THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO

Shameful Attack on a Pensioner in Coventry

It’s a summer’s evening, and a senior citizen is quietly making his way along a street in the city centre, minding his own business, up until he comes face to face with a girl who assaults this elderly man who is 80 years old and, shoves him to the ground. The unknown hooligan then gobs in his face and, leaves him stretched out on the pavement.

The nauseating and unprovoked assault was caught on video by a passer by who was using the camera on a mobile phone and, then shared it on Facebook, but it really makes you wonder why this passer by never helped the man who was being attacked, this passer by instead went out of his way to record the event and, plaster it all over Facebook while the man continued being attacked and gobbed at whilst on the ground.

Makes you think about what other stuff people will have to put up with, now that the government are putting adverts on the side of vehicles telling emigrants to get out of our country, which will now not only give rise to a ripple of hate offences against illegal foreigners, but as well hate crime against other branches of society, such as disabled people and the unemployed.

Police are regarding the assault as a serious and spiteful injury and, actionable with up to five years in prison; that’s if the hoodlum is ever seized by the police because the police force needs to come to grips with this indignation with regard to people.

The footage that the man captured with his mobile phone reveals the girl knocking the Asian man to the ground in the city centre of Coventry. She was flanked by three men as she persisted launching insults and, gobbing at the man.

At the moment in England there’s an enormous detestation in opposition to anyone that doesn’t come from our country and, even though I agree that our country isn’t large enough to assist everybody from different cultures, that unquestionably doesn’t give anyone the right to set upon somebody this viciously because they’re not of our culture because we wouldn’t expect to be behaved towards in such a way if we were from England staying in their homeland.

The only person to lend a helping hand to this man, was by picking up the victim’s turban, who approached as the villains walked off. The injured man who is 80 years old was left with a bleeding nose and a black eye.

This detestable assault on this elderly man will not be the only one that will occur and, the situation needs to be addressed before additional people are participants to hate crimes because the establishment are turning a blind eye so that it’s all right to do such stomach-churning activities by putting adverts on billboards stating that it’s okay to set upon your fellow man.

Benefits and Child Credits Squeeze, pushes Children into Poverty

Pauperism for the children of our society, this takes me back to Oliver Twist, “Please Sir, I want some more”.

However back then, they didn’t have more and, at the moment they don’t have more because they don’t want us to have more, not unless it’s going to an elitist society that banquet on food and provisions that people of this impoverished society only fantasise about.

All the government are demonstrating is that without doubt, it’s acceptable and that it should be endured by the lower social division and, accept that it’s suitable enough to leave them with hardly any assets, to the point where they will in due course starve or die, or just not be able to pay their bills, or rent, or even be able to keep a roof over their heads.

Who’s going to finally capsize this governments determination and, give protection to the lower social divisions, before we have a breeding ground that will rise and develop into a flee infested society because on one will not be able to pay for personal hygiene any longer and, we’ll see our culture return to when disease would flourish because of defective sanitation.

We delight ourselves on being an unpolluted sovereign state, but we’ve not been unpolluted for a long time. Air travel brought in a large amount of sickness and diseases because of poor quarantine restraint, but even worse our health service is failing, we have GP’s that at the moment can’t be bothered because it’s just too much effort for them and, now a government that wants us to go without, so that they can line their pockets from total gluttony, but when there is destitution that’s a whole new ball game.

The one’s that are going to suffer the most, are the children and, their prospects are bleak because there is no empathy any longer, although saying that, this government is quite prepared to dispatch support over to other nations because people are at death’s door, yet they’re disinclined to give help to their own people who are now dying.

The priorities are all wrong and, this government is weak-willed and, nearly all of them consume too much time on what is urgent and not enough time on what is necessary.

I believe that every single thing occurs for a reason, but I’m not sure what the government’s motive is for making adults and little children suffer and, even though you grow up in life being aware that everybody is going to hurt you; it’s realising which ones are worth suffering for.

Government is like religion and, George Carlin said it the best:

“Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man … living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money.” — George Carlin

Now the government are attempting to persuade you that their directives are the best commandments and, that you should comply with by them because if you don’t, then they will just take your financial aid away from you so that you have diddly-squat.

Nevertheless, the free investigating intellect of a single human being is the most vulnerable thing in the world. We need to fight for the liberation of mind so that it can take any course it desires, without any particular aim. To fight in opposition to any idea, faith, or government which restricts or destroys a person.

Nonetheless, people are irrational, uncooperative and, self-centred anyway and, everyone is susceptible to rumours, that’s why it’s termed the journalistic interpretation of the facts.

If someone does something, then it’s a scandal, because everyone wants to drag up some grime on somebody, or else how would we keep ourselves entertained, but there are maybe some of us out there that would rather report what actually happens.

Not because it would be entertaining to do so, but to divulge what is really going on out there. The things that are hidden and, that no one can see.

It’s not right that we should have to have permission to say what we think, or else why was it so named “Freedom of Speech”. Or are we only permitted to freely talk when it is at the jurisdiction of the government and, if that’s the case, are we just being moulded to not say what we think, but to say what they want us to.

If that is the direction we are heading in, then we need to be very careful because social engineering is a very dangerous idea.

Mental Health Problems and ATOS

Mental health is considerably underestimated and, the effect it can have, not just for that person, but for their families and, society as a whole.

In the United Kingdom mental illness accounts for a third of all afflictions and, at any given time, one person in six undergo anxiety or depression.

In England, mental health disorders cost roughly £105 billion a year, owing to deficit of income and related treatment and welfare costs.

The cost to a person with a mental health disease can furthermore be high because left untreated, such disorders can result in being unemployed, homelessness, the break up of families and, eventually taking one’s own life.

Owing to the ongoing humiliation that some people have about mental health disorder, many individuals are unwilling to talk about any mental health problems they have had.

While mental health disorders are not usually life threatening, left untreated, they can lead to pursuits and behaviours that are physically damaging and, in some instances, life-threatening.

For example

Physical disregard for oneself

Alcohol and drug misuse self-harm

Suicide

Despite the fact that suicide rates have dropped by 20% since 1998, suicide still remains one of the main reasons of death in younger people and adults who are under 45 years of age.

The most widespread mental health disorders to have an effect on adults in England are assorted anxiety depressive disorders, and illness where an individual experiences the manifestations of depression and anxiety and, it is estimated to affect 1 in 10 adults in any given year.

Generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), a disorder where a person experiences constant and acute sensations of anxiety, is estimated to affect 1 in 20 adults each year.

Periods of moderate to acute depression, which is estimated to affect 1 in 40 adults a year.

Phobias, an extreme, or illogical fear, such as a fear of heights, or animals; phobias are estimated to affect 1 in 40 adults a year.

Obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), a condition where an individual experiences all-consuming thoughts or compulsive behaviours, is estimated to affect 1 in 75 adults a year.

Panic disorders (also known as panic attacks), which are estimated to affect 1 in 80 adults a year.

More complicated adult mental health disorders are usually less widespread than the mental health conditions that are stated above, but they can have a considerable effect on the quality of a person’s life and can be more challenging to remedy.

These additional complex mental health disorders include, Schizophrenia, Bipolar disorder (also known as manic depression), Post traumatic stress disorder, anorexia and personality disorders.

There is a span of further disorders that while are not strictly mental health conditions, can frequently benefit from the input of mental health services, these include:

Autistic spectrum disorder

Dementia

Drug and alcohol dependence and

Stroke because many people who are recuperating from a stroke incident, have manifestations of anxiety and depression

So, presently you can see why there have been so many people complaining against ATOS because they’re failing people with Mental Health Disorders because the work capability assessments are not equipped to cope with Mental Health issues and, consequently people with Mental Health difficulties are scoring no points at all and, by the time ATOS are interrogated, they have handed it over to some other company that’s dealing with it, so if people want to protest, they have to go somewhere else, to see someone else instead of ATOS who have now conveniently vanished back into the woodwork, like the critters that they are.

People do not expect to be regarded as animals by ATOS workers, in fact animals at the zoo in all likelihood get treated better than they would do by ATOS employees.

Yet in today’s culture one has to be a bootlicker to get on in this life, or else your place of employment will criticise you for doing the correct thing, this is why an ATOS workers disposition regarding another human being is one of entertainment because I’m sure that’s what they all require just to get through a functioning day.

I’m sure that not all employees that work for ATOS really agrees with what goes on in the company, especially those workers that have family members that are also disabled; you just couldn’t fulfil your job description without some type of jocular mirth, sadly that entertainment is at the cost of the person who is being assessed.

I believe that people ridicule other people because in their own twisted minds, it gives them some kind of power kick, but what they don’t realise is that their amusement is futile and mean and, no one is unfailing and, the scorn that those people display to others, will one day be manifested to them and, it’s shameful that one human being should be displaying another human being such hideous and contemptible behaviour which they classify as a power kick.

Should mothers work or stay at home?

The chancellor has really gotten his knickers in a twist over this one, but while he might have been completely ready to hand his children over, when they were younger to an absolute stranger, a number of parents are not and, will not and, it wouldn’t matter how much money you gave them.

I mean if you’re not going to get to see your own child cut it’s first tooth, or stroll across the floor for the first time, or even discover how to use the potty, then what is the purpose in having children?

These extraordinary activities that our children do are actions that we can’t get back once they’ve been done and, I wouldn’t have been willing in handing my child over to someone that I had not ever in fact met, after 6 weeks of my babies life.

After all, the newborns that we have from this period, are the future which will with any luck go onto attain a great deal of excellent things, so I’m not sure the answer would be to hand them over to anyone the government want us to.

We are not androids that are automated into doing a particular thing that we don’t really want to, we’re human beings with vital fluid routing throughout our veins and, up until that changes I think that parents are the much more suitable option for looking after their children.

I can’t see what’s improper with mothers remaining at home to take care of their children, despite the fact that a number of mothers don’t have that option, which is a pity for the mother and, child because both miss out on something throughout the bringing up process and, it may sound extremely old vogue, but why shouldn’t a parent remain at home with their child so that they can bring them up?

I’m sure if something happened to that child that Social Services would be investigating every nook and cranny, interrogating why they weren’t there in the first place, because it’s the responsibility of the parent in the safekeeping of their child, instead of someone else doing it for them.

In addition, do we know whom we are employing? They may come with a character reference, but since when has that had any importance, when there are so many children being sexually assaulted by people we might have employed on the belief that their references were spot on.

On the other hand, what is inappropriate with a grandparent looking after a child while the parents go to work. Numerous people who have to go to work, would sooner a family member look after their child, than someone that they don’t know, but of course, you can’t do that because the government will not give payment to a family member to look after your children while you work.

Nonetheless, the government can’t have their cake and eat it and, it’s necessary that there’s somebody there for the children in the early years, as well as in the middle and teenage years as family situations and pressures alter.

The government describe it as social engineering, to get you to hand over your children to someone else and, it’s not fair to put mothers under such continuing strain because being a mother is an occupation in itself and, one that a great deal of mothers love the most.

It’s difficult to know who will be the most enraged at hearing George Osborne say, that for a stay at home mother, that it’s their lifestyle choice, but it’s not a lifestyle choice. It’s the normal inherent tendency of a mother that wishes to stay at home with her child, to bring up that child, to finally become a grown-up.

George Osborne without doubt needs to disentangle his knickers before somebody is seen to be using them as a sling shot. It’s a division between good and bad and, it appears to mostly be resolved by determining the better off are good and, low earners are bad.

Next year Universal Credit is meant to roll out to all. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation disclosed that for a couple there is just no incentive for a second partner to work, owing to the steep way in which UC removes benefit and childcare assistance as people take home more wages.

Say for argument purposes a father on the lowest level wage works full time and his wife joins him full time, their earnings will at most improve by £29 a week because of the harsh fall in their credit and childcare allowance, so she may as well remain at home because, regardless of his words, George Osborne’s strategy makes her work unproductive.

Teaching and disorder triumph, with a prejudice with regard to their own kind and, a huge majority want to be in employment, but often for little extra cash.

Is a stay at home parenting good? Well, only when the situation is good and, they can afford it, but most live in torment, especially when it affects mothers that have often found themselves single, with no career to fall back on.

In addition, how come the scrutiny is continually on the poor, like it’s their pursuit to be poor, they don’t choose to be in that situation and, it’s not what makes them happy, so for what purpose are they pigeonholed, when there are many women out there that are unmarried, but have assets and, they don’t get branded.

The reason being is because they have resources and, they don’t sponge from the government, but see how fast that would alter if their circumstances were to change. See how swiftly that would go from being a woman of character to a woman of poverty.

There is no benefit to being poor and, people will only work more arduously and diligently, for longer hours if it’s to their benefit, they will not work harder and longer so that it’s more convenient to the government’s finances.

In addition, the government might be skilful enough to tweak us a little by attempting to pull the wool over some of the publics eyes, but they can’t do it to everyone because contrary to popular belief there are some of us out there that do have intelligence and, know how to utilise it and, do fairly frequently and, you don’t require a certificate to prove that.

GP practices to host internet training sessions

NHS England is dishing out thousands of pounds to bring about a digital top-of-the-line training in GP practices, health centres and hospitals as part of a drive to teach people to utilise the internet this year.

The learning centres are intended to lessen health inequalities, one of the guidelines of the Government’s requirement to the NHS England and, will be set up in regions of social poverty.

The greatest self-motivation to teach 100,000 patients was first made public in NHS England’s business plan for 2013/14 to 2015/16 and, the procurement paper for the scheme discloses it may cost up to £750,000 in 2013/14 and, that it could be prolonged for an additional two years.

NHS Digital Flagships’ will be set up in GP practices, health centres and hospitals and, collective centres will be set up in libraries and, community centres in order to teach patients how to use the internet.

More than seven million people in the United Kingdom have at no time used the internet. Despite the fact people of over 65 account for approximately half of all NHS dispensation because 40% don’t use to the internet at home and, five million of those have never been online.

It was also stated that other groups, such as those with disabilities, the homeless, offenders, the travelling brotherhood and, people in some rural districts, were also at an additional drawback, as they’re not able to make use of the internet.

I am not opposed to people utilising the internet, for some it’s a very necessary component of their lives, but it all gives rise as regards manipulation and, tricking the people into thinking that they’re being educated for diddly-squat.

Nought is without charge in this life and, those people that are inexperienced in the art of computer skills will very likely not want to try because people that are advanced in years are set in their ways, but the disabled and suchlike will see it to their benefit, as do the government.

If we can be trained in a skill without realising what’s behind it, then the government will then undeniably state that if they’re well enough to acquire a skill, they’re well enough to work. So, what you acquired knowledge of was not without charge after all, now you’re going to earn all that money they used up educating you, giving it back in taxes when they find you a position, that’s if they can find you a job, but in the meanwhile, they will make your life a misery while it is left to you to find a position and, if you don’t then your benefits will be sanctioned.

It’s all about restraint and, giving you boundaries and, to string you along whilst they’re doing it. You’re being moulded daily, but you don’t realise that it’s happening, non of you do.

So, now your in a job that in actual fact being disabled you can’t do. It was all right for an hour here, or an hour there because after that you get the opportunity to go home and rest, but now you’re attempting to keep up with everyone that’s not disabled, but you can’t because at the moment you’re doing an 8-hour day.

Yet you can’t hand your notice in because if you do, you won’t qualify for a single benefit and, I frequently wonder while I journey through life and, interact with different people, what it’s all about, what role do we in fact compete against and, for a while there I really believe that if somebody were out there taking a snapshot of our lives what it would in fact look like if we were on the other side of the camera looking in.

It’s all about rivalry and, how maniacal our life in fact is, that we have to compete against everybody else to get on in this life. When would it not be more pragmatic to be thankful for what we’ve got, more than what we can have and, extract from others.

Yet there will continually be someone out there who will rebel, not against the structure of society, but in opposition to one another because they have this acute neediness to expand their pockets a little bit more, up until in the end they tear the fabric from our society.

Another Welfare Myth

If Iain Duncan Smith believes that he can survive on £53 per week, then I would in fact, love to see him to do it. He appears to make these declarations and, then simply can’t put his money were his mouth is, that’s because he’s got so much money, he just doesn’t know what to do with it – Bend Over, Wend Over!

A common rhetorical sleight of hand for politicians is to talk about looking after the tax payer. Nonetheless, the point is they’re only actually interested with particular tax payers. The electoral classes that decide the results of popular voters, often the people on middle salaries and, they babble away as if tax payers are some hard pressed group who are oppressed by the low income families and, that the rest of us don’t pay taxes, well that’s where they’re mistaken.

The truth is that there are innumerable different taxes, at least 25 different taxes and, as well the low income people don’t just pay tax, they frequently pay the most tax and, as our revenues alter, so do the various types of taxes we pay.

The two pie graphs beneath compare the taxes paid by the poorest 10% of families and, the richest 10% of families and, it is extremely transparent that, for the poorest, the most sizeable taxes are VAT, council tax and income tax, but for the richest 10% it’s Income tax that is by far the biggest tax.

So, it’s completely transparent that the poor do in fact pay taxes. Not just incidental taxes, like VAT, but as well income tax and council tax. A great deal of other taxes are concealed from sight in duties or other background taxes like Employer’s National Insurance and, this is why it’s extremely important to pay attention to the detail of what Chancellors say in their financial plans each year.

So, does that indicate that if a low income family are getting their benefits from the taxpayer and, they have already paid tax on that money and, then the money that goes to the low income family is taxed, does that mean it’s been levied twice?

As well, you might usually presume that the rich must pay a much higher percentage of tax than the poor. After all, the income tax network is meant to place progressively higher duty on people with high incomes, but when you look at the proportion of tax paid by each household you find something very unforeseen.

Curiously this all means that, excluding for the very poor, the UK has what is named a flat tax system and, everyone pays the identical scale of tax as each other, but this flat tax system is attained by integrating a continuous income tax system with a system of an extremely high oblique or concealed taxes, what are called regressive taxes that prey on the poorest.

Perhaps this plays down the problem because if you have a disability or are becoming debilitated in old age and, as a result require social care, you will discover that you are subject to an additional savage tax called social care charging, a tax that exclusively preys on disabled people.

There are three things to bear in mind when politicians talk about tax:

1. Tax payers are not an exceptional group of people, we are all tax payers

2. Tax payers are not burdened by the poor, the poor are super tax payers.

3. Tax cuts come in many contrasting shapes and sizes, not everyone benefits equally

So, if Iain Duncan Smith and, his family does want to live on £53 per week, then maybe he will be additionally responsive to the reality that a lot of this money will be handed straight back to the government.

Nonetheless, we wouldn’t want to cut in on his brief and fleeting pleasure of believing that he could conceivably sustain oneself on £53 per week. Just a dull-witted intellect could entertain himself with that witticism because we’re all mocking him and, now that he has exposed himself to such mockery, I’m sure his own family are so proud of him.

For that reason it is merely a noble man that could conceivably categorise himself in the selfsame group as what they keep calling scroungers. If Iain Duncan Smith had to ever become low-income he would become no more than the pitiful dogs we see homeless on the streets, which the now government find irritating and inferior.

Well, I now find IDS and, all his cabinet ministers in the Tory party displeasing and, certainly not competent to run this country. They are ill-suited for the job because they plainly have no empathy and, you have to have at least some compassion to mend a country that is on the edge of cataclysmic disaster.

To be a winner is be somebody who is a nobody because most people that run the government are so incarcerated in their own prisons, that they have no concept of what really goes on in the real world, which conflicts with what IDS states, that he could survive on £53 per week.

Iain Duncan Smith may believe that he can survive on £53 per week, but frankly he has at no time really experienced penury, although I dare say his portrayal of poverty and mine, may be totally different, but I dare say he’s not at anytime in his life had to feed himself from a food bank, or sleep on the streets. Well, neither had a lot of other people until he brought in this senseless reform of his.

When someone says to you that they could survive on £53 per week, I’d deem that a bit of a bet, or why on earth would you say it, unless you knew you could do it and, I’ve not seen Iain Duncan Smith live off £53 per week and, when questioned, he just hurls his toys out of his pram like an overindulgent child. So, I’m not asking Iain Duncan Smith whether he could do it, I’m asking him, why did he say that he could survive on £53 per week, when obviously he had no intent of presentation and, showing the public that he could, or did he just simply want to piss people off more than they were already pissed off, although, if the people of England really thought he was going to live off £53 for the week, they were very much misguided because he said it knowing full well he would never do it because he knew that he would be proved wrong and, would just make a complete arse of himself.

We’re all in this Together!

David Cameron stated, “It was time to pull together,” in conjunction with his Conservative catchphrase of, “We’re all in this together”.

Well, I can’t see much togetherness going on at the moment when Iain Duncan Smith’s department hands out gratuities of £44 million while reducing benefits for the vulnerable. What David Cameron in fact indicated when he recited, “We’re all in this together”, is that we are, so long as it’s not coming out of their resources. After all, you have to “Pick a pocket or two” because, in this life, only one thing counts, in the bank and large amounts because money, I’m afraid don’t grow on trees, so you’ve got to pick a pocket or two.

Although the government is saying, “It’s true, why should we break our backs, stupidly paying tax, better pick a pocket or two”.

Well, they are without doubt picking a pocket or two because Senior civil service fatcats based in Whitehall are still paid bonuses of up to £17,500 based on performance, is that performance on how many pockets they can pick?

Work Secretary Iain Duncan Smith paid his employees bonuses totalling more than £44 million last year while cutting benefits for the numerous poor and vulnerable people.

The top Tory’s departments are in disarray with delays to leading benefit improvements, an enormous benefit tests pileup, bungled work capability assessments and an IT disaster.

Although Senior Civil Service fatcats based in Whitehall were still given bonuses of up to £17,500, based on their capabilities of the previous year.

In all, just 62 of them split £671,000 on top of their substantial earnings that frequently ran into six figures and more junior Department for Work and Pensions employees were paid bonuses of up to £2,710 to top up their wages.

All in all, 97,701 of the department’s 99,739 workforce, an amazing 98% shared more than £43.8 million and, that vast amount of money was in addition to the in-year rewards of money and vouchers aggregating a further £5.3 million.

So, as we can see from this, “We’re not all in this together” and, David Cameron’s motto is nothing but a show of fake deceit, so that he can manoeuvre the people into thinking his stand on his bold slogan is genuine and, that he truly is convinced by it, but he in fact is a spineless individual who’s not valiant enough to confess that he has enticed the public into a seduction that everyone is in this together, but of course they’re not because he is unaffected by penury and, what he doesn’t tell you is that he deems the people of Britain who are out-of-work, nauseating and, he is repelled by this and looks at each person as a scrounger, including the disabled.

If we are all in this together, then David Cameron and, all the constituents of his party in Government should be reaching into their pockets so that they can put something back into the coffers because that’s what it means to all be in this together. After all, it’s not one directive for them and, another for us.

Why should people of the United Kingdom be punished and, be taken advantage of to the detriment of their families, who are now against this kind of behaviour that the government are now sporting, as they show off to the press what pleasant vacations and, how many second homes they can have, at the cost of the taxpayer, while the United Kingdom is in disrepair.

It raises some extremely significant issues and, in the end, the people of Great Britain will NOT allow this type of behaviour from the Government. They will take a leap of faith and, upturn everything this government is trying to do.

People may look ignorant, but they do sit and evaluate and assess the facts that they think are not fair and, once they inspect and question, they want an opportunity to speak.

Whatever the government do in regards to cutting benefits is an intentional venture of self-control, to try and whip the people of the United Kingdom into line with what the government think is the source of all evil and, that there should be one rule only, their rule, to preside over us with supremacy and restraint.

They will take everything from as, so long as we give them permission to. Nonetheless, we are in charge of the situation and, we don’t realise it because without the public who make this United Kingdom go round, there would be no United Kingdom because we keep everything turning.

There is a large number of people who get up in the early morning, every day to go to work and, they work arduously and, long hours, some for next to no money at all, but they’re the people that keep this country going, without them, the country would come to a gridlock, but wind them up enough and, it may still come to a standstill because without the government realising it, they need the people, more than the people need the government.

THE PEOPLE .V. THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION

Police take an Oath of Allegiance when joining the force and, that allegiance is that they sincerely serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, honesty, conscientiousness and impartiality, maintaining basic human rights and, give equivalent due regard to all people to the best of their ability, making sure that peace be kept and protected, to stop all offences against people and property and, that while they hold that office they will to the best of their expertise and understanding, discharge all obligations in a loyal manner as stated by law.

Nevertheless, thousands of police officers are being ordered to obey illegal legislation, which endangers life, and property and, this is in conflict to their oath of office.

Each member of the Police Force and Armed Forces in the United Kingdom has an obligation to go against criminal law and, Senior Officers who have been informed of the details continue in issuing felonious directives, which shadow prohibited laws and, are bound by detention for exacerbating the serious unlawful offence of magnifying the British social code.

Higher-ranking Officers, with their fellow Constables have the ability and, allegiance to apprehend Ministers of Parliament who continue to act out and try to impose criminal laws.

A press release that was announced nearly 1 year ago in assisting the police resist criminality more effectively; the government disclosed that an oath had been planned to produce a policy for Police and Crime commissioners.

The oath is a sworn pledge of impartiality, in a promise to represent each section of the public without fear or favour. It is set out in an attempt to publicly be dedicated to being of service to every member of the public impartially, although at the same time identifying the significance of the running independence of the police service.

We take pleasure in some features of an elective government, but our social code is extremely undemocratic and, in fact, it’s not worth the paper it’s not written on.

The British social code is unwritten or, to be more exact, uncodified. This means that, unlike in most contemporary elective governments, there is no single official paper which describes how we are controlled.

Instead legal wizards point to a number of agreements, regulations and practices, another word for habits, which jointly make up the constitution.

These include:

• Acts of Parliament

• Treaties

• EU Law

• Common Law

• Conventions

• Royal Prerogative

• Works of Authority

This means you need a sizeable amount of learning and in all likelihood a degree in politics or law to fully comprehend how Britain is controlled because it is one of the least comprehensible, least democratic and least explicable constitutions in the democratic world.

Compare this with say, Ireland, which has a straightforward and easy to read written social code, clearly setting out who has what control, how they got it and, how they can be dismissed from office.

In any constitution, power has to come from somewhere and, must be inherent with someone. In Britain, it comes from the Crown and exists with the government and parliament.

The people hardly get a look in, being given only the infrequent opportunity to take part in the formal political process.

One crucial characteristic of the social code is the continuance of doctoral, inexhaustible and explicable control, all of which stem from the Crown, although most of these are exercised by the government, some remain to be exercised by the Queen.

The Queen herself maintains four essential constituted dominance. Exclusively the Queen herself may utilise these powers and, no member of government or advisor may practice these powers on her behalf.

Legally, the Queen has the authority to nominate whoever she desire to be the Prime Minister. Equally, if she so decided, she could commission no one to the office and could keep it empty.

There is no lawful prerequisite that the person named as Prime Minister be a Member of Parliament, but conventionally, the Prime Minister is the front runner of the group with an all-inclusive number of seats in the House of Commons and, as long as there is such a majority and, as long as the party interested in it has a clear front runner, the Queen will have no actual choice, but these things are not always so obvious.

In 1957, when the Conservative party was in office, it was not clear who should succeed Eden as a leader of the party and Prime Minister.

The Queen effectively selected Macmillan above Butler and, in 1963, when Macmillan was too sick to carry on, the Queen, in the words of her biographer, permitted herself to be deceived by Macmillan into once again making sure that Butler did not become Prime Minister, inviting Sir Alec Douglas Home to construct a government.

The Queen’s biographer illustrates this as the biggest political misjudgment of her reign and, eventually, in 1974 when there was a Hung Parliament no one party controlled a large number of seats in the Commons.

This time the party leaders took action wisely effectively keeping the Queen out up until it had become evident that Harold Wilson should be asked to form a minority government.

No Bill can become a legally binding Act of Parliament unless and up until it is given the royal approval. This means that the Queen has a veto on all laws passed in Parliament.

She has the power to refuse her approval to any law for any reason or for none and, were she to utilise this power no court of law could hold it illegal; she has remarkable power.

Even if these powers have not been used in the United Kingdom in numerous years, don’t be fooled. Legally, they still survive.

Not one of these powers has at any time been bestowed upon the Government by our chosen delegates in Parliament. They’re not elected powers, but have been bequeathed by the Government of the day directly from the Crown, avoiding the people altogether.

The Government’s powers of entitlement comprise the following:

• the ability to make agreements

• the ability to declare war and to position Her Majesty’s Armed Forces overseas

• the ability to take on civil servants and to alter the terms and conditions of their employment

• the conduct of diplomacy

• the control of Britain’s overseas territories

• the commissioning and dismissal of ministers

• the appointment of peers

• the grant of honours

• the assertion of public interest immunity

• the granting and revoking of passports

Furthermore, in recent years the exercise of several of these powers has shown to be intensely debatable.

So, it becomes visible that the public has no claim over what goes on in the United Kingdom because it’s all done and dusted by the time we hear about it. In that case why should we vote if we don’t get to express what we would like, or not like and, if that is the case we are no more than farm ants doing all the labour for the Queen Ant and all her institution.

I’m certain that there are a large amount of people out there that would sooner sit back and be instructed what to do, but I for one am not one of those people and contrary to popular belief, I do have a brain and, it’s not sitting on the side in a laboratory being pickled in formaldehyde.

Atos and Other Disability Related Welfare Urban Myths

Some people being announced not unfit for work because of a certain disability is an Urban Myth, or an old wives tale and, that numerous people have died because of this and, this is at the moment being called a Myth as well.

I must say that perhaps the press may have possibly leapt on the wagon and overstated what has actually been said, but they’re not a long way off from the facts.

Nevertheless, when a man who was paralysed in a car crash and, who needs round the clock supervision faces financial and psychological upheaval because it’s been shown he’s fit for work, is that an Urban Myth, or are we going to be advised by some political activist that it’s a Myth and, we shouldn’t regard it as true.

It seems that it’s an Urban Myth that Atos is eliminating a number of people a week, well I’m not knowledgeable of the number and, really don’t care, what I care about is that if Simon Stevens, Independent Disability Issues Consultant, Trainer and Activist wants to equal Human Beings to a tin of baked beans, then evidently he has Disability Issues.

Maybe Atos are not killing these people physically, but they’re killing them mentally because they’re taking away their benefits on the deduction that they’re fit enough to work, when they’ve just spent maybe an hour with that disabled individual, of whom they do not know, have never met prior to this, yet they’re sitting behind a desk, in front of a computer screen making snap findings on a score process.

These people are servants to the government, who are pulling the strings and, telling them what to do and, how to conduct themselves and, allegedly even if that person is too sick to work, they tell them to score them so that they can be fit for work.

As well, if they accomplish getting additional people back into work, they can then have a big fat gratuity for doing so, so in reference, they’re just like the people that they’re rating, only they’re not disabled, but they’re pawns, doing the establishments handiwork.

It was put forward that if Atos were killing people, there would be people taken into custody, court cases and public examination and, at present there are court hearings going on, as for people being taken into custody, well that’s not going to happen and, as for public investigation, it’s too early in the day for that, not enough ruination has been done.

There’s no Urban Myth about hate crime when it comes to disabled people. I’m disabled and, I’ve been the target to loathing numerous times, although by good fortune for myself I’ve not been assaulted, not physically anyhow, nevertheless, my son who is disabled has been an object of hate crimes a great deal and, as well, his friends that are disabled have been as well.

Hate crime happens all over, but more so now that the government have brought in their welfare reforms and, as far as people who work are interested if you breathe, you’re a valid living thing and, you can work and, it actually doesn’t matter whether you have no arms or legs, or on a life support machine, all they see is that they’re paying their taxes to pay for someone who is less able and, when I’ve spoken to some people of whom I can’t name, their viewpoint is that if I was dead, it would be less challenging on their pockets.

As for anti-social behaviour, for my part, if truth be told, I find that younger people are more accommodating to my disability than older people. I assume because I’m older and, they’re younger; my age demonstrates that I should be on a scooter or a wheelchair, because to them I must appear old, but I’m not that old.

As for my son who’s disabled, he gets far more disapproval and, hostility than I do from people his own age because they believe he should be the same as they are, but he’s not. So, it’s not just younger people, but older as well that are responsible for anti-social behaviour regarding disabled people.

An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

CHILD VICTIM DESCRIBED AS SEXUAL PREDATOR

A judge let a pedophile walk out of court without charge after the judge portrayed the 13 year old who was his prey as a “sexual predator”, after taking into consideration the fact that the child appeared older.

It should not matter if a child seems older, that person is still a child and, consequently is under age and, it did not give the 41 year old man the right to misuse her, if she looked older or not.

The judge said that: “The girl was predatory in all her actions and she is sexually experienced.”, but Mr Wilson enticed the teenager to his home in Romford, Essex, where he watched her undress out of her school uniform before she carried out a sex act on him.

She may not have been almost sixteen and, he knew this, yet he still proceeded to permit this young girl to go back to his home and, let her perform sex upon him, as well, he had a horde of foul images and videos portraying child abuse and bestiality and, on that count he should have been imprisoned, even if he was not imprisoned for sexual assault on the young girl, he should have been placed on the Sex Offenders List and, imposed some type of prison term to make sure he did not do this again.

The child was additionally under age and, should have therefore been examined by Social Services because evidently there is something extremely awry when a child of such a young age should be parading herself in front of older men for sexual intercourse.

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this: