On the separation of powers.
We are told this hinders corruption within governments, and I’m of the opinion it probably does. To that end, within the framework of the secular system that forces itself upon the way I live my life, I support it.
This is why I think David Davis should be supported on the 42 day syspension of basic human rights. It is also why I deeply oppose the DNA database, biometrics and CCTV.
Browsing through my Manchester Evening News (M.E.N.) last night something caught my eye…
This lays another brick in the now large wall. A wall of a fascists prison within which anyone can and will be thrown when the all powerful government, for whatever reason, desides to use DNA/biometric data for political ends. And it will. You bet it! And those who look for these signs will tell you, it is already happening.
It is nothing short of madness what we do today in terms of the identity based society.
–
I have to wonder about those discs that the government “lost”. As the above MEN story points out, If that data was now in the hands of those driving the NWO in all its forms, I wouldn’t be in the least bit surprized.
–
–
–
–
Living with the Conspiracy 24-7 
I listened to an interview, David Icke on the Alex Jones show. David is running against David Davis, not to win, but to fire a salvo about the international scale of the police state agenda.
He mentioned the names of a number of people rushing to support DD in his campaign. Among them were Rothschilds, ID card and biometric companies and the like. I cannot remember the names as they came thick and fast, but i will listen again today to see if i can follow it up.
What it means is that Davis will play the part of champion of civil liberties, only to impose a different method of control.
StefZ and Lord Patel (amongst others) also show us that people in the DD campaign are pro ID card and the rest. DD himself said he was in favour of 28 days too.
I read on Ickes site that DD refused to debate the issues of freedom with him, which even if DD thinks Icke is on the fringe, then it shows a high degree of insincerity on the part of DD. {Please note I originally said ‘sincerity’ which is the opposite of what I wanted to say}
Well many respected voices have now given large cautions against supporting DD, and I guess there swaying my previous stance on the matter, but I’m in uitter despair at the lack of any effective opposition (which by nature I guess, needs to be organised) to whats happening.
For example if you offered to champion the cause you might have people not follow you becasue you might imply sympathy for a belief in Ickes reptilian presence. I would not have many people joining me becasue I think eventually there is a good change the world population will become unsustainable at some stage and I believe in peak oil…. All the while Parliament and Congress pass more and more laws taking us into outright fascism.
Its frustrating being of a conspiraloon hue.
LW
Here are the names from the interview.
Ed Vaizey MP. He seems to be on the good side of civil liberties, and his voting record displays this. He is however a signatory of the Henry Jackson Society, a think tank with the likes of Richard Perle, William Kristol, James Woolsey and Robert Cagan of the Neocon brand, and closer to home names like Dearlove, ex MI6, and Stelser, Rothschild bank man and writer associated with Murdoch’s line of papers…Research ongoing.
Patrick Mercer MP – His voting record also slings along the lines of civil liberties, but he has interests with Blue Hackle (British Blackwater style company), and to an Electronic Passport, biometric and ID card company called Heart Group or something like that. I am still trying to locate that link.
Anyway, I don’t understand why DD wouldn’t debate with DI. If he thought DI was fringe, he could slap him down in public and make his mark. I think DI would win a debate with DD pretty much hands down.
Despite the reptilian thingy, Icke knows his stuff.
Yes DI would slaughter DD in a discussion. Thats maybe why DD avoids one.
(sorry about the confusing typo before)