PDA

View Full Version : Was the Election to Divert Us From This??


sukyspook
17-07-2008, 09:31 AM
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
David Davis - Another blody silly conspiracy theory from Lord Patel

There are many observers, players, commentators, on the Westminster scene puzzled by ;
1. David Davis MP's resignation
2. The response of David Cameron in actively campaigning for and with him
3. The muted response from his Party
4. The total and rapid unwillingness of the Labour Party to field a candidate
5. The total and rapid unwillingness of the Liberal Party to field a candidate
6. The curious case of Shami Chakrabarti very publicly swinging the non - political Liberty behind David Davis's campaign
7. The curious and shadowy role of an expensive and very well connected PR company, Fleishman-Hillard in so swiftly erecting David Davis's website (not to mention the source of funds to do it etc.,)
7 (a) The clumsy attempt to conceal the role of Fleishman-Hillard
8. The extraordinary coverage that the BBC gave to David Davis across the spectrum, Radio 5 Live phone in (1.5 hr), You and Yours (1 hr), Womans Hour (20 mins), Question Time (1 hr), Any Questions (1 hr) (plus repeat and Any Answers), Newsnight ...not to mention endless news items covering the election without any opposing or dissenting views
9. The role of the new Total Politics magazine that has so mysteriously appeared, fully financed by unknown sources, and with the ubiquitous help of Shami Chakrabarti OBE , Governer of the Ditchley Foundation along with Lady Dame Jane Baroness Pauline Neville Jones.

There was however, a curiously congruent and interlocking series of events also going on, which received virtually no coverage and certainly no discussion....Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.

June 18th The Lords Davis ruling on anonymous witnesses published (but of course known of within Government circles)
June 18th - Also the day when David Davis applies for the Chiltern Hundreds

June 21st (Saturday) war criminal Jack Straw announces he is going to rush through legislation to allow anonymous witnesses

June 23rd Judge Paget halts trial using anonymous witnesses

On BBC June 24th Commissioner Bob Quick, for example, called the ruling “catastrophic” and criticised the criminal justice system for “too much principle and not enough pragmatism”. (This was the guy who with Sir Ian Blair couldn't remember how any terrorist plots there were when asked by MP's. see Counter terrorism Bill ..and the Old Bill... Fiction is stronger than the truth )

June 26th “Chaos as Law Lords ruin trials” (The Sun, 25 June); “Anarchyis unleashed” (The Sun, 25 June); and “Terrorists, murderers and other violent criminals will escape justice unless emergency laws are passed within weeks” (Daily Mail, 26 June).“Britain could witness unrestrained violence like the slaughter in Zimbabwe” ( Sun 25 June). (All these quoted in Liberty brief Page 4 - "Thankfully" says Liberty n contrast to the Press "Thankfully, the response of Government and opposition parties to the decision did not follow suit. It was, in contrast measured and informed."

June 26th the Government makes routine sotto voce outline the plans for legislation with dates for debate in Commons on 8th July and Lords on 10th July (Bill published July 3rd). This after cross party "consultation".

26th June East Riding of Yorkshire council announced the long, long , varied and entertaining list of accepted candidates and date of election to be 2 weeks on Thursday 10th July.

So the Bill is to be debated (?) 8/9/10th July which means press comment could be 9th/10th/11th but curiously enough they were busy looking at Gemma Garretts teeth and tits and Elvis and the Cow girl.

Of course David Davis gets his seat back, without actually having said a fucking thing, except a few mildly critical remarks about useless CCTV pictures, and DNA databases. But he and Shami had very effectively hi-jacked the so called debate on "civil liberties" - and she hen goes on to pat herself and David on the back (see top).

Debate on the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill, somehow, slips by and " 42 days or not 42 days " has monopolised any concern about stealing fundamental liberties and freedoms and the proper conduct of trials. Psyops success, in fucking spades.

What about dear sweet, doe eyed, scarf adjusting, Shami Chakrabarti offering TLC to DD in late at night , heart to heart's on the cellphone? The ex Home Office lawyer whose non-political Liberty winds up supporting a politician's election, one who agrees to 28 days and the loss of habeas corpus.

Shami Chakrabarti the ex Home Office lawyer who leads the non-political Liberty but ends up helping edit Total Politics ?

Shami Chakrabarti the ex Home Office lawyer who leads the non-political Liberty who provided a brief for the Government which agrees in principle to the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.

Shami Chakrabarti the ex Home Office lawyer who leads the non-political Liberty who provided a brief for the Government written by Jago Russell & Michael Spencer which agrees in principle to the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.

Prior to his post at Liberty, Jago Russell worked as a legal specialist in parliament where he advised select committees on a range of matters including counter-terrorism laws and corporate accountability. He has particular expertise in international and comparative human rights law, the UK government’s anti-terrorism policy, constitutional and criminal justice issues and has written and spoken on these and other matters for parliamentary and wider audiences.

Nu Labour has an eye for colourful ladies they can promote Baronesses, Vadera, Amos, Scotland .... arise Baroness Shami Chakrabarti of the Pashminas .... you have earned it.... and who knows maybe to join her soulmate and phone-sex pal David will reluctantly pass on his seat at the next election to a Tory hopeful and pass onwards and upwards as Baron Davis of the Blinding Diversion

Of course Liberty will need a new leader ... someone with the right ideas.. step forward Jago Russell.

PS : Here's a nice summertime job for a media studies student .. and god knows there are plenty of them... A good detailed annotated Timeline, fleshed out with details of all press coverage / comment , of the above.

Read original post here:

http://www.postmanpatel.blogspot.com/

I recommend you visit postman's site every day - you'll laugh, you'll cry but at least you'll remain informed!

micklemus
17-07-2008, 10:45 AM
Interesting post.

The "Journal of a Sham Election, By a Concerned Citizen" on the main website is interesting too. Reading that article, a couple of occult points came to mind -

1. Mental focus and spiritual intent/respect are very closely associated.
2. You don't have to display the true meaning of whatever is being focused on/worshipped for it to have the desired effect. So hidden objectives can become accepted norms just as easily as open objectives.

Therefore, as DI says for example, in churches it doesn't matter that people think they are praising Jesus; they are still practising an ancient sun worship religion involving other characters from further back in Middle Eastern history. So.......

....if David Davis actually (and contrary to the public show we witnessed) backs the Big Brother state and his campaign is backed by the very people who will take it to the next stage (see that journal and your post) then the enormous public support he received nationwide and ultimately in his constituency is in an occult sense taken as overwhelming support for moving everything on a notch and not as support for stopping the surveillance society. He's a place man, a patsy, and the public have swallowed it.

But in any event, if you want to just look at this in a more 'normal' day-to-day sense, why on earth would this man resign and then allow himself to be re-elected back into the Conservative Party? Surely if he was truly standing for principles he would have sought re-election as an independent politician? That alone made it obvious that something wasn't right.

If David Davis has done something good then that upswell of public opinion will be reflected in changes in national politics and a movement away from the Big Brother mentality. But my money's on everything accelerating in the other direction.

That's why I chose not to give any attention to this by election. The whole thing stank. Although the plus side is that DI clearly raised some awareness. Sadly the media coverage has caused people to become more polarised than ever though.

planetsadhana
17-07-2008, 01:45 PM
The whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth, initially I was hoping that in some way this could be a catylst event, but all it is has done is reinforce the fact that politicians can not be believed, the press are lazy incompetent and are failing in any way to report any real issues, and the general public are apathetic beyond belief.

I felt it was a brave move by DI to stand in this campaign even to prove the above points and that the sham that is politics is to some extent unbreachable.

The whole country/world system has got to the point now where any maverick thinking is dismissed by politicians/press and the people, it just doesnt even get a chance, its unbelivable that it seems the vast majority have bought into this, the whole political system here is so blurred why cant people see that.

I recently watched a documentary on how worried the american authorities were over John lennons "outhere" thinkings about peace and counter culture, that eventually he was killed, now the "Big Brother" state is so advanced that if you think anywhere outside the status Quo you are treated as a figure of ridicule not only by the political system and press but the very people you are trying to awaken.

cacadores
17-07-2008, 03:54 PM
......... He's a place man, a patsy, and the public have swallowed it..May I ask you if you have evidence? Or should we conclude this is mearly speculation?

And saying 'swallowed it' is a means of mildly insulting most people, and implies you know better than they and us. We don't know why they voted, do we? Did you do a survey?:confused:
I think not!
......... But in any event, if you want to just look at this in a more 'normal' day-to-day sense, why on earth would this man resign and then allow himself to be re-elected back into the Conservative Party? Surely if he was truly standing for principles he would have sought re-election as an independent politician? That alone made it obvious that something wasn't right..There are differing strands of thought within the Conservative Party, along with many, many people who support Davies within the party. By standing on this issue at an election, he coalesces other Conservative party members onto his side (and that could be useful group of people), and makes it far more difficult for the leader to back-track.
......... That's why I chose not to give any attention to this by election.You responded to this topic. The topic is about the election.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

micklemus
17-07-2008, 04:30 PM
Well thank you for that incisive cross examination. As I said in my previous post, I was referring to the thread starter and the "Journal of a Sham Election, By a Concerned Citizen" and relaying my opinion and feelings on the by election. You're very welcome to yours too.

I don't think there are many subjects here which would pass any tests in a court of law but that doesn't necessarily denounce their validity. I believe the idea is to exchange views and information.

Besides, I hope your analysis is correct so there's nowt to argue about as far as I'm concerned and I have no desire to change your opinion anyway. I just don't happen to share your optimism over how this leaves the English political landscape.

And yes I did respond to the topic, which unless I'm mistaken is about information connected with the by election. The by election is over and, yes, I had nothing to do with it.

;)

sukyspook
17-07-2008, 08:01 PM
I'm on record at this forum expressing my belief that David should leave the election alone - having said that - I went up to Hull to hear his talk which has proved to be a wonderful tool for awakening more and more people to The Truth.

The 'system' - as it stands, is in the hands of what can best be described as a 'junta' or mafia-like extortion 'cult'. There is more than enough info on the Internet exposing those organisations and many individuals guilty of treason and many other charges. The sad thing is that as the same system is 'set up' - the armed forces and the police DO NOT work for we, the people but work for 'The Firm' as so lovingly described by members of the 'royal family' or 'The firm within the firm' as described in this 6 x part series which all should watch here:
http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=4365
= Inside the Brotherhood.....

I keep tabs on postman patel's website daily as there are some rare gems on there which are more than enlightening. Also, keep a daily eye on www.aangirfan.blogspot.com as there is much Truth to be found there too.

This is WW3 and it's being waged in our bodies/minds and souls for control of the entire planet.

Suit yourselves if you're still laughing at such a theory.

"I can't show you the matrix - I can only show you the door" Neo, The Matrix

cacadores
17-07-2008, 10:12 PM
So if I disagree with you it's because I'm 'fooled' and haven't been 'awakened'?

Have you got a cerebral cortex, perchance?

Yes?

Me too.

Then why constantly try to persuade us not to use it?

I'm genuinely interested:).

cacadores
20-07-2008, 10:44 PM
Perhaps you got the wrong end of the stick,
You were saying I've been 'fooled' and you implied I need 'awakening'. You haven't really said why you think that.
You then go on to accuse me of 'having faith in those who actually work for the system' and say that's 'my perogative'.

And yet you know nothing of my opinions. It's most odd.

talkingchimp
20-07-2008, 10:45 PM
fooled me once.....lol

cacadores
20-07-2008, 10:50 PM
And yes I did respond to the topic, which unless I'm mistaken is about information connected with the by election. The by election is over and, yes, I had nothing to do with it.;)
So even though you responded to a topic called ''Was the Election to Divert Us From This?? ''
you wrote:
''......... That's why I chose not to give any attention to this by election''.:rolleyes:

Perhaps by coming to terms with the sometimes glaring inconsistansies within oursleves, we might be in a better position to appreciate the inconsistancies in the wider world.

What do you think?

celtic isis
20-07-2008, 11:45 PM
I was saying earlier that what i've noticed now (from this election and resulting media coverage) it is now 'in' to suggest that the government is 'big brother state' minded, whereas, DAvid Icke has been saying this for donkey's years and ridiculed mercilessly for his trouble and now it's 'in', but only 'in' to admit it when most of the implications of what Big Brother state actually means are left out, and that it doesn't just boil down to the the security cams everywhere...when they're the least of our worries!

The PTB have realised that joe public has begun to wake up a tad, the game/plot has gotten so obvious at this point that they have to take part of Icke's truth and haul parts of it over to their side with their own spin on the term with their own puppet politicians crying out for change, all leading the people to think oh ok, it's like that then, see no conspiracy the government agrees!! type scenario...

those fookers!!! :mad:

micklemus
21-07-2008, 09:01 AM
So even though you responded to a topic called ''Was the Election to Divert Us From This?? ''
you wrote:
''......... That's why I chose not to give any attention to this by election''.:rolleyes:

Perhaps by coming to terms with the sometimes glaring inconsistansies within oursleves, we might be in a better position to appreciate the inconsistancies in the wider world.

What do you think?

My friend don't try to be clever here as there really isn't an issue. Your gripe was that I said I had nothing to do with the election yet I'm commenting here on this thread. I would invite you to read my posts again because there is no inconsistency. It's true - I had nothing whatsoever to do with the election in any capacity. I didn't get involved in it and I didn't support it That doesn't somehow preclude me from commenting on information connected with it post event.

What are you saying - no one has the right to say anything about anything unless they're directly connected with the subject matter?