Common Sense- Where the hell has it all gone?

The current Government stance on the Gurkhas and their rights to stay in this country have set me thinking. Does anyone else think that they seem to be going out of their way to be as difficult as possible, and do exactly the opposite of what common sense should dictate? And its not just the Central Government that is guilty of this, Local Authorities seem to have the same issue with consistency as far as policy is concerned.

The Gurkhas have proved through sacrifice and dedication that they are decent, hard- working people, and no matter what your views on war, you cannot deny that so many of these people laid down their lives for our country that we have no right to prevent them from living out the rest of their days here with whatever the state can afford to give them. By stark contrast to the obstructions placed in front of the Gurkhas, the fact is, we have a lot of immigrants in this country who have not proved anything at all, least of all their genuine eligibility for maximum benefits etc. I accept that immigrants come here for all sorts of reasons, and I have no problem with that, Britain has long welcomed the desperate and down- trodden- even when we have been in that situation ourselves.

What I am questioning is the kind of mind- set that allows people with dubious intentions to come here, get away with what ever the hell they want, and then goes out of its way to obstruct a group of people who have shown their dedication to their country by dying for it!

As a side note I believe that people like Abu Hamza are here for the benefit of the media,the War on Terror agenda, to stir up as much trouble as possible, and he also gives the Popular media a hate figure! (Osama- Lite!)

And its not just Immigration policy, Social Services are doing their bit in the war against common sense. Roughly the same time as the Baby P case appeared in the papers, there were a rash of 'minor' stories about mothers being threatened with having their un-born babies taken and adopted as soon as they were born. Their terrible crimes? To have had such things as depression in their teens!

In one case I can remember, the girl who was in her early 20's had had depression when she was 15, but had improved greatly and her family GP had testified that she was of sound mind and perfectly fit be a mother. Yet social services had told her that they were going to have to take her baby straight into care for its own protection.

When Baby P died, the social workers said things like, 'oh, we didn't realise that the mother would be a danger', and, even though there was reams of evidence and he was constantly being taken to hospital, 'we couldn't go against her human rights and take the child away', 'there was no evidence that they deliberatley harmed him (hundreds of times!) so we couldn't justify putting him in care'.

So let me get this straight- one group of social workers can justify taking a child by basing everything on the fact that the mother previously had depression, and another group, despite the fact the baby had already been hurt, couldn't take the child into care?

The list of obvious contradictions goes on and on. If you already have your eyes open you'll know just how frustrating the minor things can be, as well as the major lies and diversions!

What the hell is going on here? Why is everyone in 'authority' determined to do the opposite of what any half- decent person would do? Is it deliberate? Or just huge incompetence and inconsistency?

I think its important to know the answer to those questions, I think once we know, the bigger stuff will start to fall into place.........!

Any Ideas?

Oh! my Darling.

Guaranteed jobs for the unemployed! If there were jobs there wouldn't be any unemployed. Living on credit! wasn't that what got us into the mess in the first place, now the government are gonna borrow wheel barrows full of it to try and get us out of the shit, when all the time we're sinking deeper into it. It's gonna be a long hot summer. I predict a riot! and how long before the police start using the anti terrorism act to stop people filming or taking pictures of them. Just a few thoughts I had while staring at a blank word document.

State Fascism- the circle comes round again!

Hmmmm, the G20 protests............

I personally would have loved to have gone along and voiced my disgust at our current, grossly bloated corporate system, but I didn't because the media and police hype made me instantly suspicious. There are many incidents in history of provocateurs planted in protests and strikes, it's a simple equation, if they don't want what you're saying to reach the ears of the general public, trouble is conveniently started and the real message becomes distorted. In the end the only thing they get to see in their living rooms on the evening news are pictures of violence and whatever the police do in that situation can be justified by saying they were provoked.

It seems to me that because the vast majority of people who are anti- corporate/ anti- globalization etc. could actually give a reasoned debate on their points of view, our so- called leaders decided long before the event that something had to be done to distract people.

This neatly explains both the convenient pockets of violence that I'm sure were 'encouraged' in some way and the attempted provocation by the police. The overall aim of the police violence meted out to Ian Tomlinson, the woman in the crowd, and I'm sure many others was to get the protesters to lash out at the police- giving them an excuse to start really cracking down, not just at that protest but ANY OTHER TIME after where the basic right to legitimate dissent might be exercised.

It has happened before many times- and we have evidence they are starting to use the same old tactics. Anyone who is familiar with protests in the 70's and 80's will remember such illuminated ideas as the Special Patrol Group. If you will also remember, it was a favourite tactic of the police to remove their identifying numbers in order to get away with extreme acts of violence.

During the infamous Battle of the Beanfield in 1985 the police were incredibly brutal, when watching the clip below, please bear in mind that in some of those buses and vans are New Age Traveller FAMILIES- not 18 year old middle- class idiots who get daddy to bail them out from court when they let loose for the afternoon (that happened after the G20!)

There were kids in those caravans and buses!

Also notice the lack of ID on the riot squads-

WARNING: Police brutality happens when they think they will be unaccountable for their action!

Please watch this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OOew1UAT3k

I am using this as an example of why the fact that the police thought it was ok to hide their faces and prevent their identification was a not an 'anti- terror' measure, or whatever their excuse will be, this is a way of creating trouble without having to explain their actions- pure and simple. If they would go this far for people who just wanted to celebrate the solstice at Stonehenge, what will they do when people are really angry?

Throughout recent history Police forces have been used for the furthering of the goals of some really unpleasant groups. The obvious ones are the Gestapo, the KGB and the current Chinese police force, I could go on, but you know all that anyway. Why do we think our Government would be any different? It's a nasty thought but most of the major dictatorships in our history started out as “Left- wing” parties. In Germany it was the National Socialists, in parts of Asia- Communism, why would Labour not turn out any different? All the hallmarks are there! The only difference today is that there are many who are aware that “Left and Right” in politics do not exist, we have to get past labels and see that there is only one way to govern and that is through Common Sense.

They are trying to prevent the free and natural expression of dissent, the basic right to question the system we are forced to exist in. By any means necessary- getting or encouraging small, well- placed groups to cause violence or letting a few cops stir up peaceful demonstrators by giving them a sneaky dig or two.

What's the answer to this?

How do you have a successful demonstration where the General public can actually hear what you're trying to say? Where the legitimate questions people have can be brought out into the open and debated properly?

How do you express yourself to the people who are in charge when they obviously couldn't care less what you think, they'll go ahead and do whatever the hell they like?

Is this a democracy we are living in?

WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS ALL ABOUT?

I dunno, it's up to you!

If u wanna join in with it all, leave yer details in the comments, ie email address, and I'll register you with blogger then you can post away till yer hearts content about whatever you fancy ranting about, so long as it aint any racist, sexist or homophobic shite. Legitimate targets only; politicians, celebrities, whoever...lets Twat 'em!