Search This Blog

Wednesday, 31 July 2013

"Frank Willis On Law & The New World Order"

"We Are Change Manchester"

Published on Jul 16, 2013
What Have The New World Order Got Planned?

Beware!! This presentation contains frank views and opinions expressed in a strong way. The views and opinions expressed by Frank Willis should not be taken as an endorsement by New Horizons or WeAreChange Manchester. They are Frank Willis's truth and we would never seek to suppress his rights to express that truth.

The ever-challenging and enlightening Frank Willis opens some dark doors for us to peer through

In March 2011, hundreds of protesters stormed a courtroom in Birkenhead in support of Roger Hayes from the British Constitution Group who was facing a bankruptcy hearing for non-payment of council tax. In the court, the protesters attempted to make a citizen's arrest on the judge.

Since then, Frank has been meeting people in the Truth Movement, not by chance as in the past, but by design. He wanted to know more about the circumstances of the attempted arrest and the consequences for those who took part. Frank believes we've been duped!

This opened many doors for Frank... some of the people he met were friendly; some were not. The closer he got to the truth, the more intense the threats became. The levels that the New World Order are operating on are truly terrifying. Frank will share his experiences and views with us in this presentation.

This talk will open our eyes to the fact that we are not as free as we think.

Please spread this video far and wide. It's time to take Action!


Tuesday, 30 July 2013

"British Police State - We Told You It Was Coming! - Will The Sheeple Finally Awaken?"


by  on Jul 27, 2013

The UK government is about to pass legislation which will make any behaviour perceived to potentially ’cause a nuisance or annoyance’ a criminal offence.

The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill also grants local authorities, police and even private security firms sweeping powers to bar citizens from assembling lawfully in public spaces.  Those who refuse orders under the new rules will face arrest, fines and even prison time.

The Ever Increasing Powers

Since the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which introduced Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) the government has invented and legislated for a litany of such orders covering everything from dog poo to drug addiction, including but not limited to: Control Orders; Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Orders; Intervention Orders; Crack House Closure Orders; Premise Closure Orders; Brothel Closure Orders; Gang Related Violence Injunctions; Designated Public Place Orders; Special Interim Management Orders; Gating Orders; Dog Control Orders; Letter Clearing Notices;  Noise Abatement Orders; Graffiti/Defacement Removal Notices; Directions to Leave and Dispersal Orders.
The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill, which passed the committee stage of its progress through the House of Commons on Monday 15th July, purports to simplify this legacy of New Labour’s legislative promiscuity.  In reality, it creates a series of wildly ambiguous, generic orders which grant officers of the state and private sector even greater powers to issue tougher sentences, with fewer checks and balances to protect citizens.

Being Annoying is Now Illegal

The Bill introduces Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (IPNAs) to replace ABSOs. Almost no one will be sad to say goodbye to ASBOs.  The orders, designed to allow police to tackle anti-social behaviour, simply became a means of criminalising youthful indiscretion – and eventually a means of criminalising anything people found annoying.  Some of the bizarre abuses of this power include:
  • Stuart Hunt of Loch Ness brought to court 100 times since 2007 for breaching an ASBO preventing him from laughing, staring or slow hand clapping
  • Homeless, alcoholic and mentally ill Michael Gilligan given a 99 year ASBO rather than the welfare support that might have made a difference
  • A profoundly deaf 17 year old girl given an ASBO and a jail sentence for spitting in the street
  • A 13 year old banned from using the word ‘grass’ in England or Wales
  • Manchester Council applied an ASBO to prevent a mobile soup kitchen from feeding the homeless
  • Councils placing ASBOs on homeless people resulting in prison sentences for begging ‘earnestly and humbly’
  • An 87 year old man was given an ASBO threatening a prison sentence if he was sarcastic to his neighbours
The ASBO has allowed the line between criminal behaviour and annoying behaviour to become hopelessly blurred – and the IPNAs will only serve to increase the problem.  We have seen the abuses permitted under ASBO legislation, the test for which included wording to the effect that ASBOs could only be issued where an actual act of ‘harassment, alarm or distress’ had occurred.
Many believe they have rights
to protest, assemble and
associate that they lost a
decade ago, simply because
they have never actually
attempted to claim them
IPNAs have a much weaker test, applicable where on the ‘balance of probabilities’ a person has or might engage in behaviour ‘capable of causing annoyance’ to another person.
How many times a day could this legislation apply to any of us?
Eating with our mouths open, talking too loudly into our phones in a public space, walking too slowly or quickly or belching without saying ‘pardon me’.  All of this may very well cause annoyance – but soon it might well also be illegal.
The orders can be issued to anyone aged 10 or over (and we all know how well 10 year olds are at being annoying), and there is no limit on how long an IPNA can be applied to a person for.  A person could receive an IPNA for 10 and retain it their entire life.
Whereas an ASBO could only desist the subject from certain actions, the IPNA includes ‘positive obligations’ (p10).  This means the subject of an IPNA can be found in breach not simply for doing things they have been banned from doing, but from not doing things that the IPNA states they must.  This makes an IPNA much closer to probation and other post-conviction arrangements than a civil order.
An IPNA can be applied for by Local Authorities, police, some transport bodies and some NHS authorities.
The consequences of breaching an IPNA are serious.  The breaching of an IPNA has been added to the conditions for securing possession of a home – meaning a 10 year old child breaching their IPNA could result in the entire family being evicted from their council house. Breaching the orders can also result in jail time for anyone over 14.
Even the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), giving evidence on the proposals, argued that this could lead to further criminalisation of children and called on the government to think again.
But the plans move along unaltered.

Kiss Goodbye to Freedom of Assembly

Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs), and new Dispersal Orders will replace Designated Public Space Orders, Dog Control Orders, Gating Orders and a host of other orders intended to keep aggressive drunken people or drug dealers or dog poo off our streets.  But it is plain that the target for these laws is no longer the person peddling illegal drugs, but the people sharing politically challenging ideas.
These new powers present the most significant threat to lawful assembly and protest in modern history.
Public Space Protection Orders
PSPOs will be granted where ‘activities carried on or likely to be carried on in a public place will have or have had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality’ (p21).  They can be used to restrict an activity or require people to perform an activity in a certain way.
They require substantially less consultation than current alcohol free zones or dog control zones and rather than applying to everyone, they can be applied to specific groups of people (the homeless, the unemployed, racial/religious groups etc.) – opening the door for discrimination.  These rules could see homeless people or young people lawfully excluded from public spaces.
PSPOs are subject to ‘on the spot’ fines, rather than attendance at a Magistrates’ Court, reducing the scrutiny and checks on police power.
These orders are also by no means short term.  They can be applied for up to three years, and continued for another three years at the end of their term.
The orders have been heavily challenged by Liberty and The Manifesto Club on the basis that they will seriously infringe upon people’s freedom to assemble, associate and protest.  The Ramblers (the walking charity) have also given written evidence to the government raising their fears about the further appropriation of public highways, by ways and footpaths under the PSPO powers.

Dispersal Orders
Under the current Direction to Leave powers, anyone over 10 years of age can be asked to disperse from a ‘locality’ and stay dispersed for period not exceeding 48 hours.
Current Dispersal Orders mean a Police Superintendent (or an officer with specific written authority from the SI) can disperse groups or two or more people in areas where there has been ‘persistent anti-social behaviour’ or take home any young person under the age of 16 who is in a dispersal zone between 9pm and 6am.
Anyone failing to comply with a Dispersal Order faces a fine of up to £2,500 or up to three months in prison.
Downing Street clearly do not feel this is tough enough.
The new Dispersal Powers mean police constables and even Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) can issue dispersal orders if they think a group of two or more personsmight harass, alarm or distress others in the vicinity (p16).
The PCSO or constable can specify how long the person/group must remain out of the designated area, and by which route they must leave, and also confiscate any items of their property which they deem anti-social.  Failure to comply with any element of these orders results in a fine of up to £5,000 or three months in prison.
The new legislation also fails to define ‘locality’ – meaning a person could be excluded from a city, a county or even a whole country (p17).  In fact, York couldn’t even wait for the new legislation to pass and is already implementing the powers.
These new laws effectively end freedom of assembly in England and Wales, as any lawful assembly can be instantly redefined as illegal on the spot by some part time PCSO, people’s personal possessions can be confiscated, and anyone who dares to challenge the process will end up in jail.

What Will It Take?

One could be forgiven for despairingly enquiring: ‘What it will take for the slumbering British public to awake to the fact that the legal and physical infrastructure of a police state is being built around them?’  
Many believe they have rights to protest, assemble and associate that they lost a decade ago, simply because they have never actually attempted to claim them.   They remain imaginary rights, never cashed in.
As someone who has found herself arrested, locked up and later cleared by a court twice in recent years for peaceful protest – I discovered for myself how much things had changed while I wasn’t looking.  So without getting everyone to attend a protest and get arrested, we rely on communicating the changes to those who might not experience them directly.
These new powers present
the most significant threat
to lawful assembly and
protest in modern history
But while the BBC, our main broadcaster, has devoted its resources to stick a correspondent up the arse of anyone with the faintest connection to the Royal Baby – no such resources have been devoted to informing on the curtailing of our most basic freedoms. Defenders of the BBC may argue they are there to cover the news, not make it – this is an outright lie.
The media create stories as well as cover them, many people glean what is important from how much it is being talked about on the news and in the papers.
Imagine if journalists were door-stepping David Cameron, human rights campaigners and police authorities all day every day asking what on earth was going to happen with our human rights? If 19 pages of the Sun (news)paper wasn’t talking about the Royal Baby but our eroded civil liberties?  Things would look very, very different.
In the meantime, it’s up to all of us with an interest to shout it from the roof tops.  We have a hell of a fight on our hands here, and most folks still don’t even know it.


"Barking Mad Survival School"

Foster homes for rescue dogs plea

Sighthound Rescue Jersey is encouraging pet-lovers to take on dogs for a couple of months or so to make room for others more in need.

The family-run centre is having to turn animals away and is desperate to find foster carers.

The centre is home to at least fifteen dogs, known as sighthounds. 

The group of dogs include Afghans, greyhounds, whippets, who used to hunt by sight rather than scent.

Most of these animals had a grim start in life overseas, some found in a ditch or left to starve at the roadside, but have they have made a new start here in Jersey.

Alison Le Feuvre, Jersey Dogs Sighthound Rescue said: "I'd always grown up with whippets. If ever there were any at the local animal shelter I'd take them on then I realised there was a plight with whippets and whippet-crosses in the UK and Ireland and that there were homes wanting them here. We don't have any children, so the home is geared around the dogs."

Although it is a rescue charity, Alison and her husband, John, often pay for dog food and treats from their own pockets.

Alison said: "We've got our longest-stayer, Sadie, she's a middle-sized lurcher. Then, we've got Keira, another Irish hound; she's a Saluki-cross. Now, she'd had notches cut out of her ears, so it's taken months of healing, but they seem to be ok now and she's ready for a home. We've got Ellie, the little whippet; she's the smallest of the gang at the moment and there's Gemma who's got odd eyes, one white or pale blue, so we think she's got some collie in her, collie with a little bit of whippet."

Four of the dogs in particular need new homes right away.

If you would like to foster, adopt a dog or make a donation to Jersey Dogs Sighthound Rescue please click the link below.

Monday, 29 July 2013

"Chemtrails Over Jersey - An Open Letter To Chief Minister Gorst" PART 3

"Jersey Denying Chemtrails,
But Will They Deny Geoengineering?"

When did we ever see a sight like this in our youth?



Is this a beer cellar, or a plane?

So, our government employees are denying that chemtrails are a viable phenomenon, but did we ask the correct question?

Governments can honestly deny the existence of anything if the question is not put forward in the correct manner and context. As we have learned from part 2 above, the word "Chemtrail" is slang, it is slang for "Geoengineering" so what is the government stance on geoengineering?

Will the Jersey government deny Geoengineering?

Will I get a response?

From:William Peggie (
Sent:26 July 2013 17:07:04
To:'ian evans'; Louise Magris (
Cc:Robert Duhamel (; Valerie Cameron (; Vanessa Page (; Andrew Scate (

Dear Mr. Evans,

Thank you for your email which I have discussed with the Chief Minister. Senator Gorst asked that I respond in Dr. Magris' absence. While he recognises that you have strong views on the matter, the Chief Minister supports Dr. Magris' original response that the scientific community does not accept chemtrails as viable phenomena and that there is no scientific evidence supporting the chemtrail theory.
Yours sincerely,
William Peggie 
Director for Environment / Deputy Chief Officer 
States of Jersey |Department of the Environment 
T: +44(0)1534 441600 | F: +44(0)1534 441601 | E: mailto: | W:
The content of this email is without prejudice to any future decision which may be made by the Minister for Planning and Environment

From:ian evans
Sent:29 July 2013 13:19:19
To:William Peggie (; Louise Magris (
Cc:Robert Duhamel (; Valerie Cameron (; Vanessa Page (; Andrew Scate (
Dear Mr Peggie

Thank you for your response in which you are all agreed that "chemtrails" is not a viable phenomenon.

I wonder if you and/or your colleagues would answer one final question for me?

Do you hold the same views on "Geoengineering"?

Kind regards

Ian Evans

Saturday, 27 July 2013

"Curtis Warren - The Corruption Continues"

"Curtis Warren - Every Alley Bricked Up"

Curtis Warren is alleged to have committed a Quasi crime, and is given thirteen years.

Ian Christmas has committed a real crime (common law crime) and is given £600,000.

And who sat on 'both' of these appeal cases?

John Martin QC
Michael Beloff QC
Christopher Nugee QC



"Christmas Gets A £100,000 Present - Who Says Crime Doesn't Pay?"

"Christmas Not Happy With £500,000
Free Wages,
Gets Another £100,000 Bonus"

So....half a million of tax payers money for doing nothing over four years, and now he is exonerated from his £100,000 obligation to his victim?


He will be claiming compensation for stress next!

"Where Is The Justice For Anyone On This Island?"

"More Police Failure"

"Another £200,000 Of Public Money Moved Into Private Pockets"

"The Siphoning Pythons"

"Rantzen Rants Fall On Deaf Ears"

"The Distrusted"

Friday, 26 July 2013

"Three Ju-Rats Reinstate Sacked Cop In A Secret Court Hearing!!!"

"The Jersey Way - Still Going Strong"

Who, at the JEP, writes this sh*t?

"Having an affair with his ex-girlfriend."
How can it be an affair if they are not together?

"He had been investigating rumours that his former partner, who is also a police officer, had been seeing another man behind his back."
How can it be behind his back if they are not together?

I bet we wouldn't have got to hear about this if I hadn't posted it yesterday?

Thursday, 25 July 2013

"New Internet Troll Law For Jersey - Will It Continue To Protect Jon Haworth?"

"Why Do We Need A Law?
& Why Are There Blogs?

The J.E.P says "Ministers back new law to allow action against online bullies" yet the J.E.P, Channel TV and BBC Jersey all allow multi avatar trolling from the same inadequate halfwit, Jon Haworth.

Isn't that just a touch hypocritical?

Well actually, no, when Jon spews his bile in favour of the establishment party, its just fine. Given that JEP, BBC Jersey and Channel TV all do the same, we begin to wonder just what the real motive is behind this latest move.

If any of the State Media reported honestly and openly,
would this alleged law even be necessary?

Would there even be any bloggers if the State Media did their job properly?

I think it is fair to say (especially in Jersey) that most corruption and criminality these days stems from government, and because the State Media have failed to investigate and report the truth, we have seen the emergence of blog after blog.

It is plain as a pikestaff, the reason why this new law is being thrown together, we know its to try and gag citizens media. They don't want the unsuspecting public getting wind of the utter criminality government is engaging in.

As each day passes, the people are waking up to the oppression's that government have held them in servitude with for so long. Governments all over the world are beginning to lose their grip on their power over the people, and they don't like it.

Now ask yourselves this....

Why would people like myself, Stuart, VFC, Rico, Trevor, TJW, Cyril, Mike, or any other blogger for that matter, waste our time and our lives blogging?

Could it just possibly be that we want a fairer, freer, happier and more equal world for ourselves and our fellow human beings without the tyranny of government trying to steal everything we own from us.

And that we have the courage to follow that dream to its conclusion.

"That which I hold dear, I will defend to the last.
No matter the odds or the consequences."

"Another Cop On Data Protection Charges"

"Did The Last Cop Fired For Data Protection Offences Get His Job Back?"

I have been told recently that Danny Craven, fired for a data protection breach, appealed the decision and got his job back as a police officer. If so, what is the point of even trying these officers in court, let alone firing them?

Wednesday, 24 July 2013

"First Internet Censorship For Jersey Being Considered - But Is It Really To Keep Children From Accessing Porn?"

Jersey could adopt internet porn blocking plan

The real start of Internet censorship

ISLANDERS could be automatically blocked from viewing online pornography unless they choose to have access to it, the Assistant Home Affairs Minister says.

Following the news that UK Prime Minister David Cameron is to take steps to require internet providers to block pornography by default, Senator Lyndon Farnham said his department would now be considering similar plans for Jersey.

Anyone in their right mind would think this a good idea to protect children, yet this is just the first stepping stone to dupe the public into accepting such censorship as the norm.

This is not just a Jersey thing, or even a UK thing, it is a world wide thing. They begin chipping away at the public using honourable reasoning to gain consent for their censorship's and intrusions. Then later they begin the real agenda in earnest after Joe Public becomes used to restrictions being enforced upon them. This is all part of the N.W.O. agenda.

You only have to look at Internet service to see the restrictions already in place even on single words being used in Emails. One example were the words "erect pole" which were disallowed in an Email from a States member because it had a sexual connotation! If I remember correctly, that politician was Bob Hill.

Wake up people, JUST SAY NO!!!

Tuesday, 23 July 2013

"Cops To Be Sat On Their Arses For Even Longer Than Usual"

Jersey Police Officers take to the bus

Some Jersey police officers will be catching the bus to get to rural areas under new plans by the island force.
Officers said the new scheme, which started on Saturday, meant passengers would get to chat to officers as they take a ride.

Jersey's bus operator, Liberty Bus, is offering the journeys to uniformed officers on duty free of charge.
Insp Mark Coxshall came up with the idea and said it started as a way of getting young officers out.
He said: "It goes back to the younger officers who are not yet graded to drive police vehicles but we still want to get them out into the rural communities, parishes and villages.

"It isn't about walking past community members, it is about giving them time to stop and chat and listen to any concerns they are going to have."

So Jersey's finest will be sat down doing nothing for even longer!

What happened to those pretty shorts and racy bicycles that Bowron acquired?

Walking round town at the weekend I noticed that cops are getting shorter and fatter than ever, some almost as wide as they are tall.

Perhaps Mr Bowron might like to invest in a few of the sporty numbers pictured above? Lets face it folks, the Jersey Police are becoming the laughing stock of the world policing organisations, one of the cool looking machines above could only enhance their image and credibility!

Mind you, if we got rid of Mike (crunchy policing) Bowron, the police might actually remember what it is they are supposed to be doing?

And looking at VFC's latest posting linked below,
there sure as hell is plenty to do!!!