What’s In Our water?

Anti-depressant tablets that Britons are taking in ever larger numbers are beginning to have an effect on the country’s water supply. And the results can be observed in the birds at the bottom of your garden.

Birds consuming antidepressants from water have lost interest in food and sex, scientists established after studying starlings. What else is in our water? And if that’s what it’s doing to birds, what is it doing to you?

How do drugs get into the water? When people take pills like antidepressants, not all of the medication is absorbed, meaning that tiny quantities progress into our urine which then passes into the water system. Even after it’s been treated and is safe to consume, it still consists of traces of the medication. The numbers of antidepressants taken by Britons have ascended sharply in the last 20 years.

Since birds drink out of rivers they can be affected by the drugs too.

Here’s what it does to the birds. One recently developed study of starlings near waste plants showed that even low levels of antidepressants drastically affected their behaviour. They looked at levels of the antidepressant fluoxetine which is the master component of Prozac amidst other medication.

Researchers gave food to starlings, worms and water that had been processed with fluoxetine, a dose of 0.92 micrograms per day. That’s the level scientists calculated roughly that birds were exposed to in the wild. They then documented the starlings’ behaviour.

They established that the birds that were on antidepressants didn’t eat as much, lost weight, and as well lost interest in prospective mates.

This is significant as, through the wintertime, the birds need to eat enough to be in a position to remain alive. If they’re consuming antidepressants in the ecosystem, they are less able to survive.

And here’s what it does to humans. In humans, the dose is a lot less elevated, however, the side effects of this specific drug can be identical – reduced sex drive, plus fatigue and possible sickness.

You’d need to consume loads to be affected by anti-depressants in the water, and there’s not a lot of data about levels of antidepressants in British waters. Nevertheless, American research concluded that there could be as much as 0.32-0.54 micrograms per litre in the water.

This is a high estimate from the United States, however, if this were the occurrence in British water, you’d still need to drink 37,000 – 62,500 litres of water at this concentration to get a dose of fluoxetine as normally prescribed.

And that’s not all that’s going around in the tap water

Here’s what else can find in our water:

Oestrogen – from contraceptive pills


Blood pressure tablets

Ibuprofen and other painkillers

Even if the levels are tiny now, the result of so many different drugs interacting with each other is not well-known and is a huge foundation for concern once they reach more powerful levels. The number of antidepressants taken in the United Kingdom is only going up.

Iain Duncan Smith Deceives Twice

Work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith has been caught telling great big dirty lies twice in a T.V discussion about the knock on effect of his apparent improvements for disabled people. Even managing to challenge his own notable mentor.

Iain Duncan Smith

Iain Duncan Smith has been the centre of vexation for disabled protesters since he took over the post in 2010, however, his recent television discussion this week, with Channel 4 News, saw him lie twice about the effects of his alterations on disabled people in an interview that lasted under five minutes.

He lied initially about how lavish Britain was in disability payouts, and then fibbed about Conservative proposals for a benefits freeze following the election. Iain Duncan Smith asserted that those disabled people in the support group of the out of work disability benefit employment and support allowance (ESA), that those with the most elevated support requirements would be not subjected from the benefits freeze.

Nevertheless, his own special adviser, informed the Disability News Service (DNS) just three weeks ago that this group would not be excused from the benefits freeze, a position that was finally confirmed by Chancellor George Osborne’s own special consultant.

They confirmed to the Disability News Service that the core ESA component would be frozen, so affecting all those in the support group, and that it was just the support group top up that would be exempted from the freeze.

Iain Duncan Smith was questioned how disabled people should feel about the disputable remarks of his welfare reform minister Lord Freud, who professed at a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham that some disabled people were not valuable enough to receive the minimum wage.


Iain Duncan Smith responded that the UK government in all probability dish out more than nearly any other nation in the developed world, and that we squander almost two fold what Germany fritters away.

This repeated assertion made by both Lord Freud and their conservative ministerial colleague Esther McVey, who had used figures from the OECD (the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) to put forward that the government was a world leader in disability spending.


They said last year that the UK used up nearly double the OECD norm on disabled people, paying out 2.4 percent against the OECD average of 1.3 percent in 2009.

Nonetheless, they were only capable of making that assertion by reciting the OECD’s disability statistics, and disregarding those for sickness, which incorporates expenditure on ESA and incapacity benefit.

If a differentiation is established between the United Kingdom and all of its immediate OECD neighbours, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland and Ireland, the UK’s spending is lower than average.

Where the United Kingdom used up 2.9 per cent of GDP on disability and sickness in 2009, its nine OECD neighbours consumed an average of 3.2 per cent. Also, the UK’s spending is only a little bit more preeminent than Germany’s, which is 2.6 per cent of GDP, a long way from being almost double.

Iain Duncan Smith declined to remark when called upon to reply to claims that he had lied about both matters in the Channel 4 discussion.

Ebola Fabrication As Man Living In Ghana Corroborates Ebola Is A Hoax

A declaration made by a man in Ghana has rolled across cyberspace in the last few days, and the following knowledge needs to reach the people so that they know precisely, what’s going on.

We need to see Ebola for what it really is, and it’s time that the world woke up to the agenda behind all of this frenzy, and here’s what they say that about what’s happening in this man’s home country.

People in the Western world need to know what’s happening in West Africa. They are lying. Ebola as a virus is not present and is not spread. The Red Cross has brought the disease to 4 specified countries for 4 specified causes, and it is only contracted by those who are given treatments and inoculations from the Red Cross.

That is why Liberians and Nigerians have started booting the Red Cross out of their countries and reporting the truth in the news. Most people leap to depopulation which is no doubt always on the mind of the West when it comes to Africa. Nevertheless, Africa can never be depopulated by murdering 160 people a day when thousands are born per day. So the actual reasons are a lot more real.

This vaccine implemented sickness called Ebola was launched into West Africa for the end objective of getting soldiers on the ground in Nigeria, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. If you recall America was just attempting to get into Nigeria for Boko Haram. However, that fell apart when Nigerians began telling what actually happened. There are no girls missing. Worldwide support fell through the floor, and a different reason was required to get the armed forces into Nigeria and purloin the new oil reserves they had found.

Sierra Leone is the World’s Biggest Supplier of Diamonds, and for the past 4 months they have been on strike, refusing to supply diamonds owing to dreadful working conditions and slave pay. The West will not reward a just wage for the resources since the plan is tantamount to keep these people surviving on rice bags and overseas assistance so that they stay a source of inexpensive slave labour for all time.

A factor was also required to get soldiers on the ground in Sierra Leone to force an end to the diamond miners strikes. This is not the first time this has been done. When miners refuse to work armed forces are sent in, and even if they just have to kill and substitute them all, the only wish is to get diamonds back flowing out of the country.

Of course to launch numerous military operations, to intrude on these countries individually would be way too suspicious. Yet something like Ebola allows admission to a whole region at the same time.

In addition to running of with Nigerian oil, and coercing Sierra Leone back to mining, soldiers have also been sent in to force vaccines, the deadly Ebola poison onto those Africans who are not stupid enough to take them voluntarily.

3000 soldiers are sent to make sure that this toxin continues to spread, because again it is only spread through inoculation. As more and more reports are distributed as they have been in Liberia, telling the populous of the United States lies and manipulation, more and more Africans are refusing to visit the Red Cross. Armed forces will coerce these inoculations upon the people to ensure that there is a visible appearance of an Ebola pandemic. In addition to this, they will protect the Red Cross from the Liberians and Nigerians who have been rightfully dismissing them from their countries.

Last but not least, the appearance of this Ebola pandemic, should Americans not catch on, will be utilized to frighten the innumerable millions into taking an Ebola vaccine which in fact is the pandemic. Already they have begun with tales of how it has been brought to the United States, and has become noticeable in Dallas, how white doctors were cured but blacks who are contaminated are not being allowed to have medical treatment.

All that will do is make blacks try to get the vaccine, since it appears that the cure is being held back from blacks. They will run out in herds to get it, and then there will be serious difficulties. With all that, we have learned about vaccines this year you would think we learned our lesson. All we can do is hope so, since they depend on our lack of knowledge to complete their agenda.

If Ebola really was spread from person to person, instead of controlled spread through vaccination, then why would the CDC and the United States government carry on allowing flights in and out of these countries with absolutely no supervision, or even none at all. They are lying for their own advantage, and there isn’t enough influence out there with a platform to help share our reality. Hundreds of thousands have been killed, paralyzed and disabled by these and other new vaccines all over the world and we are finally becoming aware of it. Now what will we do with all this information?

A Liberian-born department constituent of a United States university composed a report on a Liberian newspaper, the Daily Observer, asserting that Ebola is the result of bioterrorism experiments managed by the United States. It has been claimed, among other things, that locations around Africa, and in West Africa, have over the years been set up for trying out emerging diseases, particularly Ebola.

WHO and a number of other UN agencies have been incriminated in choosing and tempting African nations to take part in the testing events, encouraging inoculations, and engaging in different testing regiments.

There is something exceedingly odd about the global extreme publicity surrounding what appears to be, at least at this point in time, the non-crisis of Ebola. Three months into the upsurge, and it turns out that only a comparative few have died in West Africa, after following vaccines from Western aid workers and one man has reportedly died in Dallas. Yet, if we were just judged by the strength of press reporting, one would believe we are experiencing a re-run of the Black Death of Medieval times.

Yearly human flu in the United States results in roughly 36,000 deaths and more than 200,000 hospitalisations each year. In addition to this human levy, influenza is yearly accountable for a comprehensive price of over $10 billion in the United States. Each winter, tens of millions of people get influenza. Almost all are only unwell and out of work for a week, yet the aged are at an elevated chance of death from the sickness. We know the global death toll is more than a few hundred thousand people a year, but even in advanced countries the numbers are debatable, because medical dominance don’t normally substantiate who in fact died of influenza and who died of a flu-like ailments.

Influenza is no joke, and it is eliminating far more people each day, as we speak, than Ebola has killed in 3 months, so why aren’t those deaths prominently hallmarked on the front page of the Slimes each day? And why did CNN stage fake events of dying Africans? Or weren’t there enough real Ebola deaths for them to film?

By now, we have all seen what the Ebola virus microbe looks like. However, yearly flu viruses look just as frightening. Why aren’t those microorganisms being shown on television screens? We know that Ebola has been used as an excuse to station United States soldiers to Africa. Nevertheless, it’s not yet understandable what the motive of Ebola Mania in the United States and Europe is all about.

Could it be a deflection that will be later used to limit our freedoms? Are we being set up for a build up of vaccinations which will incorporate something really groovy in them? Will a genuine aggregation casualty of the virus be set free at a later date, following us having by this time been psychologically prepared by the present panic advertising? Does somebody stand to make a whole lot of money selling vaccines? Or will this whole thing pass over once the occupation and/or defeat of West Africa is finished?

One thing is for sure at this point; this Ebola racket smells to high heaven.

What’s Actually In A Big Mac?

It’s a question that has crossed the mind of anybody that has ever bit into a Big Mac, and asks themselves. What actually goes into a McDonald’s burger? Urban myths regarding ingredients have rotated throughout the worldwide web for years, with claims of pink sludge chicken nuggets and beef burgers.

One YouTuber even puffed on a McDonald’s french fry in the past, claiming it demonstrated it was made up of damaging ingredients. Now the fast-food monster is serving up a new offensive which has bravely asked the public to ask any question they want about the food-production procedure.

Furthermore, to kick it off, they enrolled Grant Imahara, of TV’s Mythbusters, to verify their burgers are 100 per cent beef. A news crew from Good Morning America was also permitted entry to its food plant in Fresno, California, the first time the press has been permitted inside.

In a DVD entitled, “Is McDonald’s beef real?” presenter Imahara inquires on arrival to the inner-sanctum: “Are there lips and eyeballs in there?” Of course not, but there are other unwelcome critters in there that we don’t really want consumed.

In October of this year, a man who will not be named went into his neighbourhood store of McDonald’s in the UK, and ordered one of their bagels with filling inside, but when he looked inside he was greeted with way more than he bargained for.


Looking back at him was what looked like some type of insect, however, it was way more protein than he planned on consuming.

He complained to employees who were on duty at the time, and they said that evidently because of the extremely scorching summer that we’d had this year, the doors at the back of the restaurant had been opened, and insects and flies had been permitted to enter the building, and as a result into the food prep area.

I’m not sure if I feel more sad for the customers who ingest this kind of rubbish, or the insect that got cooked in the process.

We deal with all types of stuff everyday, and we manage really well when things don’t go right, however, when you sit down to your power lunch with your children in one of McDonald’s fast food chains, we do demand that it is fly and fuzz free.

Extreme Instances Of Head Lice

Millions of parasites crawl through a child’s hair each day, however, now there appears to be an outbreak of head lice in what experts have reported as an extreme case of head lice. This is where a mother is shown combing millions of bugs out of her daughter’s hair.

It shows a mother struggling to run a fine-toothed nit comb through her daughter’s rough locks, which appear to be filled with white and green creepy crawlies, as the camera centres on the comb, as countless wriggling lice is revealed.

Many infestations are extremely common in the United Kingdom, and in Europe, but not to this kind of level.

These kinds of cases are noted in cases of neglect of children or the elderly. It is further seen in cases of homeless people. Head Lice, also known as pediculosis capitis, are tiny bugs that exist in human hair, which grows to the size of a sesame seed.

They feed by biting the scalp and feeding on blood. The females lay eggs near to the root of the hair so they are kept warm by the scalp, and these then incubate into additional lice which reproduce and increase. In bad cases, children frequently develop a condition called plica polonica, where all the hairs get glued together and can’t be brushed.

To treat it, you have to cut off all the hair, because grooming and shampoo would not work. Nits are glued like a cement to the hair by the mother louse, extremely near to the skin. So you just have to cut the hair extremely short so the female lice don’t lay eggs.

Even if the child gets treatment, they will still get lice for about a year, as the old nits become perceptible. One underused procedure of treating head lice is to use antibiotics, because all human lice has a bacterium living inside them.

If you treat the person with antibiotics, it’s probable the lice will die, because it kills this bacterium inside of them, and they can’t remain alive without it. It also means that if head lice can be cured with antibiotics, why are we not treated with antibiotics in the first place, rather than having to pay out a cargo of cash on over the counter cures that frequently don’t always work, because any simple, mild antibiotic will kill the lice.
It is true that numerous parents don’t examine their children’s hair as much as they should, and that’s why some children end up with extremely severe head lice, and other children not so bad. Even so, what happened to the head lice caregiver that we used to see in schools many moons ago, they seem to be a thing of the past.

Health and safety took them away because they might offend someone, and in some schools, they won’t even send letters out to tell parents that it’s going around.

It’s probably one of the more vivid childhood memories among the over 30’s. At least once a year, the entire school would line up in the passageway, and stay there until you were seen by Nitty Nora the bug explorer, or then recognised as the “nit nurse”, who would prod around pupils’ heads looking for the revealing indications of an infestation of head lice.

Nora was phased out in the 1980s and 90s on the grounds that her attempts were intrusive and humiliating for children, and because a yearly school visit could not possibly stop every eruption. Instead, the burden was put on families to identify and treat. However, almost 30 years on, parents say the system is failing, and they want the nit nurse back.

In the last two years, there have been at least four petitions on the prime minister’s e-petitions website calling for the return of the nit nurse, and the matter is a hot subject among mothers on parental support websites. An ongoing online survey, carried out by netmums.com, reports that nearly 88% of parents want to see the nit nurse back in schools.

Personally, I’m convinced that bringing back the nit nurse as the main source of detection and treatment is the answer, but only on a uniform basis because even the nit nurse can miss an infested head, but I also believe that school nurses have a role to play in teaching parents, mainly during school holidays.

The whole matter of head lice seems to remain very stigmatised, and is seemingly an extremely difficult matter to raise. However, it’s not as complicated as we are told it is, as many mother’s will keep in touch with other mother’s to let them know there is an outbreak without feeling at all embarrassed. However, it’s less costly for the government to make you believe that it’s, just so they don’t have to pay out extra cash, and they will tell you that it’s because it’s against the child’s human rights, however, it’s okay for the child to walk about with nits, and pass it onto other children who also have a human right not to be infected. This is why you need somebody with medical understanding, who is respected by the community, to step in and get involved.

There is no shame in having head lice, head lice has been around for hundreds of years, and back when I was younger, going to see the nit nurse was no different then going to see the nurse to have your BCG, it was something you just done because you would sooner have nitty nora the bug explorer sift through your hair, than walking about scratching your head all day.

Over the years, there seems to be more and more that schools have no power on what occurs to your child when they’re in school. The duty is always on the parents, and there’s no caregiver to help a child if they are unwell whilst in school, because now they are all too worried that if they’re in contact with the child, they will be accused of doing something wrong, and will be hit with legal action.

A teacher can’t breathe without being worried regarding legal action by a parent, or the child. We’re so scared. That one day, our children might even be educated by robots, because after all, legal action can’t be taken against something that’s not human…

Visitants Will Be Charged £10 To See London’s Pyrotechnics On New Year’s Eve.

Mayor Boris Johnson declared revellers will be required to pay £10 to attend London’s fireworks display on New Year’s Eve, with just 100,000 tickets being made available to the public.

Last year, about half a million attended, and he stated that such tremendous numbers signified the event was unsupportable.

London’s New Year’s Eve fireworks are phenomenally sought-after, not merely in the capital, but across the world and Boris wants to ensure it remains a reliable, fun and a sustainable attraction for the long-term.

After consulting with partners, they’re introducing ticketing to help manage crowd numbers and create a better experience on the night.

For anybody without a ticket, the fireworks are again being displayed on T.V., meaning you can watch it in glorious HD colour without missing a single second.

Plus don’t forget, there are a lot of other New Year’s Eve celebrations to enjoy in bars, restaurants and clubs across the capital.

You’ll be able to book up to four tickets per person from Friday 26 September.

It was stated that they’re not introducing ticketing to make a gain, and that every single penny that is imposed for the ticket goes straight back into the costs of introducing ticketing, and means the cost of ticketing the event isn’t passed onto hardworking taxpayers.

The thing is that taxpayers will still pay towards it on account of, when paying tax we actually don’t know where our hard earned cash is going, we just accept everything that we’re told. We’re kept informed of what will take place, and we don’t in reality process it in our heads because we accept that’s what it is, and that there’s nothing we can do about it.

We’re conditioned to believe that this tax needs to be paid, and that if we pay it, it will yield to better us. This disappoints me greatly because this is simply not true because our taxes don’t rightfully go to the right places that we expect them to.

Figures disclose just how much hard-working Britons on low and middle incomes have to pay, and tax campaigners state we should get these figures every year.


Numerous taxpayers will be appalled at the thousands of pounds they give with regard to state handouts and town hall pensions.

Families may also be horrified to discover what they stump up for the European Union and overseas assistance.

Here the itemized Treasury figures in the appearance of a tax invoice break down precisely where your money goes on a scope of areas including health, education, police, transport and the environment.

We make payments for migration and border control, and in spite of it, the government is still letting them into our country. Therefore, if they’re still permitting newcomers into our homeland, we shouldn’t be required to compensate for border controls, and seeing as it was our government that consent to them coming in on account of, they were good inexpensive labour, why should we be required to compensate for their ultimate cock up?

We’re as well, paying for broadcast and publishing. If we’re making payments for broadcasting, then why on earth do we still pay for our television licence? It appears that everything we pay for when we pay our taxes we appear to pay double.

It was once when I was much younger that a couple would get joined in matrimony, they would usually both work, and before long they would purchase a house for themselves, and before long they would start a family. There were lots of social housing accessible back in the day before Margaret Thatchers reign on our society, however, some couples decided it would be exceedingly propitious to buy a house so that they had something for their children once they passed away.

And so, acquiring a house was more of an endowment for their children than anything else. Had they had no children, then social housing probably would have been more logical.

Therefore, back in the day a couple would purchase a home as an endowment for their children, and once a couple became too elderly to look after themselves. Many would go into care homes, which at the time were equipped by the republic. After all, you did a day’s work, and you worked hard all your life, at least that was something that you could look forward to, free from apprehension.

Now, 2014, the government would if they could, take the boogers from your grandmother’s nasal cavity if they could get away with it, and those boogers were made of gold.

Nothing is safe, your house is not safe, you’re not safe. 2014, we work, we get married, we purchase hour home, we have children. Once again, we still purchase our homes as an endowment for our children for when we pass on. Only this time when we get old and need a care home, we have to sell what we worked hard for all our lives to finance our care home, and guess what, we still had to pay our taxes.

So what did we actually work for, a home that we just have to sell to be looked after in a care home.

I frequently listen to people saying to one another that they bought their homes, which they’re actually proud of, and justly so. If you obtained your house free from a mortgage, then of course you should be so proud of it, it’s really yours. However, with a mortgage, by reason, it was not ever yours to begin with, it belongs to the bank till you pay off every penny of what you owe on it.

In that time, you could suffer job loss, or even be made redundant, as a large amount of people have been, and are still.

Then it’s taken back by the banks, and all you have to show for it is a big fat nothing, however, people concentrate more on what they have in the moment, than what they could end up with, because we live in our suburban life, with suburban neighbours, doing suburban things, in our Stepford village.

Then the government is dumbfounded when people don’t want to do a day’s work, well it’s not rocket science actually, but the government believes that because you come into this world with nothing, you should go out with nothing.

I know you can’t take it with you, but of course, we do want to earn a living for something that is retained after we’re dead and buried, and of course, most of us want to give that something back to our loved ones, and if not our loved ones, friends maybe, or some sort of organization of our choice, but certainly not back to the money clutching bloodsuckers that is described as government.

Leadership is all about taking what does not rightfully belong to them.

Some people are now declining to pay their tax because they state it’s providing to an unlawful and unethical war overseas, nevertheless, those who regulate the money control the man.

History explains to us that the most efficient way of combating illicit, inefficient or crooked government is to engage in a tax revolt. The refusal of the people to pay taxes, because without the money to compensate for their pursuits, Governments are weak.

Now we get the historic chance to engage in a lawful tax rebellion. Under the laws of war citizens are prohibited from taking part in armed conflict on the side of the attacker and are lawfully obliged to resist orders to support or take part in an unlawful war of offensive.

This lawful responsibility to refuse to comply with illegal orders includes tax demands. If governments use the cash raised by imposing taxes to wage unlawful war or to assault and murder civilians, then under international law a taxpayer’s normal obligation to pay tax is reversed and changes into a liability to hold back tax.

Each of the wars fought since 2001 in opposition to Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya is unlawful. Not only does the use of armed force break the Treaty for the Renunciation of War and the UN Charter, but by murdering 1million adults and 450,000 children, the leaders and taxpayers of Coalition, NATO and ISAF governments committed murder, war crimes, crimes in the face of humanity and genocide.

It may come as a shock to numerous law abiding inhabitants that, under international criminal law and the legal doctrine of joint enterprise, every British, NATO or ISAF inhabitant who has paid tax since October 2001 is technically an accomplice to the war crimes, offences in the face of mankind and genocides perpetrated by ISAF Governments toward the Afghan people and is criminally subject for imprisonment, prosecution and punishment as a chief offender.

You will be pleased to know however that the enactment renders relief for taxpayers who were misled into believing the war was lawful and ignorantly supported the offences. Providing you stop your support in the offences at once and hold back all taxes from your government and its representatives you will not be disciplined for helping and assisting the crimes.

One efficient way of holding back tax from Parliament and Government is to place all tax payments into escrow accounts retained by a third party such as a bank or a court.

The money cannot be made public to the tax collector till the terms of the escrow are met.

In this case, because members of Britain’s Parliament and Government have dishonored the laws of war and perpetrated severe offences toward the Afghan, Iraqi and Libyan people, the terms of the escrow can be set to guarantee that the money will not be handed over till such time as all ISAF Parliaments and Governments have stopped the war with Afghanistan, ended the use of coercion, discharged the troops and commenced criminal proceedings toward those accountable for war crimes.

War is basically an immoral thing. Its results are not restricted to the belligerent states alone, but influence the whole world. To start a war of attack therefore, is not only a universal crime. It is the highest international crime varying only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated wickedness of the whole.

In judicial procedure, it is an offence of accessory to murder for a person to aid an action of murder by a third party by furnishing the perpetrator with the means for the empowering of the crime.

The method can be anything which the murderer uses to perpetrate the offence, such things as the weaponry, the weapons training supplied to the perpetrators or assassins, the getaway vehicle, the raw materials, tools and stocks required for the delegation of the offence, the housing, offices and facilities put to use to organise the crime, and the most significant means of all, the money to pay for everything linked with the crime.

By using taxpayers’ money to enlist, prepare, equip, supply and pay HM armed forces to partake in illicit wars and armed assaults in which innocent Afghan, Iraqi and Libyan citizens were murdered entirely because of their nationality, the United Kingdom Government perpetrated genocide and ignorantly implicated all United Kingdom taxpayers as accomplices to the worst offences known to humanity.

For all these reasons taxpayers are lawfully obliged to decline to pay tax and to continue to refuse to pay tax till the United Kingdom Government halts the killing, stops its unlawful wars, ceases all forbidden use of armed force, starts criminal proceedings against British war criminals, stops purchases of armament, eliminates all employment in HM Armed Forces, decommissions weaponry and military tools and substantiates conclusively that it is abiding by war law and the terms of the UN Charter.

We have been commemorating New Year’s Eve in London for many years, and will presumably continue to do so, but of course, presently, it is not sustainable to continue this unless we’re charged for it, then it becomes sustainable. Unless the government is making money off us, then we are not sustainable, and we’re not worthy of pleasure unless we’re paying for it, and the government is generating a profit.

The entire thing is about an economic accumulation, to obtain funds, whatever the damage, even if it denotes sacrificing another human life, because if you’re living, and you’re not sustainable, then the government can’t feed off you like parasites. They freeload off you, and give nothing in return, however, we still continue to live in our little suburban lives, and we continue to endure, to scrape by, and all the time attacking one another because that’s what the government wants us to do.

Human cultivation has been the most lucrative, and destructive. Human society can’t be logically understood till it’s looked at for what it is, a set of farms where human farmers own human cattle. However, some people get confused because governments provide healthcare, water, education and roads, and consequently envisage that there’s some kindness at work.

We’re permitted certain freedoms, and hence believe that our government defends our liberties. Nothing could be further from reality. In your country, your tax farm, your farmer allows you certain liberties not because he’s interested about your freedoms, but because he wants to extend his profits.

Under the Democratic representation, direct slave ownership has been re established by the Mafia model. The Mafia seldom owns businesses directly, however, sends thugs around once a month to thieve from the business owners.

So you are allowed to pick your own occupation, which lifts your productivity, and consequently the taxes you can pay to your masters. Your few liberties are protected because they’re lucrative to your owners.

To keep the tax livestock securely in the compounds of the ruling divisions is a three phase method.

The first was to brainwash the young through government schooling. As the wealth of democratic nations grew, government schools were universally forced upon in order to dominate the thoughts and intelligences of the livestock.

The second is to turn citizens against each other through the creation of the dependent livestock.

It’s extremely difficult to control human beings directly through coercion, but if human beings think that they’re free, then they will yield much more for their farmers. The best way to preserve this illusion of freedom is to put some of the livestock on the payroll of the farmer. Those cows that become reliant on the existing chain of command will then assault any other cows who point out the violence, hypocrisy and immorality of human ownership.

Freedom is slavery, and slavery is freedom, and if you can get the cows to attack each other whenever anybody brings up the reality of their situation, then you don’t have to spend nearly as much time controlling them directly, because anybody who demands freedom from ownership will say that will harm your fellow cows, consequently shifting the moral liability for the destructiveness of a violent system to those who call for real freedom.

The third stage is to devise persistent external intimidation, so that the terrified livestock clings to the safekeeping of the farmers.

Economic freedoms produce money, and the money allures more thieves and political freeloaders, whose greediness then ruins the financial freedoms. The government that starts off the smallest will invariably end up the largest. This is why there can be no viable and sustainable alternative to a truly free and peaceful society.

Spain Agrees With Sephardic Jew Citizenship Plan

Spain’s cabinet agreed with a proposal permitting descendants of Jews compelled into expulsion centuries ago the prerogative of dual citizenship, however, stated applicants will have to take a Spanish culture examination in addition to having their ancient bond to the country vetted by experts.

Sephardi Jews who want to put in an application must have their heritage reviewed by the Spanish Federation of Jewish Communities or by rabbis where they live. The culture test will be prepared by the Cervantes Institute, which encourages Spanish language and culture abroad.

The plan proposes to fix what the government calls the historic mistake of propelling Jews into exile arising in 1492, coercing them to change to Catholicism or burning them at the stake throughout the Inquisition. It is expected to pass effortlessly in Parliament because the ruling Popular Party has an absolute winning margin.

Reformation will permit coupling citizenship, authorizing the recently minted Spaniards to hold their preceding citizenship. Spain currently allows that perquisite exclusively to Latin Americans. With this gesture, Spain is doing justice and correcting the error that led to the banishment of the Jews.

The word Sephardic means Spanish in Hebrew, however, the label has come as well to apply to one of the two principal variants of Jewish religious practice. The other, and globally dominant one, is Ashkenazic, which applies to Jews whose genealogy, in recent times, is traced to northern and eastern Europe.

On account of the mixing connecting the classes and other factors, there is no recognised figure for the global Sephardic inhabitants. Sensible evaluations would span between a fifth and a third of the world’s approximately 13 million Jews. Hundreds of thousands reside in France and already have EU passports. However, the biggest area is located in Israel, where all but half of the 6 million Jews are reflected as Sephardic.