Canada, Jason Kenney and George Galloway : the ongoing 'banning' saga...

Seen and/or heard much about brave British MP, George Galloway being "banned" by Canada?

Courtesy a sweaty, stinking lying, self serving, duplicitous, piece of political slime, christened Jason Kenney?



Interested at all in telling the truth? The type of truth that so often hurts certain so-called 'elected representatives' of 'we the people'?

Interested in integrity? Democracy? Honesty? Free speech? Freedom of movement? Freedom from harassment and/or hindrance?

If so, you absolutely MUST go to Gert's place ...

... then, to see the unarguably unmissable, second 'installment' of this sad & sorry saga, slip straight across here.

Incidentally, if you're a British Passport holder yourself, we strongly suggest seeing precisely what it says inside its front cover.

On second thoughts, being the big hearted old Brits that we are, we'll save you some of your precious time.

Her Britannic Majesty's
Secretary of State
Requests and requires in the
Name of Her Majesty
all those whom it may concern to allow
the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance,
and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary.

Incidentally, don't just take our word for it ; check it out yourself when you next get the chance to.

Saddam Hussein's Long Lost Letter to America ...

Remember Saddam Hussein?



Two years ago today (7th July 2006) Saddam Hussein sent a hand written letter to 'The American People'.

We doubt many of them even received it, let alone ever read it.

So here's their second chance - since we have said letter right here - in it's absolutely uncensored entirety.

Isn't it somewhat surprising though that so many Americans, along with plenty of others, were so easily able/allowed to see something as shocking as this?

Anyway, can we sincerely suggest everyone starts asking themselves some (very relevant) questions?



The above photograph of Saddam, by the way, was taken just five short months after he wrote his letter.

(Cross posted at 'appletree')

Wikileak dot org: Banned? Censored? Wiped Out? Or Worse?

Anyone belonging to the fast shrinking sections of certain Western citizens who still steadfastly refuse to accept the fact that they're living in Big Brother Land -should stop squandering their (mistakenly imagined), valuable time reading this story - right here.

Since we ourselves long ago faced up to the fact that some simple souls neither can nor ever will, see the ends of their own noses on their own faces.

So stuff 'em. That's their problem. We should worry. Not.

However, all those who enter here with open minds, an IQ of at least double figures, are not yet completely brain dead and a still possess any semblance of a thirst for truths -- study these selected snippets.

Whistle-blower site taken offline

The case was brought by lawyers working for a Swiss bank

A controversial[Wikipedia-like], website that allows whistle-blowers to anonymously post government and corporate documents has been taken offline in the US.

Wikileaks.org, as it is known, was cut off from the internet following a California court ruling, the site says.

(snip)

Wikileaks claimed that the order was "unconstitutional" and said that the site had been "forcibly censored".

(snip)

The court hearing took place last week and Dynadot blocked access from Friday evening.

Wikileaks says it was not represented at the hearing because it was "given only hours notice" via e-mail.

A document signed by Judge Jeffery White, who presided over the case, ordered Dynadot to follow six court orders.

(snip)

The site was founded in 2006 by dissidents, journalists, mathematicians and technologists from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa.

It so far claims to have published more than 1.2 million documents.

Read the rest of this BBC report -- if it's not been blocked nor buggered about with.

*(Cross posted at Appletree)

Lord Paddy Ashdown On Our Global Security Threat(s): Is The BBC Biased?

*



Increasingly, it seems that no matter how much truth and/or sense anyone any longer speaks, be they 'known' (like Lord [Paddy] Ashdown) or not, it matters not to much of mainstream media.

Especially when it concerns something 'the establishment' considers (even the slightest bit), sensitive.



Here's a clip from an item published today by (the often, much maligned), AOL.

Global threats to national security

The battlelines in the fight to maintain national security need redrawing, taking urgent account of increased threats from climate change, disease, poverty and energy insecurity, a think-tank has warned.

The left-leaning Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said a security strategy based only on preventing military or terrorist attacks was redundant.

(snip)

Intended to inform a report from the commission later this year, it identified five key factors in the new security landscape. These were - globalisation and power diffusion, global poverty and failed states, climate change, the growth of political Islam, and socio-economic vulnerability.

(snip)

"Terrorism is a very real threat but we must not allow it to dominate discussion about national security.

Read the rest of this well balanced report.



How different does the same story sound when read in the well watered down form as released by dear old 'aunty Beeb'?

Imagine how much impartial information those of us relying solely on supposedly trusted proffesional sources such as the BBC would be denied (be it by accident or by design), if it weren't for our ability (and desire) to ferret about the internet a bit, for the benefit of both ourselves and others.

Read the rest of the BBC's so obviously biased-by-ommission, offering.



Well, what do you think?

* (Cross posted at Appletree)

Can Great Britain's Greatest Athletes Be 'Commanded' To Kow-Tow To China?

*
I suck. He sucks. She sucks. You suck. They suck. We suck.

And so it goes, and goes, and goes.

Such statements seem commonplace nowadays, especially in the states. And while we freely confess that we can cuss, curse & swear as well as anyone can, we don't - and never did - have much time at all for those particular expressions.

However, there's always an exception to every rule.



Kow-towing, most certainly sodding does suck!

As does this shocking snippet of a sad state of current affairs news item published in today's 'Mail on Sunday'.

Britain kow tows to China as athletes are forced to sign no criticism contracts

British Olympic chiefs are to force athletes to sign a contract promising not to speak out about China's appalling human rights record – or face being banned from travelling to Beijing.

The move – which raises the spectre of the order given to the England football team to give a Nazi salute in Berlin in 1938 – immediately provoked a storm of protest.

The controversial clause has been inserted into athletes' contracts for the first time and forbids them from making any political comment about countries staging the Olympic Games.

(snip)

From the moment they sign up, the competitors – likely to include the Queen's granddaughter Zara Phillips and world record holder Paula Radcliffe – will be effectively gagged from commenting on China's politics, human rights abuses or illegal occupation of Tibet.

Prince Charles has already let it be known that he will not be going to China, even if he is invited by Games organisers.

His views on the Communist dictatorship are well known, after this newspaper revealed how he described China's leaders as “appalling old waxworks” in a journal written after he attended the handover of Hong Kong.

Read the rest of this sorry story, if you've a strong enough stomach.

Shame?

Sadly, it seems there's no such thing as far as the stupid shitheads at the British Olympic Association (BOA) are concerned.

*