- Keeping up with the future. The Last Enemy is on BBC 1 at 2100 GMT on Sundays from 17 February.
- The Future is Closer than You Think. My comments about Peter Berry's discussion of his writing of The Last Enemy concerning the future and reality with regard to the surveillance society.
- MP pledges to force smacking ban. Smacking children is still permitted in the UK. Banning it would go a long way to stopping child abuse by drawing a clear line while providing the same protection from physical assault for children which adults enjoy. The UK is still in the Dark Ages when it comes to child abuse.
1. Keeping up with the future.
BBC News
Keeping up with the future
  |
Benedict Cumberbatch in The Last Enemy When the writer of Prime Suspect, Peter Berry, started a new TV drama set in a "near future" Britain that's become a security state, he didn't expect current events to overtake his imagined plot.
2. The Future is Closer than You Think. I posted the following comment after the article noted above. I doubt that it will be published there for the very same reasons I discuss. In order to get the honest and truthful news it's necessary to read web journals. This is an excellent example of how the big media organisations censor and suppress. This is why the real threat from surveillance technology abuse will succeed. People create the illusion that they are actually doing something significant but are butt of jokes from those using the surveillance technology which they manage to hide with extreme abuse against surveillance targets.
"The Future is Closer than You Think," wrote Peter Berry as a possible slogan for the drama he set about creating. You have no idea. I will be watching your drama in anticipation of some excellent portrayals of issues and conflicts, but I want to point out the real problem. You self censored yourself and your creative imagination by not portraying listening and lip reading CCTVs. You withheld what has turned out to be reality. You will have to grapple with yourself as to why you did this and what else you might have dropped for whatever reason. Do you think George Orwell did this? Now, let me tell you about reality.
I've been subjected to 24/7 surveillance technology for 9.5 years. It was and is in the hands of the criminals whom I reported for their child abuse. The purpose is to control and stop the reporting of antisocial behaviour and crimes so that those in charge can maintain an image that all is well. Thus, crime and antisocial behaviour flourish.
The police and NHS mental health people are deeply involved in this as are other departments of government up to the top. The point is to discredit the truth of what I report especially about the surveillance activity and its technology by false allegations against me which is why the innocent have much to fear as well as the guilty. When the criminal control surveillance, the innocent will be criminalised as I have been.
After 2.5 years of this surveillance activity, agents of a foreign power, the US, arrived in February 2001 with their own totally invasive surveillance technology. This was seven months before 9/11 and years before the London attacks of 2005. These were US Marines (retired/former) Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird who were no mysterious "they." They joined the people already well known to me as neighbours who were using the surveillance technology.
This surveillance technology is beyond anything imagined by anyone, yet it is real and in use as brain wave monitoring and feedback technology capable of reading thoughts, hearing through ears, seeing through eyes and picking up brain activity relating to muscle movement and feeling. The feedback can induce thoughts, hearing and pain/muscle movement. Dreams can be induced for memory probing during sleep. The electromagnetic halo around a person's head can be fingerprinted and that person tracked anywhere subject to all of the above. Surreptitious medication can be induced as well anywhere.
All of this was government policy before 9/11 as was the rendition flights which were argued out in my hearing thanks to this surveillance technology in 2001. I knew and understood the kind of torture that was going to be used at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib before these became public knowledge because I was and still am being subjected to it.
We are not sleep walking into a surveillance society. We've taken the plunge knowingly long ago. I recall Pogo saying decades ago "I have seen the enemy, and he is us." While it is interesting to look at these issues involving ID cards, databases and CCTVs, no one but no one is dealing with the reality of the brainwave monitoring technology which can be run anywhere in the world through satellites to track anyone anywhere and screen the brains of masses of people continuously as NSA/GCHQ does with communications. It takes only a few people to run this technology (computer controlled of course) against masses of people to find the terrorist cells and interactions between people down to the individual level. It's there and in operation. It will be the future for everyone because no one wants to admit that it exists. That's why it is succeeding.
If you really want to get a grasp of the future look at the surveillance laws and the proposed mental health laws. These are the clues to future control. The police are already making the laws in the community, and the mental health people already are a police force for suppression. The technology being used by them is as I've described in the hands of the criminals. This is nothing new. Look at what the US did with COINTELPRO in the 1960s and 1970s. It has moved to the UK with its new technology.
There is no more privacy at all. Not even thoughts are private. Every single thing a person does can be monitored completely with that person subjected to intense torture abuse continuously without ever being able to escape. Write a drama about the reality as it exists now. See if anyone actually believes it. I do not think they will. What people do not see and understand at present is exactly what will be the future. I've had a lifetime of such successful predictive experience. There is no point in worrying about ID cards, databases or CCTVs. These are meaningless in the face of the current reality. They are diversionary to smokescreen reality.
Laziness and fakery
Is there a laziness in suppressing yourself by not including the listening/lip reading CCTVs in the drama when you only "thought" of them? If this is a thought control crime, where does it originate? What really kept you from including it?
Is there a laziness on the part of you and the BBC to not get out and verify the real state-of-the-art for surveillance technology in Britain when hundreds of people from the community have participated in it for the past decade? Especially in light of the fact that I've continuously reported this to the BBC and other media since 2000?
Why is there a maximum security prison for the most serious offenders where an MP was bugged talking with his client that has become a location for sending other prisoners so that they can be subjected to surveillance? Is there a special surveillance technology environment for this particular prison? Is it laziness that has prevented you, the BBC or anyone from exploring this possibility or is it something else?
Is this laziness or just another level of control to deny the public a dramatic insight into the realities of surveillance state Britain and the fact that the police are determining human activity and thought as you reflect in your own self censorship and suppression?
How much fakery actually exists in the security services efforts which needs to be hidden (covered up) that contributes significantly to the danger from a terrorist attack?
How much more fakery will occur as thousands are brought into the security services who are marginal at best for such a job who will then fake it to make themselves look like they are doing something at the expense of innocent people?
How much fakery will exist in the system when the community is engaged in surveillance technology use leading to abuses where revenge and retaliation against those who are disliked for one reason or another is allowed to take place?
3. MP pledges to force smacking ban. BS is the real infant slugger. Her partner the real child choker. The child abuser uses the current law to manipulate those in authority to get out of being stopped. As a result, the child abuse goes on and on.
I don't believe that this MP will be able to get a smacking ban because the government seeks votes and not standards for protecting children. That is true here at the micro level and true at the macro level in Parliament. Violent behaviour becomes the standard in society, and the government ignores the reality behind it: child abuse. There are many ways to physically abuse a child without leaving marks just as there are many ways to torture someone without leaving marks.
I've watched child abuse perpetuated for almost a decade after I reported it on 5th May 1998. There are too many viciously violent sadists in this country who will oppose a complete smacking ban against children. It is this group to whom the government panders with its vote getting policies and legal machinations in the House of Commons.
Sadists crave power over living beings, and children are the most convenient object to pick on for that purpose. There are too many of these in positions of authority for anything meaningful to be done. They would not know how to enforce such a ban. As it is now, they can turn a blind eye to physical abuse under the current law as described in the article below.
BBC News
MP pledges to force smacking ban
 'Reasonable chastisement' is legal |
A senior Labour MP says the law on smacking children in England and Wales is unworkable, and plans to propose a ban in defiance of the government.
Kevin Barron said the current law, which allows light smacking, does not improve children's behaviour.
He is spearheading moves by Labour backbenchers to force an amendment to the Children and Young Persons Bill.
Their preferred strategy is to appeal to the government's chief whip for a free vote, they say.
At present in England and Wales, under the Children Act of 2004, a lighter smack or 'reasonable chastisement' is permitted.