Corrupt Butthole British Undemocratic State - Writes the Rules of Political Persecution

ꕤ Butthole BRITISH UNDEMOCRATIC STATE Writes the Rules of Political Persecution FREE ASSANGE 18 December 2015 British Home Office www.gov.UK/homeoffice https://govwaste.co.uk/ [CLICK image for clarity / enlargement] ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. re: EXTENSIVE ONGONG COST Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) covert police activity uniformed policing op at Embassy Ecuador (period sought:  19/06/ 2012 to 10/2015) FREEDOM OF INFO REQUEST PURSUANT TO Freedom of Information Act (2000) ('the Act') UNDEMOCRATIC British State ❌ NOTIFIES GOVT: WILL NOT PROVIDE INFORMATION SOUGHT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC INTEREST GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY FREEDOM OF INFO LAWS VITAL TO MAINTAINING GOVT. ACCOUNTABILITY Thus said government REFUSES to PROVIDE info requested to INDICATE if info is held ❌ Same CORRUPT government that writes the laws has absolved itself of this vital obligation INCUMBENT upon  the 'democratic' state THUS the Butthole British State has REFUSED to remain accountable & transparent to the public it purportedly serves the dodgy BUTTHOLE BRITISH STATE has absolved itself of being held accountable by virtue of passing LAWS in favour of state institutions controlled by corrupt government ALL in pursuit of maintaining STATE POWER  exercised on behalf of elite interests whom corrupt Butthole government actually serves at all times   THEREFORE CORRUPT BUTTHOLE BRITISH GOVERNMENT  is not obliged to provide the voting public (that it pretends to represent) with vital information (& thus transparency demanded by democracy) owing to the SPECIAL PERMISSION  the said CORRUPT BUTTHOLE BRITISH GOVERNMENT HAS GIVEN ITSELF UNDER   Sections 23(5) & 31(3) of the Act UNDEMOCRATIC DENIAL of information committed Ad Absurdum JUSTIFICATION UNDER GUISE & PRETEXT pertaining to: bodies dealing with security matters S.23(5) for purpose of safeguarding national security S.24(2) prevention of 'prejudice' of law enforcement S.31(3) which are the very Butthole British bodies that are also involved in the POLITICAL PERSECUTION of Australian journalist, publisher of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange publications that exposed USA, British & Allied Government Wrongdoings & WAR CRIMES   BUTTHOLE BRITISH STATE SELF-EXEMPTION from public accountability Sections 24 & 31 of the Act EXEMPT the undemocratic,  politically-persecuting state from the 'public interest test' re disclosure of info & allow the corrupt state to rely upon DENYING government transparency to the voting stakeholder public, whom the state pretends  to represent ... & fervently pretends to do so, just prior to mock 'democratic' ELECTIONS CORRUPT POLITICALLY PERSECUTING BUTTHOLE BRITISH STATE HAS PERMITTED ITSELF TO DENY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION on the following smart-ass basis: BRITISH MINISTRY OF TRUTH to 'neither confirm nor deny' existence of information Butthole British Home Office Corrupt British State Typically hiding behind 'Security' bodies  that have nothing to do with actual state security & everything to do with shielding state wrongdoings & preserving the interests of the elites that control the state, and a state that pretends to exist to serve the interests of the masses -- the masses that the state & the elites partner to exploit  ... the very 'Security bodies' that 'SEXED UP'  info re Iraq to ensure that Britain would COMMIT ILLEGAL INVASION OF IRAQ at British taxpayer & other expense Section 23 under the Act permits the corrupt state to hide behind 'security matters' that shield its corrupt institutions (ie including bodies dealing with 'security matters') from democratic, public scrutiny & the corrupt, politically persecuting DEMOCRACY DENYING TOTALITARIAN state acting on behalf elite interests has thus ABSOLUTELY EXEMPTED itself from public interest considerations under the joke Act ... any time it is politically convenient to conceal (or commit) wrongful, undemocratic & otherwise unjust or illegal deeds by a Butthole British State merely PRETENDING to serve: justice & democracy BUTTHOLE BRITISH GOVERNMENT pretending  to represent interests of the people  AND pretending to be accountable  to the people The same BUTTHOLE BRITISH GOVERNMENT which is publicly elected and therefore legally & otherwise obligated to serve public interests:  but judging by Butthole British government neglect, violations (including political policing & record of political police RAPING activist members of the public ... no, I'm not kidding) -- along with a litany of other violations of decency, democracy, law and justice -- the indication is that state 'serving the public' ideal is far from reality. EXAMPLE British Crown Prosecution Service 'justice' ie. DENIAL OF JUSTICE  [CLICK image for clarity / enlargement] [CLICK image for clarity / enlargement] THE TRUE FACE OF THE BUTTHOLE BRITISH UNDEMOCRATIC STATE The State v. UK miners' strike miners at British Steel coking plant South Yorkshire, 1984 Battle of Orgreave   & Other British Public Protests LINK | More Metropolitan Police Service ('MPS') aka 'the Met' (informal) territorial police force law enforcement:  Greater London City of London square mile responsibility of:  City of London Police {not MPS} MPS comprised of 32: Borough Operational Command Units Ministry of Defence police MoD property throughout UK / HQ Whitehall & other MOD establishments British Transport Police policing:  rail network, incl. London Royal Parks Constabulary merged with MPS 2004 parks policed by:  Royal Parks Ops Command Unit {plus small park police council maintains} MPS officers have legal jurisdiction throughout all of England and Wales incl. areas w/ special police forces, eg MoD {likewise for all officers of territorial police} / also have limited power Scotland & Northern Ireland The serious inquiries go to MPS { eg terrorism, complex murder } with assistance fro relevant specialist force(s) even if MoD or railway incident location Royal Exception officers involved in protection of royalty & other VIPs have full police powers in Scotland & Northern Ireland (in connection w/ such duties) RANKS Commissioner Deputy Commissioner Assistant Commissioner Deputy Assistant Commissioner Commander Chief Superintendent Superintendent Chief Inspector Inspector Sergeant Police Constable ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COST TO TAXPAYER 2011/12 MPS total expenditure: £3,692 million ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- MPS Established: Metropolitan Police Act 1929 est. 1829 by Robert Peel known as:  the 'bobbies' 55,000:  officers, staff, traffic wardens, community support officers & volunteers (2016 figure, MPS site) controlling:  7 million Londoners, commuters & visitors over:  620 square miles (997.7 km square) ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Robert Peel one of founders of:  Conservative Party father of modern British police b. Lancashire son of wealthy textile manufacturer & parliamentarian Peel issued:   Tamworth Manifesto comprising principles re basis of modern  British Conservative Party education:  Oxford + other Entry to politics at age 21 as MP for Irish rotten borough of Cashel, Tipperary rotten borough =  existence prior to the Reform Act 1832 parliamentary borough = town with royal charter granting it incorporation = right to send x2 elected burgesses as Members Parliament, House of Commons Butthole British Elites - Bribery Constituencies electing members to House of Commons remained same for centuries / did not reflect population shifts --> electors so few some places --> electors could be bribed by wealthy patron --> known as:  'Rotten Boroughs' (inf.) --> aka 'Pocket Boroughs' (inf.) --> aka 'Nomination Boroughs' electors voting as patron instructed them voting by show of hands, so none dare vote contrary  LINK | More Peel:  created modern Conservative Party on ruins of 'old Toryism' PM of UK (twice) 1834-1835 1841-1846 Home Secretary (twice) 1822-1827 1828-1830 [Wikipedia + MPS site] ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- That's pretty much how I understood that Butthole British government notice, denying information on the costs of persecuting journalist, Julian Assange. Peel & the Conservatives sound interesting.   I'm guessing Peel is an example of who rules Britain even today. Need to catch up with that after I figure how to prepare a chicken biryani. This recipe looks good - here.   Looks straightforward.  Least favourite parts:  handling raw chicken & fresh chilli.  Onion slicing on big scale, not so great either ... lol.  Might do without the mint and might throw in some almond flakes & maybe some sultanas. ꕤ

War in Iraq Cost Over $1.7 trillion dollars / Private Contractors PROFIT from US War: $138 billion US taxpayer to private contractors

Cheney's Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq War By Angelo Young, International Business Times 20 March 13 The accounting of the financial cost of the nearly decade-long Iraq War will go on for years, but a recent analysis has shed light on the companies that made money off the war by providing support services as the privatization of what were former U.S. military operations rose to unprecedented levels. Private or publicly listed firms received at least $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for government contracts for services that included providing private security, building infrastructure and feeding the troops. Ten contractors received 52 percent of the funds, according to an analysis by the Financial Times that was published Tuesday. The No. 1 recipient? Houston-based energy-focused engineering and construction firm KBR, Inc. ..., which was spun off from its parent, oilfield services provider Halliburton Co. ..., in 2007. The company was given $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts over the past decade, with many of the deals given without any bidding from competing firms, such as a $568-million contract renewal in 2010 to provide housing, meals, water and bathroom services to soldiers, a deal that led to a Justice Department lawsuit over alleged kickbacks, as reported by Bloomberg. Who were Nos. 2 and 3? Agility Logistics ... of Kuwait and the state-owned Kuwait Petroleum Corp. Together, these firms garnered $13.5 billion of U.S. contracts. As private enterprise entered the war zone at unprecedented levels, the amount of corruption ballooned, even if most contractors performed their duties as expected. According to the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the level of corruption by defense contractors may be as high as $60 billion. Disciplined soldiers that would traditionally do many of the tasks are commissioned by private and publicly listed companies. Even without the graft, the costs of paying for these services are higher than paying government employees or soldiers to do them because of the profit motive involved. No-bid contracting - when companies get to name their price with no competing bid - didn't lower legitimate expenses. (Despite promises by President Barack Obama to reel in this habit, the trend toward granting favored companies federal contracts without considering competing bids continued to grow, by 9 percent last year, according to the Washington Post.) Even though the military has largely pulled out of Iraq, private contractors remain on the ground and continue to reap U.S. government contracts. For example, the U.S. State Department estimates that taxpayers will dole out $3 billion to private guards for the government's sprawling embassy in Baghdad. The costs of paying private and publicly listed war profiteers seem miniscule in light of the total bill for the war. Last week, the Costs of War Project by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University said the war in Iraq cost $1.7 trillion dollars, not including the $490 billion in immediate benefits owed to veterans of the war and the lifetime benefits that will be owed to them or their next of kin. http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/308-12/16561-focus-cheneys-halliburton-made-395-billion-on-iraq-war COMMENT The things that stood out for me are: War in Iraq cost $1.7 trillion dollars PLUS $490 billion in immediate benefits owed to veterans PLUS lifetime benefits owed to them or their next of kin Privatization of US military operations rose to unprecedented levels Private contractors (companies) received min.  $138 billion of US taxpayer money for contracts doled out by US govt Half (52%) of that went to 10 govt contracts Biggest recipients: KBR, Inc ie parent, oilfield services provider Halliburton Co received:  $39.5 billion in Iraq-related contracts over past decade Agility Logistics (of Kuwait) &  state-owned Kuwait Petroleum Corp Kuwait contractors received  $13.5 billion of US contracts (jointly) Private enterprise entered the war zone at unprecedented levels Amount of corruption ballooned Costs higher than paying government employees Professional, disciplined soldiers - displaced No wind-back by Obama admin on doling out contracts (without public tender process) - on contrary: increase of such contracts Iraq = private contractors remain on the ground, although US military has largely pulled out of Iraq eg.  $3 billion taxpayer money to private guards for USG sprawling embassy in Baghdad This is really mindblowing.   The amount of money that is made by PRIVATE companies enriching themselves through war is staggering. Bear in mind also, that those who PROFIT from war will lobby FOR WAR. What is also staggering is that the functions of the US military have been farmed out. The danger of that is lack of (a) accountability and (b) transparency. So, really, the government is pulling a stunt where they've probably got an 'anything goes' thing happening, because what's going on is contracted and therefore beyond public scrutiny. Hopefully, that makes sense.  I don't have a way with words.  But I hope that idea comes across. If the military screws up, it is on government heads.  But if private contractors screw up, it is passed off as a bad apple, renamed and redeployed as a mercenary. The 'decommissioning' of the US military for these private contractor forces or functionaries is worthwhile considering. And there's also the costs incurred by the taxpayer funding those that: do the job at higher price than professional soldiers introduce corruption and those that don't even compete (put in tenders) but I think these aspects aren't half as important as the establishment of 'private' State armies and functionaries that are arm's length and beyond public accountability and scrutiny. What's also interesting is the Kuwait profits.

OBAMA - Where's the TRANSPARENCY?

Rift grows between Obama, media as press groups blast administration ‘spin’ Published August 13, 2014 July 16, 2014: President Obama talks in the press briefing room at the White House.Reuters While Congress is on recess and President Obama vacations in Martha's Vineyard, a coalition of free press groups is escalating an already-aggressive campaign against the Obama administration for allegedly freezing out the press and cracking down on reporters. The flood of critical letters and petitions and statements from First Amendment groups marks a new level of tension in a relationship that for years has been deteriorating. Though Obama, as a candidate in 2008, was widely seen to enjoy favorable media treatment, his administration now is fielding accusations that it's one of the least transparent in history. Society of Professional Journalists President David Cuillier, in a statement earlier this week, blasted the administration for what he called "excessive message management and preventing journalists from getting information on behalf of citizens." SPJ is among the groups that's been leading the charge on the issue. Last month, more than three dozen groups, including SPJ, wrote to the White House about what they described as growing censorship throughout federal agencies. [...] ... vowed greater transparency going forward and pointed to several steps the administration has taken: like processing more "freedom of information" requests, declassifying records and releasing information on White House visitors. "Typical spin and response through non-response," Cuillier shot back. He said he hopes the administration is "sincere" about being more open, "but we want action. We are tired of words and evasion." Media groups are gearing up for another confrontation on Thursday, when they plan to present a petition with 100,000 signatures -- backed by the Committee to Protect Journalists, the Freedom of the Press Foundation and others -- to the Justice Department. It calls for the administration to halt legal action against New York Times reporter James Risen, who detailed a botched CIA effort during the Clinton administration to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. Risen's reporting is at the center of criminal charges against former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling. Federal prosecutors want to force Risen to testify about his sources at Sterling's trial, and the Supreme Court recently refused to get involved in the case. Risen argued he has a right to protect his sources' identity, either under the Constitution or rules governing criminal trials. A federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., earlier rejected Risen's bid to avoid being forced to testify. At the same time federal prosecutors have fought Risen in court, Attorney General Eric Holder has suggested that the government would not seek to put Risen in jail should he refuse to testify as ordered. But journalist groups want assurances. Risen also is expected to speak during a press conference at the National Press Club on Thursday afternoon. The case follows tension last year surrounding the Justice Department's snooping on Fox News' reporter James Rosen's phone records and emails, and its seizure of AP phone records in the course of leak investigations. The controversy over those actions led to some reforms at the Justice Department. [...] EXTRACT ONLY  - FULL @ SOURCE http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/13/rift-grows-between-obama-media-as-press-groups-blast-administration-spin/

Hard to believe there's any tension b/w press and government when the mainstream press seems to always carry whatever the official government/corporate line may be (eg Ukraine reporting).