Sunday, 29 April 2012

Labour and Lib Dem councillors provide character references for rape accused

Here's something the controlled media will not be telling you with regards developments at the Rochdale child rape trial taking place at Liverpool Crown Court.

In a move that will shock many, allegedly Labour and Liberal Democrat councillors from Rochdale Council have provided character references for at least one of the accused men.

Councillor Aftab Hussain (Labour, Smallbridge and Firgrove ward) stated: "I have known Abdul Qayyum for 10 years.  He is a hard-working person. He comes across very well and I have never seen or heard of any wrongdoing before this case."

Meanwhile, Coun Zulfiqar Ali (Liberal Democrat, Central Rochdale ward) wrote: "I have known Mr Qayyum since he arrived in Rochdale. He has been involved in community activities and always makes time to help others. Abdul is one of those men the community has really taken to - they are really proud to have him as part of the wider family. He is hard-working and dedicated."

So in the eyes of these trusted councillors, being a hard worker somewhat offsets the accusations of rape.  Surely the welfare of our young and vulnerable children would be better served by people who understand what morality is, or am I wrong?

Friday, 13 April 2012

Killing The Bill Of Rights - Both Sides Of The Atlantic

On both sides of the Atlantic, there is a drive by traitorous "leaders" to dispose of our respective Bills of Rights.

On New Year's Day, Mike Adams, editor of, wrote:

“One of the most extraordinary documents in human history -- the Bill of Rights -- has come to an end under President Barack Obama. Derived from sacred principles of natural law, the Bill of Rights has come to a sudden and catastrophic end with the President's signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a law that grants the U.S. military the legal right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder.

This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused. It is a system of outright government tyranny against the American people, and it effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights.

In what will be remembered as the most traitorous executive signing ever committed against the American people, President Obama signed the bill on New Year's Eve, a time when most Americans were engaged in the consumption of alcohol. It seems appropriate, of course, since no intelligent American could accept the tyranny of this bill if they were sober.

This is the law that will cement Obama's legacy in the history books as the traitor who nullified the Bill of Rights and paved America's pathway down a road of tyranny that will make Nazi Germany's war crimes look like child's play. If Bush had signed a law like this, liberals would have been screaming impeachment!

Obama is, as Mike Adams says, a traitor. Similarly, here in the UK, there is a major government initiative to expunge our own Bill of Rights from history. This initiative is also being driven by traitors, specifically Nick Clegg and Kenneth Clarke.

The other traitors on the Commission are:

•Professor Sir David Edward QC
•Jonathan Fisher QC
•Martin Howe QC
•Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws QC
•Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC
•Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky
•Professor Philippe Sands QC
•Anthony Speaight QC
The Commission on a Bill of Rights, established in March 2011, "will investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in UK law, and protects and extend our liberties."

A discussion paper was issued in August 2011, asking:

“Do you think we need a UK Bill of Rights?

Only a traitor could respond with anything other than "no!" For Britain already has a Bill of Rights, passed in 1689. But our Bill of Rights is a ratification of an earlier common law contract between the people and the Crown; namely the Declaration of Right. As such, neither Parliament, nor any independent "commission" has any right to mess with it.

The Commission's discussion paper denies the existance of one of our most fundamental constitutional documents.

But Why Would They Do That?
Because the Bill of Rights limits Parliament! It states:

“no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm.

That alone should make it clear why our present Parliamentary traitors would wish to have it expunged, since they are constantly in breach of that one clause.

Other constitutional rights given by the Bill of Rights

•The right to bear arms
•The right to petition the Sovereign
•Free men cannot be imprisoned without cause
•The Government cannot arrest any man because he disagrees with the Government’s policies
•Habeas corpus is not to be denied
•No person will be compelled to make loans to the King, and there will be no tax without the approval of Parliament
•Soldiers and sailors will not be billeted on civilians
•Government will not impose martial law during peacetime
The right to bear arms gives every person the right to self defence using reasonable force, including deadly force if appropriate. (Using tragic events as an excuse to remove that right has historically been the work of governments with good reason to fear their people - governments intent on some kind of future totalitarian control of their populations.)

So, the Bill of Rights limits Parliament. On the other hand, European "human rights" legislation limits the people. It presumes that people have no rights, except those few crumbs thrown at them by the state.

The Commission is due to report by the end of 2012.

Ladies & gents, the legal maxim is qui tacet consentire videtur - he who is silent is taken to agree.

Where are our useless politicians once again? Planning to destroy the former BNP councillor probably! They will need to do better.

Well you let Habeas Corpus go without a fight and now we get trial without jury. I tried but no one would listen.

Robert Green Convicted In Court With No Jury
Scotland Proves Itself To Be Paedophile Capital Of The World
On Tuesday, 24th January in Stonehaven Court, Scotland, Robert Green was found guilty of Breach of the Peace, and breaking some of his bail conditions. Three other charges were dropped.

Barely reported in the mainstream press, this man has been found guilty of ‘crimes’ for daring to expose the facts concerning the rape and abuse of Hollie Greig at the hands of senior members of the Scottish establishment. Even before the latest 6 day hearing, the Scottish ‘justice’ system had spent over £500,000 trying to shut Robert up.

Far from helping him to investigate the abuses and bring forward evidence already existing, Robert was subjected to a clear collaborative campaign by the Scottish State system. The criminal conspiracy reaches to the very top of Scotland’s government and following the case it now makes Scotland the paedophile capital of the world. Do as you like and the state will protect you.

Reports from the public who were present state:

Robert Green did not receive a fair trial. There was no jury and he was denied key witnesses for the defence. Dame Elish Angiolini was clearly too important in the elite system to appear despite the fact that the failure to bring abusers to account occurred under her hand. Presiding Sheriff Principal Bowen simply accepted an objection by the Prosecution that she was irrelevant to the case. Robert had already been denied the Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan as a witness for the defence, despite unanimous support for his citation by all his legal representatives, past and present.

On taking the witness stand, therefore, Robert asked if he could make a statement on the record, but was refused by the Sheriff. Answering his Counsel’s questions with his customary eloquence and clarity, Robert stressed that his main object throughout the activity which had offended a few people in Scotland was to secure an investigation of Hollie’s allegations. He was able to quote from Dr Eva Harding’s letter in which Sylvia Major is named as an abuser and stated that this individual was sitting in the court.

Throughout Mr Lamb’s cross-examination Robert reiterated his belief that he was acting in the public interest in attempting to protect vulnerable citizens. He explained that he had tried every possible avenue prior to taking the action which had given rise to his being prosecuted, and that Anne Greig had also been directing her concerns through the normal legal channels since 2000. By the time of his arrest therefore, 10 years had passed during which time the authorities had obstructed every attempt to secure justice.

Robert also continued to stress that his efforts were designed to instigate an OPEN, INDEPENDENT INQUIRY into all aspects of Hollie’s case, including the abduction of Anne and the highly suspicious death of Robert Greig.

In the final afternoon session both sides summed up and Mr Lamb skillfully had Robert acquitted of 3 of the 5 charges against him. However the Sheriff ruled that in his opinion Robert was guilty of Breach of the Peace and of breaking some of his bail conditions.

Sentencing has been deferred until Friday 17th February, until which time the bail conditions on Robert remain in force.