A good example of a modern party that was created to defend certain liberties is the Pirate Party, which is dedicated to protecting the computer users rights during the digital age.

With the rise in legislation against various computer crimes such as illegal downloads, hacking and civil disobedience as exhibited by the DDOS attacks carried out by Anonymous recently we can only assume that it is very likely in the coming years that our already overcrowded jails will start to be filled up by even more people who many in society believe should never have been arrested in the first place.

Therefore you can see how one persons incarceration could be inextricably linked to the policies of the party in government and that by allowing those people currently jailed for said policies to vote could have a major effect on the nature of our parliament.

I can well understand peoples aversion to allowing nonces and murderers the right to vote however it is almost 100% unlikely that we would ever be faced with a situation where a political party campaigned for the legalisation of those activities.

However it is already the practise of our government to decide on whim and for spurious reasons that our hard won liberties are not worth keeping any more and any step in the opposite direction however unpalatable it might be to Daily Mail readers is worth doing.

Amerika, A modern day East Germany

August 1, 2010

By Dark Politricks

The definition of a Police State is:

A state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic, and political life of the people, especially by means of a secret police force.

History shows that mankind has been plagued by authoritarian governments since the dawn of collective governance. We have many instances of governments that fit the defintion of a Police State from the East German Stasi, Soviet KGB to the current Chinese government who still utilise whole teams of agents to follow westerners of interest around when they visit the country.

However these countries have all been authoritarian one party states and it has always been presumed that within western democracies the idea of a police state only existed in the nightmares of those sections of society who mistrusted the government no matter what it did. However with the recent Washington post investigation into the size of the intelligence community within the United States of America it may be successfully argued that the time for nightmares has arrived.

The Washington Post expose looked into the huge expansion of the securtity services and other intelligence agencies since the attacks of 9/11 and revealed some stunning facts such as:

  • Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.
  • An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.
  • In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings – about 17 million square feet of space.

In case that second point escapes due attention it means that roughly 1 in every 150 adults within the USA has top secret security clearance and if that many people have the top level clearance how many more have one of the many lower levels? It does seem from this study alone that the USA is awash with spooks and spies and as we know from the past ten years of abuse they are not all engaged in fighting the war on terror and looking for the supposed architect of 9/11 Osama Bin Laden.

Instead the government has directed this huge intelligence apparatus onto the people they are supposed to protect and one can only wonder whether this was the original aim in the first place. No democratic country would have ever accepted such a huge intrusion of privacy, destruction of civil liberties and total disregard to the rule of law had the threat of terrorism not existed and been used as the excuse of the century to implement such draconian measures.

Like many governments throughout the ages from Roman times with Julius Caesar, to Hitler and the Reichstag fire, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 were used by politicians to expand the power of the state at the expense of the citizenry using an outside enemy as the excuse. Whether you believe the attacks of 9/11 were staged or not is not the point as it is clear from succeeding events that they were used by the Bush government, and now the Obama administration to increase the power of the government to intrude into the lives of the public.

The main piece of legislation that started the ball rolling towards a Police State was the Patriot Act. This law was rushed through congress without proper consultation and debate and many senators later admitted that they didn’t even read the bill. The very suspiciously timed Anthrax attacks on likely opponents of the bill  ensured that the politicians passed through a truly anti-libertarian bill that had been sitting around for years just waiting for the right “event” to occur.

The law expanded the definition of terrorism to include many domestic activities and it enabled the federal government to increase it’s surveillance of the public through a systematic warrant-less wire-tapping campaign that trawled through every conceivable piece of electronic information from phone calls, emails, Internet traffic and credit card transactions whilst it built up a huge database of real time events in which it hoped to find signs of terrorist connections in a huge game of connect the dots.

The loosening of the terms that define what is and not terrorism should be a chilling warning to anyone concerned with the war on terror. We have seen here in the UK how the numerous anti terrorism laws have been misused by Police officers to prevent photographers from recording police assaults on the streets and in preventing legitimate protest. We have also seen our government abuse powers that were supposedly only there for exceptional purposes for non exceptional means such as when the UK froze the bank accounts of Iceland during the banking crisis.

The US government has now gone one step further in it’s expansion of the war of terror against it’s own citizens by enacting presidential powers that allow for the assassination of US born citizens throughout the world. The US government it seems is now perfectly willing to execute it’s own citizens if they believe them to be linked to terrorism. No trial is required to contest any evidence that may or may not exist and the defendant is not allowed to answer any charges to a jury of his peers. If the government deems you to be a terrorist with it’s newly relaxed definition of what constitutes terrorism then you may be assassinated.

Not only is the US government cranking up the war on terror by attacking those citizens it decides fall into the category of domestic or foreign terrorist it is also trying to crack down on the only forum in which free speech and dissent of government still exists e.g the internet.

In an age in which the dying print media is being deserted en mass and those that control it are scared of losing a major propaganda tool the attacks on the alternative media have increased tenfold. Claims that the old media is in the pocket of government and not doing it’s job properly have increased since the 9/11 attacks and the war in Iraq. This was a war which was miss-sold to the public with the help of national newspapers prepared to look the other way as the government used them to drip feed false stories to a public who knew no better.

The only real voices of opposition are to be found in the blogosphere and the powers that be hate that they cannot control the news in the same way as they could buy off newspaper owners, editors and journalists. Instead of only worrying about a dozen or so national newspapers the government has to contend with millions of blogs and alternative news sites and the only tactic that would work is one that limits ownership of such a site or makes the available content illegal in some way or other. This is why there are now calls to regulate Internet bloggers such as the bill being brought forward by Bruce Patterson.

Obama’s Information Czar, Cass Sunstein, has already wrote about his desire to crack down on blogs and sites that dare discuss topics that the government deems as conspiracy theory. This would include discussion of alternative theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks, or concluding that the JFK assassination involved more hit-men than Lee Harvey Oswald on his own. In fact it would cover anything that the government might deem beyond the limits of discussion by those who want to look beyond the official story immediately rolled out whenever a high crime is committed.

Then there are bills being introduced such as Senator Joe Lieberman’s 197-page Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which aims to mimic China’s firewall and which would give the President powers to control IT networks and the flow of information in times of emergency such as a cyber attack.

Disabling the internet may be an extreme option to consider but deleting content that is deemed unsuitable is already a daily occurrance. With the merger of leading internet companies such as Google and the CIA it has become very easy for media deemed anti government to be pulled from sites such as YouTube or for search results to be tweaked to hide popular anti government search terms.

We already know how Google and the NSA are working together since the attack on Google by China earlier this year and there have also been claims that the CIA helped fund Google when it was starting up. With all these links to the intelligence agencies it can safely be assumed that Google’s massive database of user traffic, search terms, blogs, emails, videos and much more is seen as a prized asset by the intelligence community and who knows at what level they already co-operate when it comes to sharing data.

Whereas old school Police States were very obvious in their survellience and monitoring techniques the modern day Amerika has no need to put half a dozen handlers onto someone they wish to monitor (not that they don’t have the staff) as through their close links with Google and Microsoft and their new plans to access private information without a warrant they can literally let the information come to them.

We live in a semi virtual world where an online persona is just as important as your real one and due to the amount of social time people spend on social networking sites and the dependence of key infrastructure on the Internet means that control of the network literally can mean control over society. We already know our governments monitor all our phone calls through the ECHELON system and there is no technical or it seems legal limitation preventing them from analysing every single packet of data transferred over the Internet if they so wished.

Therefore due to a political class that seems to be bought and paid for by those wanting to maintain the war on terror and the surveillance society it has sprung up at home there seems little hope of stopping the high tech police state we are now living in. The solutions are available to those with the means to implement them but in the end it comes down to a choice between a public uprising against the state or a change in the political class running it.

With elections in America due very soon it is a great opportunity to show the ruling elite that the public is not prepared to swap liberty and freedom for fear and the police state that enables it. Judge Napolitano always asks his guests the following queation:

“which is more threatening to our way of live, terrorism or an ever increasing secretive and authoritarian state?”

The answer is clearly the latter and we need to elect officials that believe so too. Only when the phony war on terror is seen for what it is can we start to rollback all the police state apparatus that has build up around us over the last decade. A large section of the population has fallen for the tricks played out by power hungry politicians throughout history and willingly handed over liberty in return for perceived security. The time has come to realise this was a false trade and that Thomas Jefferson was correct when he said:

“Those who would trade safety for freedom deserve neither.”

Chris Huhne and the Lib Dem’s Freedom Bill

April 4, 2010

By Dark Politricks

I’ve always liked the Liberal Democrat Chris Huhne and personally thought he should have won their last leadership contest instead of Nick Clegg. Although Clegg comes across okay I have always found Chris to be more articulate and he seems to have much more passion especially when he talks about civil liberties and human rights.

In fact it’s a very rare occasion indeed in which I find myself disagreeing with anything he says and he seems to make a lot of sense when I see him get interviewed on TV. In fact along with Nick Clegg, Vince Cable and Ed Davey their front bench seems to be quite solid and apart from their over keen attitude to Europe there isn’t much I disagree with them on especially when it comes down to main points such as the war in Iraq, foreign policy in general and especially civil liberties.

I wrote yesterday about their proposed Freedom Bill which is an attempt to roll back the massive police state architecture that has grown up around us over the last decade or so. Although I often hear some mutterings from the Tories, mainly from David Davies, regarding the RIPA act and the amount of surveillance Labour has put us under, they don’t seem to have any policy initiatives that I know of to help roll back this encroachment of our rights.

In fact the Tory party often claims to be the party of “Law and Order” and I cannot even imagine a situation where they would disappoint their many followers who read the Daily Mail by repealing laws that were designed to protect everyone but are seen by the foaming mouthed Daily Express and Daily Mail brigade as aiding criminals and terrorists.

When one actually thinks about the extent of the damage done to our civil liberties over the last decade it’s actually quite astonishing what we have lost. Considered on individual cases each change in the law was justified as a legitimate move to help fight crime but taken in their totality it’s quite a large dent in our limited protections against abuse from the state. If you believe that you will never be affected by the decisions made over the last decade or so then you probably didn’t even care that much when successive rights and liberties that were hard won over the centuries were removed or amended.

Until you are in a situation where you actually need the protection of the law it’s often the case that people believe they have nothing to fear from such seemingly “minor” changes to our civil liberties. Without a bill of rights in the UK to protect such freedoms it’s far too easy in a democracy for governments to successfully argue that such liberties are outdated or require changing due to current threats. If you believed everything the main stream media tries to spoon feed us then its only the criminals and Al Qaeda terror cells that have something to fear from amendments to laws regarding civil liberties.

We have handed away ancient protections that once seemed set in stone such as the right to remain silent or the right to demand a trial by a jury of your peers. It is very easy to give away such protections but very hard to regain them without a struggle. Unfortunately all governments throughout history have wanted to retain as much power and control of its population as possible which is the reason government needs to be limited and kept under control.

So one day you wake up and decide you have had enough of living in a real life version of Big Brother where you are captured on 300+ CCTV cameras a day and every purchase you make, every phone call, email or website you visit is logged in numerous databases. A world where your movements by foot, train, bus and car are tracked by RFID and GPS and multitudes of government agencies are able to spy on you without a warrant. So you decide you want to do something about this Orwellian nightmare and stand up to the system but it’s too late.

If you wanted to protest against such anti-liberal measures then you will need to get a permit to make your voice heard especially if you wanted to protest outside parliament. If you have been to previous protests then you may already be on the new government database of “domestic extremists” and prevented from attending any event even if it was permitted.

If you are lucky enough to be granted the permission to protest and witness abuse by one of the jackbooted storm trooper policemen that will most likely be present to ensure the event passes off violently, and dare to take a photograph of the crime, you might be considered a terrorist under new anti-terror laws. You could find yourself like many innocent photographers arrested for such a heinous crime and then who knows how many weeks you might spend locked up without being charged.

Once the government has designated you as a domestic terrorist then all bets are off. You won’t be able to remain silent during any interview without it being considered as a sign of guilt and you may even be prevented from having a fair trial with a jury.

Of course this is all just an example worst case scenario but it’s all possible in our new brave world where the only difference between freedom lover and domestic terrorist is the mood of the home secretary that day. Our liberties and freedoms are all up for grabs due to our democratic system and there is nothing stopping a powerful majority government removing many more if they so wished. We have no Bill of Rights to protect us from the will of government and although we have the Human Rights Act it’s a series of vague assertions such as the Right to Life and the Right not to be tortured all of which can be overridden during times of war or other public emergency (Article 15).

Therefore we need our protections from the excesses of government enshrined in law and we definitely need a bill like the one proposed by the Liberal Democrats to repeal all the nasty pieces of legislation that combined together have made our once fine country into an illiberal nightmare.

The following transcript is from Chris Huhne’s article in the Guardian written in February 2010 in which he outlines the reasoning behind the freedom bill and why its necessary.

There has always been a problem for civil libertarians. The sacrifices of freedoms made by successive governments often seem small, particularly when they are pushed through at times of panic about terrorism. Each time, the government argues that you only need to give up a modest amount of freedom or rights to win greater security. And what could be more free than life itself? Yet the cumulative effects of this salami-slicing have now become deeply corrosive to the free spirit of a civil society. Like some sci-fi horror movie, we are slowly becoming the authoritarian threat that we are fighting.

The Liberal Democrats are determined to resist the slow death by a thousand cuts of our hard-won British liberties. George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four was a warning, not a blueprint. Yet the Big Brother society that he satirised is growing before our eyes. Our forebears who fought so hard for the rights we have had stripped away would be shocked at what we’ve lost.

That is why we have published our freedom bill, detailing how we intend to roll back the draconian laws passed by successive Labour and Conservative administrations. This draft bill is the first time a major political party has brought all of the laws which have undermined civil liberties together in one piece of legislation so that they can be easily repealed. We have called it the freedom bill because if the measures within it were all repealed, it would represent the greatest victory for freedom in Britain in the last 20 years.

This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the freedoms that have been lost in recent years. Sadly, there are too many. It is intended to be a starting point – to show people how much personal liberty has been stripped away by this government and the one before it. The freedom bill and the corresponding website is a consultative document designed to start a real dialogue, and give impetus to a movement that will lead to legislation soon after the next general election.

Our first draft of the freedom bill contains 20 measures to restore the fundamental rights that have been stripped away in recent years. We would:

• Scrap ID cards for everyone, including foreign nationals.

• Ensure that there are no restrictions in the right to trial by jury for serious offences including fraud.

• Restore the right to protest in Parliament Square, at the heart of our democracy.

• Abolish the flawed control orders regime.

• Renegotiate the unfair extradition treaty with the United States.

• Restore the right to public assembly for more than two people.

• Scrap the ContactPoint database of all children in Britain.

• Strengthen freedom of information by giving greater powers to the information commissioner and reducing exemptions.

• Stop criminalising trespass.

• Restore the public interest defence for whistleblowers.

• Prevent allegations of “bad character” from being used in court.

• Restore the right to silence when accused in court.

• Prevent bailiffs from using force.

• Restrict the use of surveillance powers to the investigation of serious crimes and stop councils snooping.

• Restore the principle of double jeopardy in UK law.

• Remove innocent people from the DNA database.

• Reduce the maximum period of pre-charge detention to 14 days.

• Scrap the ministerial veto that allowed the government to block the release of cabinet minutes relating to the Iraq war.

• Require explicit parental consent for biometric information to be taken from children.

• Regulate CCTV following a Royal Commission on cameras.

With luck, our freedom bill can act as a focus for civil libertarians of all parties and none in the run-up to the general election. The aim must be to change the terms of the public debate so that we can put out a clear challenge to those who run for parliament: will you back the freedom bill? We must understand how important to a free society and fulfilled individuals are privacy, freedom and the rule of law. It is time to roll back the intrusion of the surveillance state.

As you can see Chris Huhne obviously cares about our liberties and freedoms and its good to see him try to make this bill a central part of the Lib Dem’s upcoming general election campaign. In fact this idea of a Freedom Bill is not a new idea from Chris and he is on record as saying that if he was ever elected as Prime Minister the first bill he would put through would be a freedom bill. The following video was taken from 2007 just before the party leadership contest.

As I have said in previous articles it matters little which party gains the seat of power as they are all basically the same under the covers and over the last quarter of a century it has made no difference to me who was in power.

It seems that whoever runs the country taxes always seem to rise and there is always some foreign bad guy that we seem to find the need to fight. We know for certain that whoever wins the next election they are going to be stuck for cash and cutting services and raising revenues from whatever means possible to pay off the deficit. Therefore it makes no difference to my life whether Labour or Conservative win the general election as they are both going to be concentrating on the economy once elected.

However on the topic of civil liberties something that really matters and should matter to everyone it seems only the Liberal Democrats are prepared to do something about our current situation. I would urge every UK citizen to consider this proposed freedom bill when they are picking a party to put a cross next to in a month or so’s time.

If you don’t think things are that bad in terms of our lost liberties then I urge you if you haven’t already to read George Orwell’s 1984 and compare the imagery and technology from work of fiction to our current reality. This book was supposed to be a warning from history not a guidebook on running the country. The Liberal Democrats freedom bill is a small step to reversing this Orwellian world.

You can read the full transcript of the proposed Freedom Bill here.

The Tory plans to roll back Labours high tech police state

April 4, 2010

By Dark Politricks

I recently wrote some articles about the upcoming UK general election and the Liberal Democrats proposed Freedom Bill which aims to roll back some of the most intrusive and liberty destroying measures introduced by successive Labour and Tory governments in the last 20 years.

The Liberal Democrats seem quite serious about their intent to roll back the high tech police state we are now living in but to be fair to the Tories they have also repeatedly slammed Labour over the years for their drive towards huge centralised databases, increased survellience and unrestrained government power. David Davies famously quit his position as the Shadow Home Secretary to fight a local by-election so that he could debate the merits of the then proposal to allow terror suspects to be locked up for 42 days detention without charge as well as what he called “the slow strangulation of fundamental British freedoms by this government.”

Now as you should know I am no fan of the Conservative party and I remember the days before Labour came into power and the Tories were just as bad as Labour is now. The only difference was that during the late 80’s and early 90’s the the technology wasn’t around that is now available but I would put good money on it that if we had just experienced 13 years of Tory rule rather than Labour not much would be different. Our civil liberties would still be trampled on without regard and we would still be surrounded by a high tech police state apparatus that enables Big Brother to spy on us in a multitude of ways. The Tories were quite happy to introduce legislation that restricted freedom of movement, the right to protest and and much more during their last time in power so I put little faith in any claims to the contrary that they make now.

However to be fair to the Tories they have put forward an eleven point plan that aims to shrink the surveillance state and although it doesn’t go as far as the Lib Dem’s Freedom Bill it goes some way to reducing the swathes of intrusive powers that Labour has introduced and does promise to give the British people a long overdue Bill of Rights.

The 11-point plan includes:

ID cards: A promise to cancel the identity card scheme and the ContactPoint children’s database; this includes a commitment to scrap the national identity register, which underpins the cards scheme.

DNA samples: Profiles of people arrested for but not convicted of violent and serious sexual offences would be kept for up to three years, extending to five, on a judge’s approval. This contrasts with government-proposed DNA retention periods of six to 12 years for unconvicted suspects for all offences. No DNA samples or profiles of children under 10 would be kept. The DNA of those convicted of recordable offences would be held indefinitely.

Ripa investigations: The power of local authorities to use intrusive surveillance would be restrained. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) would be amended to restrict councils’ access to personal communications data to investigations into crimes that carry prison sentences.

Bill of rights: The current level of legal protection of personal privacy from the state is to be reviewed as part of the Conservatives’ pledge to replace the Human Rights Act with a British bill of rights.

Privacy watchdog: The audit powers and independence of the information commissioner would be strengthened, with the appointment made by parliament rather than ministers, and the commissioner given ad hoc powers of inspection and financial penalties for deliberate or negligent management of data.

Privacy impact assessments: To be required for any proposed new laws or other measures involving data collection or sharing.

Communications data: Home Office plans to store details of everyone’s phone calls, emails, texts, and internet use to be subject to a privacy impact assessment.

Data sharing: To ensure proper debate in parliament, all new powers relating to expanding the sharing of sensitive personal data between official agencies would need primary legislation.

Data losses A minister and civil servant of director-general rank to be appointed in each Whitehall department to take responsibility.

Data security: Information commissioner to publish best practice guidelines on keeping personal information safe in the public sector.

Private sector: Consultation with business on setting up industry-wide kitemarks on data security best practice.

Let me know what you think about the Conservatives plan to reduce the governments powers. Is it just vague aspirational talk, the sort we hear lots of before elections or are they outlining some new ideological difference between Conservative individualism and Labour’s nanny state knows best?