Operation "Free Britain"
British citizens deserve no less...
New in the Website
Seldom does evil disclose its mechanisms; yet, only by understanding these can we protect ourselves. Matthew 4:1-11provides an awesome lesson on this when it describes the temptation of Jesus by Satan. First Satan attempts to create doubt: “If thou be the Son of God…” In the second attempt, Satan exploits the doubt created by saying “cast thyself down,” in other words: “I don’t believe you; prove that by violating your Faith.” Finally, after everything else fails, an offer is made: “All these things will I give thee…” Failing the test is easy if Satan’s temptation mechanism is not understood. Unluckily, the mechanisms of Western media and governments are extremely similar to the descriptions in Matthew.
Modern Western regimes behave similarly to the text above. More often than not, evil arrives disguised as Angel of Light (2 Corinthians 11: 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light); many succumb to its charming smile, dandy haircut, and proper manners, especially if he looks like a popular comedian, a true friend of the people. In his still short tenure as British Prime Minister, David Cameron – slightly resembling Chandler from Friends – is rapidly amassing an awful reputation, which includes savage violations of human rights. That’s to be expected from a graduate of Eton and Oxford, the finest wombs of slavers, colonizers, and energy pirates. It would be unfair to center this article on David Cameron, as several of the events about to be included predates his period as Prime Minister, yet, he apparently will soon outshine his predecessors. Such an early event was recently criticized by Cameron himself following the publication of the Bloody Sunday Lord Saville Report on June 15, 2010: "What happened on Bloody Sunday was both unjustified and unjustifiable. It was wrong,” and: "These are shocking conclusions to read and shocking words to have to say. But you do not defend the British army by defending the indefensible; " enlightened words from an unenlightened leader. The British Army is indefensible on moral grounds.
In order to properly put this in context, I must make a detour through the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, on the situation in Libya, which was adopted on March 17, 2011. Under this resolution thousands of air attacks on the Libyan civilian population were conducted by NATO. By no way these can be defined as good actions. How comes the UN is commanding evil? Here is where we must understand the methods used by evil. The resolution doesn’t allow such attacks; on the contrary, it defines the need to protect civilians. After it was adopted, and knowing nobody would bother reading it (sorry to have spoiled that!), Nato’s Terror Marshals did what they always wanted to, completely ignoring the binding decision; after all, who will dare attacking – or even denounce – them.
Reading the resolution is important, especially the parts denouncing the Gaddafi regime. It’s too long to be brought here, and since it is readily accessible on the web, I’ll cite only a few sentences:
Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
Most readers would probably accept my summarizing this as a call to protect civilians from the abusive powers of their state by military methods. Other parts of the resolution deal with technicalities of the military operation proposed.
While reading this, I couldn’t but remember David Cameron’s sly smile. As a member f the UN Security Council with veto power, the UK voted in favor of Resolution 1973. Great, thus, I can assume David Cameron accepts the principles defined there.
Hello, Chandler, how are you doing? Turning the cannons around on Britain is very easy. So easy, it isn’t possible to publish all the available material in a single webpage while keeping it readable. So abundant is the material, it forces me to concentrate on three key events, and even then to keep them down to the minimum, despite the juiciness of the details.
Let’s begin with a moral assessment of the UK leaders. The United Kingdom Parliamentary Expenses Scandal was triggered in 2009 by the Telegraph Group publishing of expense claims made by members of the United Kingdom Parliament over several years. The majority of parliament members had literally robbed the British public by making false declarations on their expenses. The complete list of events is large, just the list of crimes is overwhelming: nominating second homes, re-designating second homes, renting out homes, over-claiming for council tax on second home, subsidising property development, tax evasion, claiming expenses while living in grace and favour homes, renovating and furnishing properties when standing down, furnishing of other homes, exploiting the 'no receipt' rule, over-claiming for food, and overspending at the end of the financial year. Despite the information on the crimes being public and most parliament members having misbehaved, only four are facing criminal charges of false accounting. Oddly enough, Tony Blair's expenses were shredded by mistake when they were the subject of a legal bid to have them published, and thus he won’t face charges. Lucky Blair. There is no doubt we are witnessing here a criminal government taking advantage of the British people, not unlike the Western definitions systematically used against Libya (and others, but never against Israel).
In The Blair Witch Project – On Western Censorship and War Crimes are described other events related to Tony Blair. One of them is of special interest. David Christopher Kelly was a British scientist and expert on biological warfare, employed by the British Ministry of Defense, and formerly a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. In July 2003 he had an unauthorized discussion with a BBC journalist, Andrew Gilligan, about the British government's dossier on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Apparently, the British government was well aware there were no such weapons in Iraq. Following the interview, he was invited to appear on July 15, 2003, before the parliamentary foreign affairs select committee, which was investigating the WMD lies. Kelly was questioned aggressively about his actions. Luckily for the British government, he was found dead two days later. Despite the official report on his suicide, his death looks like a carefully stage assassination aimed to save the British government face. Had James Bond acted here? MI5 knows. Curiously, this wasn’t the first lucky death in Blair’s history. In 1994, his predecessor as leader of the British Labour party died at the age of 56 from an unexpected heart attack. Lucky Blair. For these and other events it is quite clear British citizens cannot trust their government and are no less worthy of protection by the UN than its Libyan peers.
“But, these are particular events! The accusations make sense but are unproven!” some readers may be thinking now in a desperate attempt to defend the British Government. That brings me to the last series of events I’m about to mention here. Any reader unhappy with my analysis and examples would be able to find similar ones by the thousands; British reality is quite clear. Between August 6 and 10, 2011, several London boroughs and districts of cities and towns across England suffered widespread rioting, looting and arson. This was an answer to Mark Duggan’s assassination by Metropolitan Police Service firearms officers on August 4, 2011. The riots were characterized by rampant looting and arson attacks of unprecedented levels. As of 15 August, about 3,100 people had been arrested, of whom more than 1,000 had been charged. The sentences were extremely severe. For example, they included Nicolas Robinson, 23, of Borough, south-east London, being jailed for six months for stealing a £3.50 case of water from Lidl supermarket and mother-of-two Ursula Nevin, from Manchester, being jailed for five months for receiving a pair of shorts given to her after they had been looted from a city centre store. Plenty of similar sentences makes one wonder what is the difference between a regular British citizens and a member of the parliament. Why do they experience different interpretations of the law? After all, parliament members enjoyed years of stealing and most of them were spared. There is no doubt British citizens are entitled to international protection from their criminal authorities. They are in literal danger of being killed or jailed. They live in a regime of terror and discrimination.
I call for an International Coalition of the Free to pass a resolution through the UN Security Council – similar to Resolution 1973 – allowing for “Operation Free Britain” which would ensure British freedom from their oppressors. British citizens deserve that no less than Libyan ones. After all, equality characterizes true democracies, doesn't it?
My articles on the web are my main income these days; please recognize my efforts in writing them by donating or buying a copy of The Cross of Bethlehem, or Back in Bethlehem.