1. Iraq has been successfully westernised. Crime and corruption finance the "insurgency."
The New York Times Sunday, 26th November 2006
U.S. Finds Iraq Insurgency Has Funds to Sustain Itself
By John F. Burns and Kirk Semple
Iraqi men suspected of engaging in insurgent activity waited to be processed at a jail on a joint U.S.-Iraqi base near Baghdad recently.
Baghdad, Nov. 25 — The insurgency in Iraq is now self-sustaining financially, raising tens of millions of dollars a year from oil smuggling, kidnapping, counterfeiting, corrupt charities and other crimes that the Iraqi government and its American patrons have been largely unable to prevent, a classified United States government report has concluded.
2.
The Independent Sunday, 26th November 2006
Smacking: Children's tsar moves for outright ban
An abuse of human rights, or necessary chastisement? If Sir Al Aynsley-Green has his way, any slap will be outlawed. But the parental-choice lobby is up in arms. Sophie Goodchild reports
The children's tsar is warning that parents who smack their children are abusing their human rights and that the practice must be banned.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2016149.ece
The child abusers in the neighbouring flat turned their violence against me when I sought to bring to the attention of the authorities the mental cruelty and physical abuse including choking which was carried out against children. This was eight and one-half years ago. After three months of ignoring their bullying attempts to provoke me, they manufactured allegations which enablled them to get the use of surveillance technology which was put at their disposal to carry out continuous 24/7 torture. It goes on as of this writing.
This morning was another such example of their continuous torture abuse using the surveillance technology as a weapon to help them as a large group and aid them in their attempts to incite those in authority to carry out criminal acts against me by their false allegations. What occurred yesterday morning repeated itself this morning while I maintained the same evidence gathering activity which enables me to prove conclusively that these ongoing allegations are totally false.
Sun Nov 26 14:41:50 GMT 2006: "Psychotic as hell," yelled Lt Harry Bird as I finished the above paragraph. This is his cheap name calling abusive way to try to intimidate me hoping to keep me from reporting this truth about what happened while trying to discredit its validity with this false negative characterisation. Since he really hasn't a clue about what psychosis means, it is only name calling. It is not used in any meaningful way other than to attack with abusive language.
Sun Nov 26 14:46:38 GMT 2006: "Liar," yelled BS as I finished the above entry for Lt Harry Bird's abuse. BS is the mother of the two abused children and the main driving force in all the activity which has been carried out against me since she publicly declared here revenge and retaliation on Monday, 11th May 1998, following the Friday night, 8th May 1998, arrival of the police who were summoned by the Social Services. I've been the violent abuse object ever since from these four adults who were directly involved in the child abuse.
"He is definitely doing it. He killed his mother. He is attacking me" said a female yelling loudly this morning with her voice coming in my bedroom window. This is the very essence of making a false allegation about what they are doing themselves while they carry on with excessive loud and continuous harassment noises including what sounded like the yelling of a young boy. Then the false allegation of violence against me which has no foundation in fact whatsoever. Finally, there is the claim of victim status to emotionally charge anyone present that she is suffering the same fate which is preposterously untrue and obvious to everyone.
Then having set the stage with this nonsense, this female then made her plea "Can you help us?" to whoever was present trying to emotionally manipulate whoever it was based upon her smear and fear campaign which she had just shouted for all the world to hear. This is the true character of the child abusers who will abuse anyone in anyway at anytime to preserve and protect themselves against being discovered for what they really are. It must be understood that anyone who would abuse children in such a manner as I witnessed directly is capable of anything.
The sooner the smacking of children is banned entirely the better off children will be. The child abuser will use smacking as a threat and intimidation implying the much greater abuse which has been meted out unknown to the world unless you happen to be a neighbour like myself who heard it all taking place. Child abusers are notorious deceivers and must not be allowed even the least pretext to abuse a child. To ban smacking entirely is to take away this all important pretext for abusing children behind which lays a far greater threat and fear from much more vile and deadly abuse like the choking which I heard on several occasions.
There are many ways adults hide child abuse. Here's just one of them from Alice Miller:
"Needles. Children have been reported repeatedly that their parents take pins along when they go shopping. When the children want to take something from the shelf, the parents, ostensibly giving them a loving pat on the head, jab them in the neck." (Alice Miller, For Your Own Good: Hidden cruelty in child-rearing and the roots of violence, Farrar Strauss Giroux, New York, 1983, p 238.)
Smacking is child abuse and should be stopped completely. By banning it a line is drawn with the child permitted its own intregity. No adult has the right in anyway to abuse a child. There is enough of a problem in dealing with hidden child abuse as it is to let smacking be one more cloud behind which the child abuser can hide.
One day when I was walking to Shepherd's Bush c 1996 or early 1997, I was walking by the railroad tracks which were down below on the other side of the subway (underground walkway in the UK) just before reaching Shepherd's Bush. I saw a couple by the wall overlooking the railroad tracks below. The male was dangling a child by his feet over the wall with his head hanging down toward the tracks. The woman saw and recognised me pointing out to her partner who I was. This was BS with their most abused child. Later this same partner of her's was to choke him several times leading to my reporting their child abuse to the authorities.
Here they were in a public place hanging a child upside down over a wall above the railroad tracks below. They had no concern who might see them. They had no concern about what they were doing. There was nothing I could do except keep track of the situation as best I could. I didn't go looking for anything. It was all made available to me by all that I heard continuously from the adjacent flat from the four adults and the several children involved. They had no concern about what they did or who heard them just as they displayed on the day when they were dangling the young boy over the railroad tracks.
After I reported the ongoing child abuse which escalated and was getting much worse in early May 1998, they turned their violence and intimidation against me. They had no concern about what they did to me or who knew it. They have behaved like this all these eight and one-half years with no one doing anything to stop their violence against me. In fact, they were given surveillance technology early on to speed along their violent destruction against me. They can do and say anything they want which will be accepted as valid while my speaking the truth with careful documentation is rejected and ignored. They are allowed to go on with their violence against me up to and including this writing.
Sun Nov 26 15:55:54 GMT 2006: "I'll kill him," said Lt Harry Bird twice as I was finishing the above. BS continued to make verbal noises as usual ending with "Potty as hell" just now.
Smacking itself can be used to belittle the fact of more serious child abuse as I've directly witnessed connected with my reporting of child abuse. After the police intervention on Friday evening, 8th May 1998, with regard to the child abuse report I made to the Chief Executive of the Council by fax on 5th May 1998 which was forwarded to Social Services, the mother of the abused children and her mother who were both participants in the child abuse appeared publicly out front declaring revenge and retaliation. This occurred on the evenings of Monday, 11th May 1998, and Wednesday, 13th May 1998, from about 1730 to 1900 each evening.
On each of these evenings they were yelling and screaming in an hysterical way about the child abuse intervention which had occurred. They were doing this among a large group of tenants each evening. They described the child abuse about which they were accused as just "smacking" and "threatening to smack." This was an attempt by them to hide the fact of the choking which had occurred against a small boy several times. That was the basis of the complaint. By using the fact that smacking was OK against children, they belittled the child abuse complainnt against them publicly amid a large group of people. Thus, they themselves announced publicly that a child abuse complaint had been made against them, implied it was meaniingless because only smacking was involved and also threatened revenge and retaliation against the person who made the complaint.
At this time I understood this threat of revenge and retaliation to be directed against me since the indications were that they knew who made the complaint. If I had any doubts, they were soon dispelled by the actions against me which commenced from those in the adjacent flat. These threats of revenge and retaliation where made with such vehemence that it sounded like one of them was frothing at the mouth with hysteria while declaring such revenge and retaliation. Cooler heads among the tenants gathered in this group urged them to ignore the complaint and take no such action. These words had no effect on the child abusers.
This is one key reason why smacking a child must be made against the law. It permits the child abuser to claim a lesser and legal incidence of violence against children to hide the far worse abuse which actually exists. If any complaint can be denigrated on such grounds, it leaves the door open for the child abuser to get away with further child abuse as I've witnessed occurring after I reported the child abuse. The end result of my reporting the child abuse has been my becoming the object of abuse and violence from these people sanctioned by those in positions of authority resulting in my experience of the past eight and one-half years with which I'm dealing here.
3. The Mental Health Bill aka "The Witch Hunt Bill" is going to get some sound opposition this week in and outside Parliament. For someone who is disliked as I am because I've reported crimes (attempted murder, rape and child abuse), antisocial behaviour and government management abuse this "Witch Hunt Bill" is ideal for those whom I continue to describe herein.
They seek to continue to carry out a process of medication and incapacitation in the community, and believe me they are making every effort to bring this into existence if nothing more than to let them off the hook for the past eight and 1/4 years of 24/7 abuse which has included totally unjustified surreptitious medication intended to incapacitate and debilitate. All of this has been based upon the false allegations of those for whom I reported for their violence then and now. This bill will open the door for such abuse turning society and the social order upside down as has occurred in this environment.
There are three Labour Party Councillors and a Labour Party MP from this area who have much to hide concerning the abuse of power against me by the use of surveillance technology 24/7 for the past eight and 1/4 years. This is an excellent opportunity for them to make certain such a law comes into effect. There are others in the Council who will benefit in this manner too especially tenant management who seek to cover up their maladministration and gross mismanagement.
I believe that no matter how much opposition there is to this "Witch Hunt Bill," it will be rammed through the House of Commons by the Labour Party majority in order to get it enacted as soon as is possible.
This provides for the ability of this government to declare anyone who is undesireable as mentally ill and force treatment upon them in the community even if the treatment is not beneficial. That means medicating someone into oblivion. It also means that people who have no history of anything will be so judged as mentally ill and subjected to incapacitating medication in the community based upon someone's fear of future action which is entirely unjustified.
All it takes in this country at present for someone with a dislike of another is the Mental Health Act to get them wiped out. My experience in this regarfd has specifically exposed extreme abuse of power by the government including mental health professionals. This is the rebirth of the Witch Hunt. R D Laing got it right decades ago (see yesterday's web journal entry).
The Independent Sunday, 26th November 2006
Bragg to lead attack on Mental Health Bill
By Ian Griggs
New law is based on 'compulsion rather than compassion', [Lord Bragg] will tell peers.
Charities and campaigners are to lobby Parliament this week against a controversial government Bill containing amendments to the 1983 Mental Health Act.
The broadcaster and writer Lord Bragg is expected to outline the objections in the House of Lords on Tuesday. He will tell his fellow peers that the Bill is "about compulsion rather than compassion".
The Bill, if approved, will allow local authorities to force compulsory treatment on mental patients whether or not it is beneficial. Wide-spread use of proposed Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) could put severe restrictions on patients after they have been discharged from hospital as well as governing where they live and what medication they take.
. . .
"Treating someone without their consent is a very serious thing to do," said Paul Corry of Rethink. "Detention for reasons other than health benefit should be handled by non-health services."
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2016145.ece