Archive for November, 2009

Climate Gate gets hotter and hotter

Monday, November 30th, 2009

Despite the press blackout on Climate Gate, it seems that the jig really is up, though some people, in this case, people who really should know better, are hanging on to the lie until the last possible moment. A Science Museum’s, campaign, paid for by money stolen from you, continues to push this Global Warming garbage and propaganda, despite everything that has happened. By all means, go to this link and count yourself out.

They really should know better, because the history of science is full of examples of theories that were widely accepted for long periods of time only to be shot down by the increase of knowledge (Spontaneous Generation), and it is also full of examples of scientific fraud, like Piltdown Man.

The Science Museum should now stop all activity related to promoting Climate Change as a valid scientific theory. Full stop.

Then we have this simply fantastic article at The Telegraph:

A week after my colleague James Delingpole , on his Telegraph blog, coined the term “Climategate” to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Philip Jones, the CRU’s director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. Through its link to the Hadley Centre, part of the UK Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC’s key scientific contributors, his global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it.
Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head by showing that, after 1,000 years of decline, global temperatures have recently shot up to their highest level in recorded history.
Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher they are today, the graph became the central icon of the entire man-made global warming movement.



Which spells it all out perfectly.

Sadly, it may be the case that someone doesn’t want this very popular article spreading around the internets.

Finally, we have ‘Lord’ Christopher Monckton calling for the UN to be disbanded. He smells the stink, and traces it straight to New York:

The fallout of Climate Gate may just be the destruction of the second attempt to create a world government (the first being the League of Nations).


There is no me in your we

Thursday, November 26th, 2009

believe it.

CRU FOIA request scandal – sound familiar?

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

Image from which contains the entire contents of the liberated CRU files, featuring the heads of well known scientists that smelled a rat, and who are detested by ‘Global Warming’ / ‘Climate Change’ / ‘Climate Chaos’ alarmists for telling the truth.

The CRU CLimate Gate affair continues to inform and outrage. With respect to FOIA requests, Home Educators will be familiar with this behaviour and bad, un-servant like attitude:

Professor Phil Jones, Director of the CRU, explains how he lobbied to overturn UEA’s FoI Officer’s instruction to answer FoI requests and schmoozed the person responsible for FoI appeals:

“When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests. It took a couple of half hour sessions – one at a screen, to convince them otherwise showing them what CA [a popular "sceptic" website] was all about. Once they became aware of the types of people we were dealing with, everyone at UEA (in the registry and in the Environmental Sciences school – the head of school and a few others) became very supportive. I’ve got to know the FOI person quite well and the Chief Librarian – who deals with appeals. The VC [Vice Chancellor] is also aware of what is going on – at least for one of the requests, but probably doesn’t know the number we’re dealing with.”

Prof Jones’s colleague, Prof. Keith Briffa – who is a Reader at the CRU – spells out their attitude towards Freedom of Information quite neatly:

“I have been of the opinion right from the start of these FOI requests, that our private , inter-collegial discussion is just that – PRIVATE. Your communication with individual colleagues was on the same basis as that for any other person and it discredits the IPCC process not one iota not to reveal the details. On the contrary, submitting to these “demands” undermines the wider scientific expectation of personal confidentiality . It is for this reason, and not because we have or have not got anything to hide, that I believe none of us should submit to these “requests”.”

This is of course absolutely disgraceful behaviour on the part of these academics and their institution. They might have felt this was an imposition or an invasion, and they may have felt that their research should have been out of the grubby grasp of the general public, but the law is clear.

This is a rare insight into the attitude within many public bodies towards transparency, and the refusal to accept the principle of the FoIA is undoubtedly all too common. While the people and the media love FoI for the power it disseminates, those who have lost their privileged status still resent it deeply.

Even more serious than their appalling attitude is the instruction by Prof Jones to his colleagues to delete emails that are apparently subject to an FoI request.

On May 29th 2008, Prof Jones instructs colleagues to delete emails in a message helpfully titled “IPCC & FOI”:

“Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.”

AR4 is an IPCC report that Keith Briffa and others at the CRU worked on together, and at least one FoI request on exactly this correspondence had apparently been submitted by a David Holland on May 5th 2008.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 expressly forbids – on pain of criminal conviction – destroying information that has been requested under FoI. As the Information Commissioner puts it:

If information is held when a FOIA request is received, destroying it outside of your normal records management policies will result in a breach of the Act. You must confirm that you hold the information and consider disclosure, subject to any exemption. It will also be a criminal offence to conceal or destroy information if this is done with the intention of preventing disclosure under either FOIA or EIR.
This offence is punishable with a fine of up to £5,000.

Tellingly, another email from Prof Jones later that year shows that UEA’s internal FoI team had evidently become concerned about his secretive actions:

“I did get an email from the FOI person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn’t be deleting emails”

If the FoI team were concerned that Prof Jones might be breaking the law – and even committing a criminal offence – on an area that they are legally responsible for, they should have reported him to the Information Commissioner. Perhaps his flowering relationship with the FoI officer and the Chief Librarian precluded this.

Happily, he’s never tried to become matey with us, so we’re reporting him and his colleagues to the Information Commissioner this afternoon.
Irrespective of how important your subject area is, what your views on the topic might be, or how much you dislike the person making the request, Freedom of Information is too valuable and too important to just be ridden over roughshod like this.


“Freedom of Information is too valuable and too important to just be ridden over roughshod like this.”

I couldn’t agree more.


I wonder what sort of dirty shenanigans went on over at the DCSF, who have refused to release information requested by some diligent and persistent Home Educators on the most flimsy of excuses? No doubt there are bombshell revelations hidden in their computers also, that if released, would cause scandals, heads to roll and misconceptions to be swept into the garbage, scuppering life changing legislation in the same way that the Global Warming / Climate Change ‘Carbon’ legislation would have done.

Once again, there is a common element to both the DCSF and the CRU refusal to release information; both of these organisations are intimately connected to the existence of the state, and in both, the people working there are not adopting the position of servants. The people who work at the DCSF are public servants, and scientists are in service to the truth, wether or not they take money from the state to do their work.

If there were no state, then there would be no problem with scientists making stuff up to steer policy and social engineer; there would be no apparatus to force their crackpot ideas onto anyone. The same holds true for education. Without a state, there would be no DCSF, Department of Education or any other apparatus to interfere with you and the good of education that you want too avail yourself of.

There is that foul smell again!

Achtung! Prosecutor says only jail deters homeschooling

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

World Net Daily has a story that sounds like it could have come out of the Large Hadron Collider i.e. from the future of Britain:

By Bob Unruh

A prosecutor demanded jail time for two parents accused by German authorities of homeschooling their children, and he erupted in anger when the Nazi foundations of the ban on parents teaching their children at home was cited.

Juergen and Rosemary Dudek of Archfeldt, Germany, were given 90 days in prison last year because they homeschool their children. They received the sentence after prosecutor Herwig Mueller asserted it was the only sufficient punishment for the family’s “crime,” appealing a lower-court order to issue a fine.


Armin Eckermann, chief of the homeschool organization Schuzh, has attended the trial. He told HSLDA the judge said he thought a jail sentence was too harsh for the Dudek family, but the prosecutor “took a hard line.”

In Germany, many Christian families object to the public-school system because it advocates for sexual and social activities that conflict with biblical teachings. The sex-education program, for example, is explicit.

Mueller also erupted when Dudek asked local school officials called to testify if they knew the current laws that criminalize homeschooling are based on laws from 1938.

“All those Nazi laws have been suspended, and this one is democratic, and you’ve got to accept it, and that’s it,” Mueller argued loudly, reports said.

Dudek said the facts don’t support the claim.

“The ‘Schulpflicht’ – the laws that require school attendance – are on the books in the German states,” he said, “and have been traced back to the ‘Reichsschulpflicht Gesetz’ [federal compulsory attendance laws] which was passed in 1938. Except for the removal of references to the Nazi party, these laws are identical or substantially the same as the laws passed by Hitler’s government, criminalizing parents who keep their children home for school.”

Practical Homeschool Magazine has noted one of the first acts by Hitler when he moved into power was to create the governmental Ministry of Education and give it control of all schools and school-related issues.

In 1937, the dictator said, “The youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing.”

Wolfgang Drautz, consul general for the Federal Republic of Germany, commented previously on the issue, contending the government “has a legitimate interest in countering the rise of parallel societies that are based on religion.”

Drautz said schools teach socialization, and as WND reported, that is important, as evident in the government’s response when a German family in another case wrote objecting to police officers picking their child up at home and delivering him to a public school.

“The minister of education does not share your attitudes toward so-called homeschooling,” said a government letter in response. “You complain about the forced school escort of primary school children by the responsible local police officers. … In order to avoid this in future, the education authority is in conversation with the affected family in order to look for possibilities to bring the religious convictions of the family into line with the unalterable school attendance requirement.”
Donnelly says the German characterization of homeschooling as a “parallel society” isn’t accurate, either.

“Homeschoolers are definitely a distinct social group but are not a ‘parallel society’ the way the German courts are trying to use the term,” Donnelly said. “The irony of German court decisions is their position that the state must teach ‘tolerance for diversity’ by forcing children into public schools and stamping out a diverse form of education recognized in all other Western democracies as a legitimate educational approach. Pluralism is supposed to stand for distinctive groups living peacefully together.”

HSLDA has reported the Dudeks believe homeschooling their children is the right thing to do, and they are determined to resist laws barring them from home education.


These people are clearly insane; as insane as the monsters who are trying to enact the same regime in the UK, which, by the way, will not take into account the quality of the education you provide ‘your’ child if you are caught committing the crime of Home Educating. This is, to say the least, odd, coming from people who claim that it is their number one concern that children receive the best possible education. But you already know these people are lying about every aspect of what they are doing.

Read the rest of these stories for more glimpses into the future of Home Education in Britain:

State tries to deny homeschoolers vaccinations
War in homeschoolers spreading?
Police ‘nab’ 7-year-old homeschooler
State could take custody of teen homeschooler
Court orders Christian child into government education
Will homeschooling parents end up behind bars?
Homeschooling parents to appeal prison terms
Parents sent to jail for homeschooling
Government chases homeschool family
Judge: Homeschooling like driving drunk
Amendment protecting parental rights urged
Courts offer homeschoolers zilch, expert says
Court upholds Nazi-era ban on homeschooling
Parents sent to jail for homeschooling
Parents losing custody for homeschooling kids
Girl sent to psych ward for homeschooling, parents billed
Prosecutor wants homeschool parents jailed
Homeschool family reaches England
Parents race to escape before court takes kids
Truancy hearing targets homeschooling mom
Homeschoolers facing $6,300 fine
American missionaries targeted for deportation
Courts offer homeschoolers zilch, expert says
Court gives Melissa back to family
Western homeschoolers need political asylum from democracy
3 families face fines, frozen accounts
‘Youth worker’ lies about homeschool student
5 ‘well-educated’ kids put in state custody
Girl, 15, begs to return to homeschooling parents
Psych tests ordered for homeschooling parents
3rd Reich homeschool prohibition defended
Homeschool family told to give up 5 other kids
Homeschooler’s parents allowed 1 visit a week
Court-ordered foster care replaces psych ward
Homeschool student disappears from psych ward
‘Psych ward’ homeschooler case goes international
Court upholds Nazi-era ban on homeschooling
Constitution threatened by homeschool case

The End of the Global Warming Hoax

Tuesday, November 24th, 2009

George Monbiot concedes defeat in The Guardian:

It’s no use pretending this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.


And check out this simply amazing comment from Monbiot, in reply to a comment on that post:


But now I suggest you review your file of correspondence and articles, and figure out who you need to apologize to.

I apologise. I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed. I would have been a better journalist if I had investigated their claims more closely.


I nearly fell off my chair when I read that.

FINALLY, the Global Warming Hoax is utterly, comprehensively and irrecoverably destroyed forever.

Every regulation, piece of legislation, directive, business project and scheme surrounding ‘Carbon’ is now completely discredited and on the way to being destroyed.

This is a monumental, earth shatteringly significant and wonderful event, and whoever leaked those emails is a hero of the most historic kind. Thank you, whoever you are, for blowing this totalitarian scheme out of the water forever.

Search through the emails for yourself:

This event shows that the rest of whole facade is just that; a facade, a fantasy, a sham. The omnipotent, incompetent, immoral, thieving mass murdering state, the push for world government, the control freakery… everything that we have been saying is true IS TRUE.

George Monbiot and all the people at the Guardian are just as knowledgeable about and WRONG about, The Environment, Economics, Education and Politics.

George Monbiot, to his credit, at least has the balls to stand up and say, “I was wrong, and I apologise”. That guy has some grapefruits, has a core of decency in him, and was just a tool, a useful idiot, being manipulated by the globalist statists and evil scientists, the latter to be made the scape goats in this.

For some time it has been clear that a scape goat would have to be found and sacrificed as the Global Warming hoax slowly unravels. I thought it would be Al Gore, since he is the biggest liar and booster of this scam and was the one who stood to make billions out of the fake ‘Carbon’ economy. Luckily for him, he can now say that he too was simply fooled by these scientists, apologise and then be let off the hook. We shall see.

The sad thing about all of this is that the real problems surrounding the true problems that face us, like millions of people pumping detergents into the water and genetically modified organisms being unleashed into the environment, will now be thrown into the same basket as Global Warming as a total hoax. This is a pity. Even if the detergent problem or any other real environmental problem is true, we should never turn to the state to solve these problems. But all of that is another story.

I wonder if the Sheffield students who lampooned the ‘deniers’ will now also now back down, if they are even aware of any of this.

While we are at it…

Global Warming scam booster James Hansen debunked

Environmentalism and the state: destroying progress and capital

Climate Cops: The Unboxing

A Handbook for Deniers

A new loathsome creature to entertain you

Carbon ration cards: ID Cards and NIR by the back door

Global Warming Brainwashing

Climate Change Hoax: rerun of a fraud

Watson On Monbiot

Of particular interest is the ‘Climate Cops: The Unboxing’ post. Many educational books have a slant that contains blatant Global Warming propaganda. Maths books ask you to calculate how much carbon would be produced in a scenario. Chemistry books talk about the greenhouse effect, and so on. All of these books now need to be replaced with books that do not contain this propaganda. Children will now no longer have vile world government, malthusian propaganda shoved into their ears.

This is a very important event; what it also demonstrates is that all the time this has been going on, decent people have been living a complete lie. The next question that should be asked is this, what else that I believe is a lie?

Sadly, everything that you read on information outlets that tell only the truth is true.

The money you have in your pocket is worthless.
There is a decades long plan to set up a world tyranny run by evil bankers.
Lack of regulation was not the cause of ‘the banking crisis’.
911 was an inside job.

Instead of waiting for the people who are behind the lies in the documentaries and sites listed above to come clean, people who were gulled into beliving the Global Warming Hoax should take a serious look at all the assumptions they have… about everything, and then throw out the garbage.

How can they detect the garbage?


The common stink

Sunday, November 22nd, 2009

There is a common element to almost all the bad things that are and have been swirling around us for decades. Here are three examples.

We already know that ‘Global Warming‘ is junk science and a complete fraud. Now there are no doubts left for even the most ardent religious fanatic that spouts Anthropogenic Global Warming garbage or its latest incarnation ‘Climate Change’.

You can read the rundown at The Telegraph. Put plainly, these people have been caught with their pants down. They have been caught trying to nobble a scientific journal, deliberately leaving out data so that they can make their case and so on and so on; every single thing that honest scientists cannot do if they are to remain objective and true scientists, they have been caught doing.

This perversion of science and the truth is behind the Cap and Trade legislation that will destroy America’s economy. It powers the thinking behind the absurd ‘saved carbon’ displays that are attached to solar panels. (in this example one million pounds was spent on solar panels, whilst the castle itself is falling to pieces due to damp). It is behind the ridiculous and illogical ban on incandescent light bulbs. It is behind the absurd rainbow styled energy rating certificates that the EU mandates for all properties that are for rent or sale (the owner is forced to pay for inspection to get a certificate; a new burocrazy), and that even extend to devices. It is behind the proposed personal carbon trading schemes that will create an artificial economy based around ‘carbon’, where you will have to swipe an ID Card whenever you buy anything or travel anywhere.

These corrupt scientists have concocted a complex and difficult to penetrate lie, so that the world economy can be distorted and a few people can become billionaires in this new artificial economy that will sit on top of the real economy. They ignore the truth, suppress it and suppress and destroy the reputation of anyone that tries to uncover their lies so that they can personally benefit.

The same thing is happening with Education in the UK:

Government’s key adviser on Academies makes millions …from setting up Academies

A key Government adviser on Labour’s flagship City Academy scheme is now earning millions of pounds in fees from the taxpayer by setting up the controversial schools.

The scheme was at the centre of the so-called ‘cash for peerages’ scandal when police were called in to investigate claims that Labour was offering honours to businessmen who invested in the schools.

Now a series of leaked documents, obtained by The Mail on Sunday, reveal how the Government’s vision of local business helping to rescue failing schools has been replaced by fat-cat consultancy firms earning huge fees to set them up.

Daily Mail

If you have been reading BLOGDIAL you already know that Home Education has been under serious and increasing threat for over five years, culminating in a scandalous, fallacious and vile report by Graham Badman, that, precisely like the Climate Change scientists involved in the scandal above, revolves around the misuse of statistics, fabrication, baseless opinion and fear mongering, all of which is designed to engineer legislation whose sole aim is totalitarian control over people who were previously at liberty to live as they chose, so that a few people can make money out of the existence of children.

This fear mongering was supported by evil social workers and fake charities (NSPCC) who all repeated lies about Home Education for the sole reason that it would provide them with unprecedented access to children for financial and other, more sinister purposes.

Finally we have the spectacle of ‘Lord’ Mandelson and his nauseating and corrupt intervention into the workings of the internet at the behest of the buggy whip wielding entertainment industry.

The entertainment industry has been spreading false reports of heavy loses due to ‘illegal copying’ for decades, whilst suppressing any evidence that copying music helps expand the market for music products.

The frictionless distribution offered by the internet represents the greatest opportunity ever for artists to expose and profit from their work. Copyright was originally envisioned as a way to encourage creativity by guaranteeing the makers of works a short time period where they would have the exclusive power to control who can do what with copies of their works, after which, everyone would be able to exercise their property rights over the copies that they own.

Now copyright is a weapon that is being used to destroy the property rights of individuals, as well as the rights of speech of people world-wide.

This is being done by Mandelson at the direct command of the entertainment industry, who, if they could, would shut down the internet entirely to preserve their ancient and hopelessly broken business model.

These luddites (the book publishers and newspaper hacks are no better) would see the greatest invention since the Gutenberg Press crippled and made less useful, for no good reason at all, simply because they lack the skills and imagination to make use of it.


All of the matters above have one thing in common; the common stink that you smell whenever you encounter matters like this. That stink is the smell of THE STATE.

Without the state, none of these things could happen; they all rely on the state to ruin progress, rape, steal money and destroy life.

The monsters involved in Education rely on money from the state to do their evil with children. That includes the people who designed and sold ContactPoint, who are making money directly off of children. Without the state, there could be no ContactPoint contract.

The same goes for those academies; the contracts to create them could not exist without the state. Some argue that education itself would cease without the state running it. This is completely false.

Every evil to do with education comes out of the state’s involvement in it. The Home Education scandal in the UK is a direct result of the state provision of education, and compulsory schooling laws; were it not for that, there would be no ‘School Attendance Orders’ that could be issued to parents. If the state was not responsible for the education of anyone, which it should not be, the idea that Home Educators should be registered would never have arisen.

The state is the rotten smell behind it.

The blatantly corrupt and evil Mandelson, plainly and clearly acting at the behest of the entertainment industry, would not be able to create a new set of laws in addition to The Copyright and Patents Act if the state did not act on behalf of industry to facilitate the monopoly on ‘intellectual property’. As is made clear in the book in the previous link, we would all be better off in every sphere of life without copyrights and patents. The internet has partially demonstrated how a copyright free world could operate and bring huge benefits to everyone who consumes and creates works. If there were no state, there would be no threat of the crippling of the internet, and the even more astonishing threat of unlimited powers to do anything as long as it is in the service of protecting copyright.

The state is the rotten smell behind it.

The Anthropogenic Global Warming hoax, a scam second only to the Federal Reserve System in its magnitude, is another example of how in the absence of a state, scientists would have little (or at least different) incentives for falsifying data.

Without a state mandating widespread changes in how people voluntarily interact with each other, it would be impossible to build a business on a lie like ‘Carbon Capture’ or ‘Carbon Footprints’, or gain employment based on a lie. Artificial stimulus of industries to cater to this Climate Change lie could not exist; the capital used to create them would be diverted into places where it is needed. An example of this is, once again, the incandescent light bulb. Capital has been diverted away from improving it and into new, unpleasant, poisonous bulbs. The incandescent light bulb, had capital not been diverted away from developing it, would have greatly exceeded its current efficiency, if indeed, that is what the market required of manufacturers.

The fact is that since AGW is false, energy efficiency is not a priority with regard to ‘carbon emissions’. You may want to spend less money on your electricity bill, but that is an entirely different matter to the artificial, state created pressure put on the light bulb industry, powered by corrupt and lying scientists.

Once again, the state is the rotten smell behind it.

The only way that everyone will be free to live to their fullest potential, is in a situation where there is no state. There is no need for a state. There is no need for one to protect anyone, ensure anything, to educate anyone or to foster creativity. All of these assumptions, that a state is needed for these functions, is false.

Finally, you cannot believe on the one hand, that we need a state for some things, but not others. As soon as there is a state, like a foul smelling weed, it will begin to rapidly grow and take over everything, killing every other living thing and strangling your liberty.

You cannot, on the one hand, be for your own individual rights, but be for the banning of smoking, or the banning of hunting, for example. If you are for the banning of anything by the state, you are against whatever rights you wish to claim for yourself. If you are for the taxing of the rich, so that they pay ‘their fair share’ then you are against your own individual rights, and furthermore, you are an advocate of theft by violence, as are the people who insist that ‘something must be done’ about Home Education, or ‘pollution’, or file sharers. The people who advocate these things are all violent types, and there is no escaping it. All of this is an unavoidable fact, and many people are having a great crisis in their lives because they are being unconsciously confronted with the stark reality that they hold and espouse two conflicting beliefs simultaneously.

Before you can begin to think clearly, you have to address the root of a problem and then align your thinking correctly so that there are no contradictions. The outcome might be unpleasant, but in the end, it is the only way to develop a mode of thought that when it is applied to or tested against anything, returns the correct, and logically consistent answer every time, giving you an opportunity to get to a solution.

The state is the cause of everyone’s problems. It destroys or distorts everything it touches. The sooner it has been gotten rid of, the better. This is the fact, the unspeakable, unthinkable fact that you must come to understand if you are interested in your rights and the protection of them.

Tories: “we will kill off Queen’s speech bills”

Friday, November 20th, 2009

Tory peers will use time pressure to thwart Gordon Brown’s ‘electioneering’ package
Queen’s speech focuses on pensioners, parents and economic recovery

Tory peers are ready to block most of the government bills to be announced in the Queen’s speech tomorrow, threatening to mire the final days of Gordon Brown’s government in frustration and delay.

Lord Strathclyde, the Conservative leader in the Lords, predicted that few if any of the bills announced amid tomorrow’s fanfare and pageantry would reach the statute book without the consent of Tory peers.

“We all know that this Queen’s speech is all about better electioneering and politics rather than the better governance of the country,” he told the Guardian.

“If these measures were so important they would have been in the legislative programme last year rather than being left to the last moment of the fifth term. That does not suggest they have the greatest priority or urgency.”

The government is expected to launch a total of 15 bills, encompassing measures to provide residential care for old people, new controls on the parents of antisocial children and a fiscal responsibility plan compelling the government to halve the public deficit within four years.

But as the government takes parliament into a fifth session for the first time since John Major in 1996 – when the Tories had to jettison legislation before the election the following May – Conservative peers can use the government’s lack of an overall majority in the Lords to block bills owing to lack of time before an expected May 2010 election.

Strathclyde said the Lords would not abandon its responsibility to scrutinise. His remarks underline the degree to which the Queen’s speech will be seen as the first draft of a Labour manifesto rather than a realistic legislative prospectus.

He said: “There are now only 33 legislative days left in the Lords between January and Easter [the most likely date for parliament’s dissolution]. That does not give much time at all to carry out the Lords’ proper duty to scrutinise legislation. Historically the Lords has taken its job of scrutinising legislation very seriously. We should not throw away that reputation or duty at the last moment.”

Strathclyde said it was “too early to say which bills we will allow through, but we will have to look at each bill in turn”.

Tory strategists know they will have to tread carefully not to be seen to be blocking popular measures, something governments perennially accuse oppositions of in the runup to an election.

Sources in the Lords said that in practice the government would have to jettison vast tracts of bills in order to get non-controversial clauses through. Even if the Conservatives do not have an overall majority, they can use the government’s lack of time to extract concessions.

The Lords tend to spend as long as seven weeks scrutinising a bill. Unlike the Commons, all amendments can be selected for debate and no time limit is set on how long an amendment can be debated.

Labour has 212 peers, the Conservatives 190 and the Liberal Democrats 71. Bills most likely to reach the statute book are those carried over from the previous parliament, including the equalities bill, the child poverty bill and the constitutional reform bill.


Now whether or not you have the right to educate your children at home without interference rests on wether or not there is enough time to debate a bill.

All those who pick or bite their nails will no doubt be getting their plasters ready.

And what if there had been enough time? Would that make the result correct? It would be a great relief that this evil is killed, but really, the very fact that it has gone so far as to be actually drafted is a big wake up call to all those who think that they have any guaranteed rights.

Graham Stuart said in a speech:

The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke), who speaks for the Liberal Democrats, said that she has been persuaded that a light-touch registration scheme for home-educated children would be appropriate. At first glance it looks as if that would offer benefits, just as with ID cards it seemed obvious at first glance that they would provide us with defence against terrorism and make us more secure. The more we gained an understanding of how ID cards would actually work and of the nature of the terrorist threat, the more the efficacy of ID cards to help us in that regard melted away. I would suggest that the idea of light-touch registration to make children safer or to make it more likely that they will get a suitable education will, on closer inspection, also melt away. I put it to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that people who move around the country will not be caught by the net, but the typical people who will be caught by it are those who live in one place, who are committed to elective home education yet have to face someone from a local authority coming and knocking on their door.


The problem with this of course, is that the ID Card fiasco, despite everyone shouting at the top of their lungs for almost a decade that it was a huge and immoral mistake, not only passed in a vote, but has had a vast fortune spent on it, and it is in fact being trialled right now in Manchester, despite the Tories saying they are going to scrap it.

Why should anyone have to put up with the violations in this bill for even one second, only to have the bill undone when these people realise what any idiot can, that it simply is WRONG. The answer to that question is that they should not have to wait, or be damaged, or disrupted or forced to pull up stakes and move on the word of a few venal and evil people. No one should have to suffer because these sinister busybodies do not have a complete understanding of technology and no morality.

Sadly, even if this bill is killed, the threat of other reviews and new bills will still be there and then there is the even bigger threat of the Lisbon treaty that can be added to without any review process whatsoever. If an anti Home Education article is added to that treaty, then all the states that are signatories will have to implement it, and of course, since most of the EU is already rabidly anti Home Education, you can expect no sympathy or help from them in that potential fight.

Its been said elsewhere, and here…

  1. No more reviews into Home Education, no matter who is involved in them.
  2. No new legislation regarding Home Education. Period.

Home Education is well understood and understandable for anyone who cares to spend a day on the Google. And now, for that speech:

Why cannot the Government adopt a humbler approach?

Because totalitarians are not humble.

Why can they not invest more money in research, enabling us to gain a better understanding of who is not at school and who is being educated at home?

Spending money on research is not an ‘investment’. Home Education is already very well understood. People who are educated at home are not the responsibility of the state. That money would be better spent in the failing schools that the state is already in charge of.

Why can we not be given a better understanding of where problems might lie among electively home-educated people?

All you have to do is ask, if you are interested, which apparently most MPs are not. In any case, there are no problems in the first place; the idea that there is a problem with Home Education is a fantasy concocted by people who want to make money off of children.

Why can we not have a voluntary registration system, perhaps involving additional financial support for families educating children at home?

There already is a voluntary registration system in place; you can register with your Local Authority if you like. This is hilarious coming from someone who used the ID Card fiasco as an example of what should not be done; the government first said that the cards would be voluntary, and of course, getting the card might be, but if you want to leave the country (renew your passport) you will have to be entered onto the National Identity Register by force… or you can never leave the country. Yes indeed, that’s really voluntary.

The present position is absurd.

It is absurd. They say the current system is unworkable, and that is true; the Local Authorities have been given duties that are beyond their remit in a free society. They have no business getting involved in family life in the way that they have been doing. The onerous and immoral duties that have been placed on these people should be removed; THAT is the way to solve the conundrum of them being given the responsibility for the supervision of Home Educated children but not the power to interfere with them.

A home educator told our Select Committee that one father had to pay £1,000 to cover the cost of GCSE exams taken by his daughter, although he was a taxpayer like the rest of us.

I do not know about anyone else, but if I had a daughter that wanted to take some exams, I would find the money so that she could take them, and not complain about it. That amount is far less than a decade of fees in a private school. In any case, this is a simple matter to solve. Schools that are examination centres should be required to allow anyone to come and sit exams just like the students who attend the school. Problem solved.

Why do we have to go down the compulsory route?

Because the people behind this are monsters, as are the people behind the fake charities that feed off of the existence of children. Without compulsion, the contracts for the licensing databases, and all the companies that are now lining up to offer training in ‘Elective Home Education’ would be worthless. This is what it really is about, and as long as those pressures are there, there will be vampires lobbying for these sorts of immoral measures.

Why do this Government always think they know best?

They are completely delusional, psychopathic monsters who are not acting in the best interests of anyone but whose sole driving impulse is to cause harm on a massive scale on every front that they can touch.

Why can they not work with people on a voluntary basis,

Because they believe they are the masters of the population, not the servants.

build up the picture and then and only then—with a complete picture and a real understanding of the risks in respect of safeguarding and education—come forward with proposals, which might involve compulsory registration if there is due and proper cause.

Even if, out of the alleged eighty thousand home educators, ninety percent of them were really terrible parents, that would not mean that the remaining ten percent should have their lives disrupted, and their rights wiped out. There are many types of bad person out there; we do not register everyone just because there are a few, or many ‘bad apples’. You are innocent until proven guilty. You should not have your liberty in any way curtailed just because there are other people who are bad. This is a fundamental principle of living in a free country and of liberty itself. That is why no legislation of this kind can ever be justified or moral. The ISA is another example of this sick and twisted thinking, straight out of the evil totalitarian philosophy of New Labour.

Due and proper cause does not currently exist, and I sincerely hope those aspects of the Children, Schools and Families Bill that deal with home education will not become law.

Once again, even if there are some bad parents, that does not mean that all parents should be interfered with. And wether the bill is passed or not, everyone will be working against its measures except those who will stand to profit from them, and the corrupt and immoral system that produced this travesty will be even further discredited, if that is even possible.


Hansard does not record how many people were there to hear a speech, but according to the Daily Mail:

No one was there to hear this speech. And that photo from the ever lying BBC is cropped; the complete wide angle view shows nothing but row upon row of empty green leather

You can guarantee that none of the MPs not there to hear the speech will be reading Hansard to comb through the drivel to inform themselves before any vote, so this speech might as well have been given in the house of commons loos for all the influence it will have.

And on the same page as this, is an amazing tirade from Barry Sheerman:

Childhood ought to be protected, warns MP, as he reveals young pupils are staying up late to watch pornography

Children as young as five are imitating sex acts at school because they are being allowed to stay up late and watch pornography, a senior MP has warned.

Barry Sheerman, chairman of the Children, Schools and Families Select Committee, said that teachers are witnessing ‘disgusting’ behaviour in the classroom by pupils who are too young to know what they are doing.

Mr Sheerman, MP for Huddersfield, blamed the increasing amount of pornography that could easily be watched by children on satellite channels and over the internet.

He said Britain was ‘awash’ with promoting sexual activity to youngsters far too early in life.

In a Commons’ debate on the Queen’s Speech he said: ‘I think it is very serious the access to pornography to children.

‘You go to infant schools now and teachers say to me: “Children come here at five and six simulating sexual behaviour that they should know nothing about.”
‘We are a country awash with focus on early sexual activity.’

He said the amount of pornography on the internet and satellite television that was available to children ‘ disturbed’ him. He added: ‘I believe that childhood ought to be protected.’

His comments echo those of other MPs who are calling for tougher measures on ‘lads mags’ to ensure they are kept out of children’s reach.
Earlier this year a survey warned that teenagers said they had learned about sex from pornography.

Nearly nine out of ten 14 to 17-year-olds had looked at graphic images and nearly one in five viewed them more than once a week, according to research for Channel 4’s The Sex Education Show Vs Pornography.

Daily Mail

This government, wants to force decent people with unblemished children who are very sensibly running away from these insane asylums known as ‘schools’ to send their sons and daughters to be corrupted by the children described by Barry Sheerman.

If it wasn’t all happening you would not be take seriously if you said the words out loud.

This is also the government that wants to force all parents to expose their five year olds to sex education in state schools.

None of this makes any sense.

On the one hand, you have Barry Sheerman saying that children are not acting appropriately in state schools, then on the other, he is saying that any parent that does not want their children to be exposed to this is not being a good parent. Then the same people want to force all five year olds to have sex education, but with the same breath, say that ‘childhood ought to be protected’ and that these children are demonstrating knowledge about ‘behaviour that they should know nothing about’.

If they should know NOTHING about it, then how on earth can you advocate TEACHING THEM ABOUT IT?

And just what kind of lunatic would observe that some children are clearly being exposed to things they should not be seeing, but then insist that all children must be locked in rooms with these children from bad homes?

Any sensible person would say, “I am not having any part of it”. And damn them all to hell from whence they came.

Finally this is on top of the fact that these schools are fundamentally and systemically broken places, where if you send your child there, you risk them not being able to read, write or do arithmetic. Or know the difference between the ion form of an element and an element.

It just got worse

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Dumped into our inbox; it’s worse than your worse nightmare:

This is bad. Here is the link to the bill on home education.

http://www.publicat ions.parliament. uk/pa/cm200910/ cmbills/008/ 10008.38- 44.html#m01s

You would have to apply to register your child for home education. It lasts one year. This seems to me to mean that you have to get permission to home educate your child, because in some circumstances, like when they decide your information is inadequate, the LA can decline to register your child, and if they think it would be “harmful to your child’s welfare” to home educate, the LA must refuse registration.

You have to give prescribed information about your child’s education when you apply to register. (To be defined in later regulations or guidelines.)

The local authority should arrange to see your child, and the parent or educator, at least once during the year, and visit at least one of the places where education is taking place at least once a year. These arrangements “may, unless the child or a parent of the child objects, provide for a meeting with the child at which no parent of the child or other person providing education to the child is present.” (So maybe you can meet at a museum? And maybe you can stop them meeting with your child alone, but then again, you may get a lot of pressure and they just might decide that you are not cooperating? see below.)

The local authority is to decide whether the education is suitable, whether it accords with the information you provided them, what the child’s wishes and feelings are, and whether it would “harmful for the child’s welfare for the child to continue to be a home-educated child.” I

The LA can revoke your registration if :

  • you “fail to fulfil an undertaking” given in your statement of prescribed information — ie you didn’t do what you told them you planned at the beginning of the year;
  • information provided in connection with your application is incorrect or inadequate in a material respect whether or not it was correct when you gave the information — I can’t figure out just what this means but it seems like if circumstances change, the LA can revoke your registration;
  • it would be “harmful to the child’s welfare” to continue to be home-educated; or
  • you don’t co-operate with the LA, by not cooperating with the annual meetings with you and your child or if you give an “objection to a meeting” and the LA decides this does not leave them “adequate opportunity” to decide if your education is ok.

I have to say the lawyer in me is very worried about how fuzzy these standards are, and the many opportunities to deny the right to home educate, fearing that in some ways this is worse than I feared from the dire Badman report . . .


So you have to not only be licensed, but you have to APPLY to be licensed.

Autonomous learners need not apply obviously.

This bill is completely outrageous in every way that something can be outrageous.

Notice at the end, there is language that hints they understand that ContactPoint is going to be scrapped:

A local authority in England must make arrangements to enable

them to establish (so far as it is possible to do so) the identities of


If they have ContactPoint in place, they would have written that the ‘national register of children should be consulted to create a list of all those who are unaccounted for’ etc.

But all of this is moot.

The legislation is drafted. They will successfully argue that it needs to be passed intact.

If they do pass it, there will be no route out for anyone that wants to educate their child at home without interference.

Take a look at this:


In determining whether the condition in subsection (1)(d) or (f) is

satisfied, an authority shall, so far as is reasonably practicable and

consistent with the child’s welfare, give due consideration (having

regard to the child’s age and understanding) to any wishes and

feelings of the child ascertained by them.

This essentially means that the the Local Authority becomes the parent of the child if you apply for registration as a home educator, and ‘your’ child can short circuit your parental authority, duty and care either by accident, misinterpretation or deliberately, causing your licence to be revoked, and your child withdrawn from your care.

For all those who bristle at the idea of children being property, your registration of ‘your’ child will turn over parental responsibility and ownership to the Local Authority, who will have control over your child in the same way that a parent should. Registration of your child is a transfer of property and of responsibility.

No doubt, this bill is going to be picked to pieces by the people who are good at that. There is nothing good to be found in it whatsoever; it is thoroughly bad.

This bill gives carte blanche to Local Authorities to absolutely control Home Education and Home Educators, and of course, the next round of legislation and or guidelines defining what a suitable education is is just around the corner, and will be the final nail in the coffin.

It effectively destroys it completely, leaving no room for anything other than what the Local Authority thinks is good for ‘your’ child.

They said that they respected Home Educators. This is their version of respect. They said that Home Educators would be operating within the law, unlike the Germans. Clearly there is not going to be any real Home Education at all in the UK should this bill pass.

I said that everything they say is the reverse of what they really mean; they said they want to strengthen Home Education, when they actually mean they want to destroy it. Well, now we see that this is precisely the case.

California outlaws large, power-hungry TVs

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

In a move that could spell the end of the plasma TV industry as we know it, the state of California agreed today to enact strict regulations on the amount of power televisions can consume, effectively outlawing most large plasma TVs as of January 1, 2011, with many more televisions set to be banned beginning January 1, 2013.

The state had been concerned that 10 percent of a home’s energy use is typically devoted to the TV and its related equipment, and that percentage has been increasing as consumers gain access to larger and larger (and cheaper and cheaper) televisions, which command an ever-increasing hunger for power.

The new rules go into effect a little more than a year from now: On January 1, 2011, televisions will be required to reduce energy consumption by an average of 33 percent. In 2013, a second tier of restrictions will go into effect, with average energy consumption required to be reduced by 49 percent vs. today’s levels.

Rest assured, this doesn’t mean the end of the television as we know it. As the California Energy Commission notes, as of now, over 1,000 televisions already meet the 2011 standards, so many manufacturers won’t have to panic in order to comply with the regulations, at least for now.

Those who will be heavily affected are manufacturers who make televisions that draw more than their fair share of juice. A formula related to the size of the TV’s screen in square inches will be used to determine the maximum power draw allowed by a TV. For example, Panasonic’s 54-inch VIERA plasma TV would be allowed to draw 281 watts of power in “on mode.” Today that set is rated to draw 293 watts of power. Smaller plasmas are generally OK under the 2011 specs, but virtually all of them fall short when put up against the 2013 rules. That same 54-inch plasma will be required to draw only 175 watts once 2013 arrives, a power reduction that just might not be possible.

Bottom line: Most LCD televisions will be safe under the 2011 law, and many plasmas will as well, but come 2013, everyone’s going to have to do some serious belt-tightening.

All told, the new rules are expected to save 6,515 Gigawatt-hours annually in the state, save the state $8.7 billion in costs for additional power plants, and save consumers $8.1 billion a year in lower energy bills.

One additional point of note: The new rules currently don’t apply to very large TVs, those of 1,400 square inches or larger (roughly a 58″ set), although rules are likely to be enacted against these ultra-large sets in the second phase of this legislation.


Lets get this straight.

You buy an electricity supply from a company, or make it yourself with your own solar panels or windmill.

The state says, “you cannot use that TV because it consumes too much electricity”.

Too much of WHOSE electricity?

Once that electricity enters your house, or you make it yourself, it is completely up to you what you do with it. Why should someone who lives ‘off grid’ (or on grid for that matter) be stopped from spending his own money on electricity?

This is all part of the same core idea; that the state can get into your home and tell you what you can or cannot do there. Wether it is running a certain type of electricity consuming equipment, washing your clothes, heating your house, cook your food, flushing your loo or bathing, or eating, they are trying to regulate absolutely everything that you do, no matter where you do it.

And note the language in this piece, “more than their fair share of juice”. What does this mean exactly? Electricity does not come from a collective pool that is distributed free to everyone; it is a product that is purchased by a household for personal use. There is no ‘fair share’ in any aspect of electricity generation, distribution or consumption. And no, global warming is not a result of electricity generation.

No doubt, if america is even still there, there will be a ‘cash for plasmas’ where people are encouraged to trade in their perfectly good televisions for new ones, none of which are manufactured in the USA.

Parliament put on notice: DON’T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

Dropped into the BLOGDIAL inbox (twice!):


This is urgent, and requires active participation by all HEs. Please read and forward to all HEs and HE lists that you belong to.

This act is not in competition with or an attack against any HE person or HE organisation. Now is not the time for an HE civil war. We need to deal with the real threat first, then try to resolve conflict within the HE community later. OUR STRENGTH IS NOT ONLY IN OUR CONVICTIONS IT IS ALSO IN OUR NUMBERS.

The Badman recommendations have generated a great deal of fear within the HE community; but the threat is an illusion. If we ALL refuse to cooperate nothing will happen – they will NOT come for you and your children. Their power over us is based on our own fear.

This is a declaration to parliament, putting them on notice that they should not add the recommendations of the Graham Badman Report into new law, and that we will not co-operate with any such law should they dare to enact it.

If you agree with what it says, select all the text between the dividers, copy the text to a new document, print it, sign it or otherwise make your mark on it, and then send it to your MP. Then forward this entire message to any Home Educators and parents that you know and urge them to do the same. You may disseminate this public notice to anyone and any place you think will help it gain momentum.

Whether you are involved in the petition or any other initiative makes no odds. Use this to deluge your MPs and show them once and for all that we are united!

To find your MP’s address use this site:

Notice of Refusal to Co-operate


WHEREAS the recommendations of the GRAHAM BADMAN REVIEW OF ELECTIVE HOME EDUCATION have been accepted in full by the Secretary of State.

AND that these grossly disproportionate recommendations hold serious implications for the civil liberties of parents, children and families in this country.

AND that these recommendations place primary responsibility for assessing the suitability of education and the welfare of the child on the state, rather than the parent – with no prior evidence that either is unsatisfactory prior to this grossly intrusive intervention.

AND that the recommendations of the review assumes that the home is an inherently unsafe or unhealthy place for the child to be.

AND that these recommendations undermine the role of the parent and trample over family freedoms in its haste to set parent and child up against each other, bestowing additional and selective “rights” on home educated children that only the government can adequately minister to.

AND that these recommendations destroy the very possibility of true autonomy in learning.

AND that these recommendations operate from a position of requiring proof of parental innocence rather than reasonable suspicion of guilt.

AND that these recommendations discriminatorily use the coercive and interventionist tools of parental licensing, warrantless entry to the home, inspection according to arbitrary external standards, and an unconscionable new power to interrogate the child without the parents present.

AND that the outcome of these recommendations will be horribly discriminatory to a minority community, the measures eventually having to apply to anyone who has their child at home with them: parents with under 5s, those whose children attend private school, and also those with school-aged children who are at home in the evenings, over the weekends, and throughout the summer holidays.

AND that the outcome of these inspections will be based on the very human whim and prejudices of a local authority officer, who will have the power to destroy the life and education that that parent has conceived for his or her child.

AND that if the government is to avoid further discrimination it also stands to reason that each child who attends school must be given the same “rights” as home educated children – to “have their voices heard” regarding whether or not they are happy to be educated in school, whether they are satisfied with their teachers and whether they feel safe in such an environment.

WE ACCEPT that it is right that appropriate and proportionate action, as currently outlined in the law, may be taken to rectify a situation if there are serious concerns about a child’s welfare, observing that a child being at home with its parents is not, and never has been, in and of itself a child welfare issue.

AND HEREBY RESOLVE that any such utterly disproportionate legislation if passed will fundamentally alter the relationship between citizen and state, and would constitute a fundamental violation of our rights,

AND that any such legislation is illegitimate on its face.

NOW UNDERSTAND that by this declaration, Parliament is PUT ON NOTICE that I and others will not co-operate with any such legislation, and strongly caution you not to consider, debate, or enact any such legislation.

Signed _______________________________


Well well well. At last, the sleeper has awakened!

No more begging. No more pleading. No more nonsense.

No means ‘NO’, and that does not mean ‘maybe’, or conditionally, or partially or “come back after you have thought about it some more”.

Right is right, and wrong is wrong, and no matter what, this is the LAST STRAW. You may go NO FURTHER.

I have said it many times before; there is nothing they can do to force you to obey them, and they rely on your good and honest nature as if it were a character flaw so that they can do bad things to you. They cannot stop the hunters from hunting, they cannot keep drugs off of the street and they cannot even keep them out of the prisons. They are massively overstretched on every front, almost to breaking point. There is no money to come after Home Educators, who are the lowest priority of all priorities. Ed Balls and the other evil clowns have announced a list of 23 new guarantees for all pupils; how are they going to pay for all of it when they are CUTTING The budget by TWO BILLION POUNDS? The answer is THEY CANNOT.

Anyone who says that they are going to cooperate in any way is quite simply a total fool. Filling out their vile forms and engaging with them does 99% of the work of control. If no one communicates with them, if no one cooperates with them they will find their plans to be completely stymied. There are not enough of them to chase up and control everyone. There are not enough of them to collate all the information they need, and of course, whatever they can write down will not have your consent and will be worthless. Even if they could do it, there are not enough people to enforce their disgusting plans.

The facts are these; if you want your liberty you can take it; it is yours, right in your hands right now. You need to put all of your fear aside and simply… ‘do not’.

But that is only if they manage to pass the legislation, and that might not even happen. Certainly it is not going to be made easy for them.

In the final analysis, no matter what happens, either way they have LOST!


In case any of you simple minded people out there have any doubts about the ill intentions of these monsters, take a look at where the Home Education licensing proposal is listed at the website of monster central:


under ‘Safeguarding the Vulnerable’!

Full screen grab here, in case they try and re-write history.

Absolutely unbelievable. These people are declaring that the children of home educators are in need of safeguarding, simply because they are educated at home!

Are you angry yet?

This is just like the scandal of Neu Liebour officially listing Landsbanki as terrorist organisation:

Absolutely appalling.

Once again, there is no depth to which these people will not sink, no lie they will shirk from telling in order to get their grubby fat hands on your children, and as we have seen, the women are as bad as if not worse than the men.

If this has not pushed you over the edge, then you do not have a pulse.

If you are wasting your time bickering over nonsense instead of doing everything you possibly can to put a stop to this, you deserve everything that you get.

They really are the worst bunch of people imaginable, and they really are after you and your children!

Three fat clowns and ‘your’ democracy

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

Three fat clown monsters want your children to march to their beat. You know their names. See how it runs:

They may just get away with it. Why? Because there are many intelligent, well meaning, thoughtful, dutiful and innocent people who believe in fairy tales and outright lies, like ‘democracy’.

[…] This travesty of a review and constant consultations are discrimination and prejudice against a law-abiding population who are shouldering the very important task of providing an education to their most precious children.

It is true; this is a form of vile discrimination, but it is more than that; it is a deliberate and premeditated project to snuff out the emergence of a properly educated army of thinking people, who would constitute a grave threat to the status quo.

Home educators should be honoured and encouraged, not vilified and harassed by a pretend and disgraceful shambles of a concoction thrown together by a bunch of people (Badman, Balls and the various LAs) who have reason to manacle home educators. Schools are dying. Everyone knows that a school education in many cases is tantamount to no education, therefore we must have alternatives in this country.

No, ‘therefore’ you and your home educating must be snuffed out. You are a forest fire that needs to be put out. You are a threat. Your children are a threat. Your success is threatening, because as people learn about what you were able to do, they rightly believe that they can do it too. A trickle becomes a torrent, a torrent of fire that is scorching out the belief that, for example, only a qualified teacher can teach a child, or even more shocking, that a child needs a teacher at all.

To cut the throat of other interesting and lively possibilities like home education is to cut the throat of a vibrant and economically sound Britain.

If anything is clear, its that these people do not know anything about economics. Economic illiteracy reaches from the the lowest person to the highest in this and almost every other country. It is a very big problem. As for interesting and lively possibilities, these monsters with no souls do not want anything lively to be anywhere within one hundred thousand miles of them. Why do you think they outlaw playing music in clubs and dancing in open fields?

The only reason Britain has lasted as a sovereign nation thus far is that Britain has been tolerant of minorities and encouraging of difference. This quality in our once-glorious country is disappearing fast and will leave Britain trailing along behind those devastated economies that treat people worse than pigs and snuffle up the left-overs of more primary nations.

Britain has lasted for such a long time on the momentum of the empire, and nothing else. Tolerance of minorities has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Government ministers must realise that they are actually accountable to the people. They must be aware that people have rights and work on that premise.

And if they do not, then what? What are you going to do about it? Neu Liebour does not in any way think that it is accountable to ‘the people’, in fact, quite the opposite. They do not accept that you have any rights other than the ones that they describe and grant you, and all of those, including the right to life, are conditional. That is the sole premise upon which they operate. That is why they believe that they have the power to enter your home and speak to your children without you being there, and they propose it without any fear that they will be stopped or in any way seriously challenged. What is even more nauseating than the fact that there are subhuman monsters that think they can do this, is the fact that there are parents who say out loud that they will comply with any such law should it be passed. I wonder just what it would take to make those parents say, “that is a step too far, and I will not do it”. I wonder, if they passed legislation saying that all parents must give their child up to a state run kibbutz upon birth, to be returned when they are 16, that these parents would say, “I am not sure if I am going to disobey this new law”. Just what sort of people are these, that they would obey such violations? What will it take for them to say, “enough is enough”? Teaching their children that they are required to submit to strangers is clearly not ‘enough’.

They must assume that people who seem to be doing their best ARE doing their best.

No they must not. This is pure projection; this is what you, as a reasonable person, WANT them to assume.

We are angry, and we have a right to be angry.

Anger is a good, not a right.

We have been slapped in the face with time-sapping and time-wasting consultations. We have been told that we are not fit to educate our children. We have been called child abusers. We have been investigated in case our children have been forced into domestic servitude or trafficking as sex slaves. We, mothers, have been suspected of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy (another charming defamatory statement). How much more do we have to put up with? How much defamation is TOO MUCH?

You tell us. It seems like there is nothing that the state can do to some people that will be too much. Like a pack of hungry wolves, the state knows when the prey has no fight left. Until you are willing to really put your foot down, these predations will continue until you literally have nothing left, and are torn to shreds.

Local authorities regularly treat home educators like enemies.

You ARE their enemies. You represent an element outside of the system. You are ‘the anomaly’. You can spread this systemic threat, by simply existing in the way that you do. Also, you live the sort of life that they are too frightened to live. They are intensely jealous of you. That is why they hate you.

They lie to home educators.

Home Educators LET THEM LIE. The law is available to everyone; they refuse to group together and set up legal defence funds, they refuse to hire lawyers on their own, and so they are WEAK and will be picked off like foxes picking off chickens. It’s as if they have no knowledge of the history of collective resistance and mutual assistance… it beggars belief that it goes on, and honestly, if they refuse to use the power that it at their fingertips, they deserve what they get.

They encroach on their time and energy, and they make up the rules to suit themselves. So MPs are intent on giving them MORE power?

Why not? What are you going to do about it either way? There is nothing that some parents will not obey, so their thinking is, “why not go all the way with every sick proposal that is imaginable and unimaginable?” Remember these are the same monsters who want mandatory sex education for five year olds; there is no depth to which they will not sink. This should be absolutely clear to everyone by now.

Where is democracy? Where is fairness?

THIS IS DEMOCRACY!!! ‘Democracy’ is not a synonym for ‘fairness’, ‘justice’, ‘decency’ or anything else that people routinely misuse that word for. Democracy is exactly what has produced everything that you hate and these attacks on you and your family. The sooner you wake up and understand this, the quicker you will get to the solution to your problems… or at least a real understanding of them.

Where do we look for justice? Not to Parliament, we fear.

Parliament is the seat of democracy.

What do we tell our children? That MPs don’t care about you or your rights? That they’ll listen to you but not take heed? That you can refuse medical treatment but you cannot refuse to be led away by a stranger to be questioned by yourself (no matter who that stranger is)? That your mother and father have to be on a list because they might hurt you and some faceless bureaucrat with ice in his heart might have to ‘check’ that you’re not being brutalised?

You tell your children THE TRUTH. And the truth is that democracy is the thing that is about to criminalise you and which abuses you and your family. It is the thing that steals from you, corrals you like cattle, and uses the fruit of your own labour to do it. If you do not tell your children this truth, then they will be slaves just like everyone else. Slaves to false ideas of what is right and wrong, of who and what they really are and what their true place in this world is. And you will have utterly failed them. AND YOU DO NOT LET THOSE PEOPLE INTO YOUR HOME.

I am sickened and disgusted by this whole farce, and wish I had never returned to what I considered ‘home’ from Canada. At least, in that country, home educators can do their duty in peace and be free from scurrilous attacks on them from people with dirt in their souls.

Go back there. At least you have a place to go to; many people do not have the means or the place to go. If you are going to stay here and obey, then you really should not waste your time complaining, since no matter what you do, they are going to try and crush you, and only a definitive ‘no’ will be of any real value. And make no mistake; this is just the beginning. There are unthinkable predations on the horizon that come right out of the best/worst science fiction dystopia scenarios, and Britain is where they are going to try them all first.

Gordon Brown to apologise for Britain’s ‘shameful’ child abusing Home Education policies

Monday, November 16th, 2009

Britain is issue an official apology for the “shameful” forced attendance of tens of thousands of children to failing state schools with the promise of a better education, only for many of them to end up illiterate, abused and neglected.

By Richard Alleyne

In what Ed Balls, the children secretary, described as “stain on our society” the anti Home Education programmes saw healthy, perfectly safe, hard working and intelligent Home Educated children sent to state schools, against the expressed wishes of their families.

Many ended up illiterate, many suffered abuse and neglect and many others were used as “slave labour” in factories.

Now after years of campaigning from pressure groups, Gordon Brown has agreed to meet with representatives of the surviving children before making a formal apology next year.

Mr Balls said the apology would be “symbolically very important”.

“I think it is important that we say to the children who are now adults and older people and to their offspring that this is something that we look back on in shame,” he said.

“It is still happening today. But I think it is right that as a society when we look back and see things which we now know were morally wrong, that we are willing to say we’re sorry.”

The government has estimated that a total of 80,000 British children may have been forced to attend state schools under a variety of immoral programs that continue to operate.

A report said that between 6,000 and 30,000 children from Britain and Malta, in perfectly normal families, had their children seen alone by social workers, whereupon they were abused.

Some of the children were told, wrongly, that they were having their “rights” protected.

The anti Home Education laws were intended to stop the children being a burden on the British state by suppressing their natural intelligence, providing the country with pliant workers.

A 1998 British parliamentary inquiry noted that “a further motive was racist: the initial pretext for the changes in the law was forced marriage seen only in certain countries that used to be British Colonies”.

Mr Balls said that while an apology would not “take away the suffering” it was important to the victims to admit it was wrong and to make sure lessons are forgotten.

He said the government was talking to the victims’ organisation to work out how to frame the apology.

“These were children who were stripped of their childhood and education, without their parents permission, and because of our abuse, went on to be illiterate labourers thousands and thousands of miles away from their true destinies, suffered physical and sometimes sexual abuse as well and it was something that was sanctioned, facilitated and encouraged by me and my government and that how we like to treat children,” he said,

“I think there have been discussions going on for some months about how to do this but to be honest it’s a matter of shame for our country and countries around europe that this terrible policy of banning Home Education happened for so many years and decades and it’s actually my government policy.”

The issue of the UK Home Educators was investigated by the Commons select committee, a process which led to the no changes in this immoral policy.

Barry Sheerman, the chairman, said Mr Brown wrote to him over the weekend to confirm he would issue an apology in the new year.

The Prime Minister told him “the time is now right” for the UK government to apologise for the “misguided policies” of this government.

However some survivors felt the apology was too little too late.

Harold Haig, the secretary of the International Home Education Association, said he was appalled that the British apology has come so late and without any change in the law.

“Gordon Brown should hang his head in shame,” he said.

“It is an absolute disgrace. He should hang his head in shame.”


Badman completely discredited: Roundup of submissions to the Schools and Families Select Committee Inquiry into the DCSF-commissioned review of elective home education

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

The memoranda submitted to the Schools and Families Select Committee Inquiry into the DCSF-commissioned review of elective home education have been released.

In the submissions, are many entries confirming everything that has been asserted by Home Educators, and permanently sealing the fate of this scandalous, scabrous, ill considered and highly suspicious report.

There are also some submissions by the same gang of monsters whose common aim is that they wish to get a hold of your children for their nefarious ends.

The line between these two groups is very distinct; on the one hand, we have people who are applying logic, science, high standards, principles and morality to this apalling report, and on the other, sycophants and child exploiters who do not refer to any single fact, but who endorse the report, “because it is right“.

I am going to cherry pick some of the best parts of the submissions.

Read the rest of this entry »

a is to b as b is to c

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

accidental beauty

Original (without artistic intervention from flickr).

Ofstead gearing up to inspect Home Educators?

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

We hear from Ralph Lucas, the following:

Ofsted inspects provision for Home Education
Ofsted are setting out to inspect home education in 15 local authorities. As part of this exercise they will be approaching some parents.

I trust Ofsted to keep whatever they are told in confidence, and not to pass it on to the LA ever, at all, in any way.

I am not happy though with the secrecy with which Ofsted is surrounding its investigation – which LAs, which parents will be talked to, etc. I have put down some questions to see if I can open them up. Nor am I confident that Ofsted understands home education – but talking to more HE parents and children should help.


Secret inspections?

The most sick part of this is that it is no surprise. That is how far everything has sunk.

Of course, Ofsted has no remit to inspect and monitor PRIVATE PEOPLE IN THEIR OWN HOMES. Lets look at their ‘about’ page shall we?

Ofsted is the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills. We regulate and inspect to achieve excellence in the care of children and young people, and in education and skills for learners of all ages.

Standards in education really means standards in the provision of education in schools. The activities of Home Educators are beyond their remit.

Parents are also nothing to do with ‘Children’s services’ parents do not provide a ‘service’ to children. This is all just TOO ABSURD.

They conspicuously leave out WHAT they regulate and inspect; it should say that they inspect schools and other orgainzations that provide education.

We want to raise aspirations and contribute to the long term achievement of ambitious standards and better life chances for service users. Their educational, economic and social well-being will in turn promote England’s national success.

They are pretty much failing in all of this, as is evidenced in the epidemic of illiteracy and innumeracy that is plaguing the UK. They are not raising aspirations, they are not contributing to the long term achievement or ambitious standards and better life choices of an army of failing students.

To achieve this we will report fairly and truthfully; we will listen to service users and providers; and we will communicate our findings with all who share our vision,

And they will not communicate with those who do not share their vision. This is why they are conducting these inspections in secret.

from service providers to policy-makers. We do not report to government ministers but directly to Parliament (and to the Lord Chancellor about children and family courts administration). This independence means you can rely on us for impartial information.

If this is really the case, and their independence and impartiality can be relied upon, then they should immediately come clean about these secret inspections.

  • Who ordered them
  • Who authorised them
  • How they are selecting families to speak to
  • What is the aim of the exercise
  • Why was it kept secret

For a start.

The Education and Inspections Act, which established the new Ofsted, specifically requires that in everything we do we should:

promote service improvement

Nothing to do with Home Education, which is not a service.

ensure services focus on the interests of their users

Nothing to do with Home Education; children are not users and nor are their parents.

see that services are efficient, effective and promote value for money.

Nothing to do with Home Education the efficiency, efficacy or value for money of Home Education is nothing to do with Ofsted or the state in general.

We carry out hundreds of inspections and regulatory visits each week, publishing our findings within the Inspection reports area of this website. Our themed and subject specific findings and recommendations on wider issues within the care, learning, and skills agenda, as well as statistical information, can be found in the Publications and research area.

Nothing to do with Home Education.

And you can find more detailed explanations of which services we inspect and regulate, and how, and the latest guidance documents in the Forms and guidance area.

Who we are and what we do
To find out more about what we do and how our work is helping to improve outcomes for children and learners, please see the Ofsted: who we are and what we do leaflet and the two Raising standards, improving lives booklets available via links on the right.

No thank you.

Putting on our ‘what if’ hat, we can speculate that Ofstead wants to get a new role as inspector of Home Educators in the new totalitarian regime designed to crush Home Educators. Because they already have ‘hundreds of inspections each week’ perhaps they think they can tack on the task of forced invasions of people’s houses.

No matter what agency they throw at Home Educators, the response remains the same. You may not enter a Home Educators home, Home Educators will not communicate with, respond to or in any way acknowledge or engage with anything or anyone that attempts to violate and monetize their children and lives.