1. One of the arrested terrorist suspects who was released without charge yesterday after a week in detention and interrogation stated that this was a police state for Muslims. A spokesman at Number Ten speaking on behalf of the Prime Minister has categorically denied that this is a police state. I fully concur with the claim that this is a police state and that it is extended to everyone and not just Muslims. In fact, Muslims have got it better because they are provided extensive publicity and the protection of the existing laws and procedures regarding arrest, detention and questioning under supervision of the judiciary. I have been denied all of these for eight and one-half years. Therefore, the police state is worse for non-Muslims than for Muslims.
I have been subjected to torture interrogation under threat of death continuously and imprisoned by surveillance technology for many years 24/7 based upon a presumption of guilt. I have been subjected to surveillance technology R&D and medical experimentation. The surveillance technology is totally invasive and permits those using it to engage in physical and mental torture second-by-second 24/7 regardless of where I am located. This has been going on for many years without any break whatsoever. The use of this surveillance technology is lethal, and I have sustained personal injuries. This will go on indefinitely declares those using the surveillance tachnology including a statement that it will never stop until I am dead.
This is the reality of the UK police state under this Labour government. All of my communications for many years have not brought this to an end indicating that this is a deliberate activity condoned, supported and carried from the Prime Minister on down crossing multiple departments of government. The Prime Minister has had every opportunity to stop this most gross abuse of power since September 1999 when I first sent him a lengthy letter by fax and post but has failed to do so despite many subsequent communications to himself and others in this government and those in authority at all levels. The media also fully informed has failed to report it. Thus, they too are complicit in Police State UK by their wilfull silence.
BBC News Thursday, 8 February 2007, 12:10 GMT
No 10 rejects police state claim
 Mr Blair's spokesman said a police state would not have freed Mr Bakr |
Tony Blair has rejected claims that the UK is a "police state for Muslims" as "categorically wrong".
Abu Bakr, who was arrested, questioned and then released without charge over an alleged kidnap plot, made the remarks on BBC Two's Newsnight.
But the prime minister's official spokesman said anyone arrested in a police state would not have been freed and allowed to appear on television.
He said: "It is a gross caricature of the political process in this country."
'Open fact'
Mr Bakr, from Birmingham, when asked about his arrest, questioning and subsequent release without charge, had told the BBC: "It's a police state for Muslims.
"It's not a police state for everybody else because these terror laws are designed specifically for Muslims and that's quite an open fact."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6342277.stm
BBC News Thursday, 8 February 2007, 10:18 GMT
Ex-terror plot suspect speaks out
 Abu Bakr works at the Maktabah bookshop, raided last Wednesday |
A man freed after he was arrested over an alleged plot to kidnap a UK Muslim soldier has criticised the police investigation.
Abu Bakr, who works in the Maktabah bookshop, targeted in anti-terror raids in Birmingham, also told BBC News the UK was "a police state for Muslims".
But Tory leader David Cameron said anti-terror laws applied to everyone.
Thursday, 8 February 2007, 10:18 GMT Mr Bakr, one of nine men arrested in raids, was released without charge along with another man.
 |  This is going to affect me for the rest of my life  Abu Bakr |
A spokesman for West Midlands Police said it was normal that some people would be arrested and released without charge in large and complex criminal investigations.
Mr Bakr, who is studying for a PhD in Political Islam at the city's university, said he became aware of the police forcing their way into his house early last Wednesday morning by his wife screaming.
Asked how he felt about his arrest, he said: "It's a police state for Muslims.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6340935.stm
BBC News Thursday, 8 February 2007, 13:32 GMT
A police state? The issues
One of the two men freed after being held in a major anti-terrorism operation in Birmingham says Britain is turning into a "police state for Muslims".
 Anti-terror laws and raids have been criticised by some |
Abu Bakr, who works at an Islamic bookshop raided in the city, said that he believed terror laws had been designed specifically for Muslims and "that's quite an open fact - we're the ones who are being locked up, detained and then told to go back to our lives."
While the government - and indeed the opposition - says the legislation was designed to cover everybody, some grassroots political activists in Muslim communities share the views of Mr Bakr. So what are some of the laws that concern Muslims?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6342609.stm
2. The system fails again and again because the people are either perverse or not any good. Here's risk assessment right in front of the professionals eyes, and they allow an unacceptable risk to occur. One does not need to have the ability to enter a premises to assess risk without the suspicion of a crime. These people lack the basic intelligence or they are psychologically demented to avoid putting this handicapped child back with abusive parents. The result was horrible abuse that could have had quite tragic consequences. It only took nine weeks to brutalise this small child in an very extreme manner. Professionals just have not come to grasp the real character of the violent abuser and how that person will abuse in the extreme continuously. Once abuse is revealed, it must be dealt with on this basis. Feeding the abusive character only makes it worse.
Child abusers hide what they do. I've seen that during the past decade. They are incorrigible when it comes to doing or saying anything that will help protect them from others finding out about their child abuse. They will intimidate the abused child to such a degree that the child will never speak about it out of intense fear. That happened in the Mary Flora Bell case and in the other most recently revealed child abuse involving foster parents who had some 280 children in their care for decades. It was only after two two of the abused girls were adults that they came forward. What about all the others?
I live in a situation where surveillance technology was put at the disposal of a violently dysfunctional family group who abused children to be used against me after I reported the child abuse. Thus, the child abuse and violence was supported and enhanced by allowing this same violence to be carried out against me in order to cover up the child abuse. Naturally, when an abused child sees that the adult parent has such power to abuse an adult who reported the child abuse to protect the children, there never will be any information from the children that will be honest and accurate.
Instead these children will be silenced by the fear from intimidation. Then, like the parents and relatives surrounding them, they will learn to lie making false allegations against those whom the group hates. The abused child of nine years ago has emerged as the anti-social bully thanks to the nurturing and conditioning provided by those in society who are charged with changing the direction of violent family groups or remove the child to a safe haven. In this case an unsafe haven was created by the authorities wasting time and valuable resources attacking the innocent person who reported the problem while the violent abusers hide their criminal activity further by acting out their violence against a scapegoat.
The Westminster Council (next door to Kensington & Chelsea) in the centre of London denied in BBC News24 interviews and comments in reports that this case had parallel points to the Victoria Climbie death. However, a director of the Victoria Climbie Foundation found similar points as did others interviewed on BBC News24 between this little girl's abuse and that of Victoria Climbie who was tortured to death seven years ago. Professionals failed to recognise a broken arm and bruises all over when she was treated medically as signs of abuse. The child was actually taken away from the parents but returned after an evaluation when the parents were expecting a third child. The other two children who were not abused were boys and not girls. It's interesting that child abuse in a family like this is selective in picking on one child out of three, and silence prevails.
A main mistake that was found was the fact that those working with the parents did not interview the little girl apart from the parents to try to discover the truth. One commentator noted that even when children do not speak, often those who are well trained can recognise the nonverbal communication. It beggars belief that such a family would be given surveillance technology to carry out abuse against me after I reported the child abuse taking place in the flat below. It further beggars belief that the mother of the abusedm children would exploit other young people and adults with the help of her relatives to carry out extensive criminal abuse with the use of the surveillance technology against me and be supported for eight and one-half years in that process by the authorities who should know better.
It is difficult for me to see how anyone can expect the problem of child abuse and its creation of subsequent violent generations to be solved so that these people are instead redirected toward healthy, normal and productive lives. In this case of my direct experience the reverse has occurred: not just failure but institutionalised ritual abuse perpetuated indefinitely. Totally invasive surveillance technology has been used for eight and one-half years without getting it right. That is not failure. That is deliberate.
BBC News Thursday, 8 February 2007, 17:58 GMT
Couple jailed for child torture
 The couple were visited up to 20 times by social services |
A couple who subjected their four-year-old disabled daughter to a systematic reign of cruelty have been jailed for a total of 22 years.
Samuel Duncan, 27, and his 23-year-old partner, Kimberly Harte, kicked, scalded and effectively scalped the girl, who has cerebral palsy.
Duncan was sentenced to 10 and a half years and Harte was sentenced to 11 and a half years, at Middlesex Crown Court.
The couple, of Maida Vale, west London, admitted three counts of child cruelty.
They had denied charges of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, but were convicted at the end of a trial last December.
| This is without doubt the worse case of child abuse I have personally had to deal with Detective Sergeant Anthony Smith |
The little girl had boiling water poured over her hands, had huge clumps of hair ripped from her head, was kicked so hard in the groin she suffered internal injuries and was locked naked in the toilet each night.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6343693.stm
3. What new powers? It's more police state activity. I've been searched continuously inside my home and wherever I am located by the continuous use of surveillance technology 24/7 for eight and one-half years. The police have partiticpated directly in this activity 24/7 for many years. They have thereby entered the premises at any time and searched with the use of surveillance technology. I have never done anything and could not be reasonably suspected of doing anything. I am the victim of false allegations manufacturered by child abusers whom I reported for their child abuse. This means that anyone including hate mongers can manufacture allegations against someone in this select group of sex offenders and have the police enter their premises with a warrant anytime on the basis of a mere suspicion for a "risk assessment" only.
The police will no longer have to suspect that a crime has been committed in order to obtain such a warrant. By allowing this to occur with paedophiles initially, it opens the door for this kind of privacy invasion to spread to everyone in the manner I've been experiencing for eight and one-half years only the police will be able to enter physically and carry out a search. If the police are going to abuse surveillance as I've experienced it, they will abuse everything else. It's necessary to experience this abuse from the police to really understand the total lack of standards which adhere to the police when given such powers of "risk assessment."
BBC News Thursday, 8 February 2007, 17:26 GMT
New powers to fight sex offences
 Tony Blair attended the NSPCC event with Prince Andrew |
Police are to get new powers to search the homes of known sex offenders.
Officers will be able to seek a warrant to carry out "risk assessments" on properties under measures due to come into force over the next two months.
Currently police can enter convicted sex offenders' homes only if they suspect a crime has been committed.
Tony Blair highlighted the powers at an event for children's charity NSPCC where he said work to fight abuse went on "day in and day out".
The prime minister was speaking alongside the Duke of York at the event.
Mr Blair said: "The abuse of a child is something that should never remain hidden."
He said that although much had been achieved, action to tackle abuse must continue.
"It's work that goes on day in, day out."