You Don’t Have To Be A Conspiracy Theorist To Find The Death Of Paedo Jeffrey Epstein Too Convenient

We contributors to this site often get called conspiracy theorists, when in fact we are not posting conspiracy theories by merely questioning the narratives promoted by western governments and mainstream media when those narratives simply do not make sense. The most recent example has been the sago of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein’s rearrest on charges relating to allegations of sex with minors, solicitimg minors for prostitution, trafficking minors for sex purposes and being a general arsehole.
Epstein has never been clear of such allegations since his first arrest in 2008, when in a complete travesty of justice he served a short sentence in a Florida USA jail for sex with a minor to escape far more serious federal charges. Many people have been concerned about the plea bargain that kept Epstein out of a very long stretch in a US Federal prison and saw an FBI investigation into his wider activities as a procurer and pimp to the rich and famous of under age girls. Hiss associates included Hollywood A listers, music industry and showbusiness stars, prominent business people and lawyers, politicians and at least one former US President and his (allegedly lesbian) wife.
The Epstein scandal re – emerged in 2016, when his name and his infamous parties on a private island in the Caribbean  and flights on the ‘Lolita Express’, the private jet used to fly his guests to and from the venue, came up in connection with a presidential candidate whose name was NOT Trump. The scandal has simmered on the back burner since then, overshadowed by the crazy and now completely discredited story of Trump’s collaboration with the Russian state to steal the election from Hillary Clinton and other efforts to remove him from office based on entirely unsubstantiated allegations and in some cases people simply deciding he should not be president because they don’t like him.
The death of the disgraced financier, pedophile and alleged blackmailer, who has been imprisoned and on suicide watch since his arrrest in June this year  came just a day after a batch of  court documents were unsealed, leading to speculation he may have been “suicided” to stop his case from going to trial.

Discussione with other bloggers of the Jeffrey Epstein have usually centred not on b”Is he innocent or guilty but  “When will he be found dead in his cell?” Nobody was willing to bet the case would ever get to court, there were too many names in Epstein’s Little Black Book who simply could not afford to be publicly associated with his activities.

And it wasn’t just the old cynics I associate with. It was quite impossible to find anybody who believed the Epstein case would be resolved with a public trial. The whole thing was quite uncanny. One name which came up again and again was that of the former US president whose name, it is now known, appeared many times on flight logs of the Lolita Express.

Let’s be honest: has there been a death of a high-profile prisoner whose expiration has been so unsurprising?

 

A suggestion last week that Epstein would never trial because too many rich and influential people would have their names dragged through the mud and their sexual peccadillos exposed to the world during the provceedings would have been subjected to ridicule by the usual suspects, the media pundits who would have us believe the government is our friend and would never do anything that is not in our best interests, that Russia is The Great Satan of Revelations and that Syria’s President Assad is a monster whose idea of fun is to gas his own people and that the child raping, sex slave taking, journalist baking head amputators of ISIS were the right people to liberate the midle east from tyranny,  and called a right wing nut job and a “conspiracy theorist.”

Well now who are looking like naive, stupid, left wing nut jobs?

Most so called conspiracy theories are nothing of the kind. To qualify as a conspiracy theory, a speculation must contain a claim that the proposer has evidence that, for example, the moon landings ere filmed in a redundant sound stage at Universal Studios and that Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins were played by The Three Stooges . The author must then go on cite what he or she (but usually he,) believes is evidence of this.

There is not much point questioning the moon landing, but questioning the supposed chain of events surounding the death of President Kennedy, the World Trade Centre atrocity or the Las Vegas Shooting to cite three examples, should be seen as a good thing, because in each of those cases there were parts of the narrative that simply did not make sense.

Likewise why would Bashar Al Assad launch gas attacks against his own people when no only was he, with the help of his Russian and Iranian allies, winning the war but also, because whatever he may be he is not a stupid man, he must have known such actions would alienate many leaders sympathetic to his cause and would give the western coalition an excuse to launch direct attacks on his regime’s strongholds.

Such questioning of government narratives is a good thing because it encourages discussion. When it comes to conspiracy theories, there are three types of people apart from the media hacks who are paid to prop up the establishment propaganda. First there are the xself appointed ‘voices of reason’ who are quite determined to convince us the government and the global corporations are on our side, there is nothing untoward going on and we are told everything there is to know about every controversial issue. Believe that and you probably also believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.  T oices of reason are themselves no slouches at pushing conspiracy theories, look back at how they were happy to believe the ‘proof’ of the Trump campaign’s collaboration with Russian agents in 2016 was beyond reasonable doubt, when that ‘proof’ was nothing more that a few unsubstantiated allegations from some very dodgy individuals in the pay of Trump’s opponents, or the way they were absolutely sure the attempted hit on former Russian agent Sergei Skripal was the work of hit men sent by the Russian government, when the main evidence consisted of a photoshopped picture of two vaguely foreign looking guys window shopping in a street that might have been in Britain.

The voices of reason confine themselves to spreading conspiracy theories about “official enemies” like Russia and Iran or personas non grata such as Nigel Farage or Tommy Robinsion. The deadliest conspiracy theory so far this century was the story spread in 2003 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein  had at his disposal Weapons of Mass Destruction with which he could launch deadly attacks on the west within forty five minutes. This narrative, fabricated for the purpose of justifying war on Iraq was  propagated through mainstream print and broadcast news media and repeated by those who routinely scoff at conspiracy theorists and label them “cranks.” I was told in a comment from somebody who claimed to be a research fellow at one of our top universities on one of my early blogs that only an idiot would disbelieve the threat of Saddam’s WMDs and soon people would see what a gullible clown I am.Seventeen years later we are still looking for Saddam’s secret weapons.

The same people have since then become quick to blame Russia for just about everything bad that happens, regardless of the lack of hard evidence.

The second category are those who seem to believe everything – or at least almost everything – is a conspiracy. The world is run by a kabal of shape shifting reptillians called The Illuminati, the Freemasons and the Elders of Zion are trying to create a New World Order, the aforementioned Moon landings were a Stanley Kubric movie. Every terrorist attack is a “false-flag”. and every mass shooting in the USA is the work of government agents

The third category, the majority most of us will hope, accept that while not everything is a conspiracy, it’s actually quite daft to think conspiracies never occur, especially when people involved are very wealthy and powerful and in some cases criminally insane and the stakes are extremely high.

Did anyone really think, deep down, given who, who and what the people he had dirt on were and the extremely serious nature of the charges he faced that Epstein’s case would ever get to court? Be honest. I’d reckon about 90 percent, even though they might not publicly admit it, would have been willing to bet a substantial portion of their life savings that he wouldn’t. Speaking as the grandson of a bookie, I have to say I grandad would not have taken any bets on it.

Here’s something from Twitter that sums it up perfectly:

Abi Wilkinson

@AbiWilks

“I’m not a conspiracy theorist” is such a weird assertion when you think about it, the idea there’s a binary between believing all conspiracies and flat out rejecting the very concept of conspiracy in all circumstances”

You really don’t have to be paranoid or  a habitual tin-foil hat wearer to smell a rat in this one. And questioning a narrative that does not make sense does not make one a conspiracy theorist. Let’s review some ofg the questions raised by the official version of events.

It was reported Epstein tried to kill himself about three weeks ago although therewas some speculation as to how he managed to inflict the injuries he received on himself, so if it was a sucide bid, why was he taken off suicide watch six days later? Who made that seemingly baffling decision? If he was still on suicide watch and a source cited in the New York Times was wrong, why wasn’t his death prevented?

If the authorities knew, as they would have, that the first alleged suicide bid was as Epstein himself claimed, the result of an attack by another prisoner, why was Epstein not given special protection?

Once he was a known sex offender, how did he get away with doing the same things as he had once served time for for so long? Who was protecting him and how far would they be prepared to go to ensure what he knew never became public.

These are only a few of the many questions that need to be answered. What is particularly interesting is the kind of people demanding answers. It’s not just the “usual” suspects who are routinely labeled cranks by the gatekeepers. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has called Epstein’s death “way too convenient.”

“How many other millionaires and billionaires were part of the illegal activities that he was engaged in?” he asked. Even the UK establishment’s propaganda agency, The BBC website has as its heading of a news story today “Jeffrey Epstein: Questions raised over financier’s death.”

The FBI is reported to be investigating the case, which in view of their failure to prosecute any member of Hillary Clinton’s campaign team over breches of national security which came to light in 2016 does not fill one with confidence.

Perhaps Epstein did after all, kill himself – prisoners facing the prospect of 45 years in jail are quite likely to be depressed; moreover the sociopathic billionaire might even have relished evading justice and depriving his accusers of their days in court. But until more evidence of his suicide such as CCTV video,  comes to light, it is reasonable to think that some other explanation for his sudden death.

UK establishment – echo site Bellingcat attacks US anti – war candidate Gabbard for doubting Syria chemical attacks

 

For some in the USA congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is the stand out figure in a crowded but uninspiring field of Democrat Party politicians hoping to win the right to challenge Donald Trump for the presidency in 2020. Running as an anti-war candidate, Gabbard has expressed opposition to US military interventions in their world nations and has gone on record for casting doubt on the establishment narrative that President Assad of Syria has on several occasions ordered his troops to use chemical weapons against civilians in that country’s long civil war.

The congresswoman from Hawaii is not out on a limb in doubting the official line, while mainstream media, fearing reprisals maybe, has dutifully toed the esatblishment line that the raping, sex slave taking, journalist baking, head amputating ISIS, Al Nusra and Al Qaeda rebels are the good guys in Syria. Respected veteran journalists including John Pilger and Seymour Hersch have also pointed out that it would have been ridiculous of Assad to use illegal weapons at times when the war was going his way. However it has been revealed that the Saudis, the USA (more so under the Obama administration than Trump,), and the EU all gave material support to the rebels, while Assad, who is supported by a majority of his people, has been demonized because he has stood in the way of US / NATO regional ally and oil reservoir Saudi – Arabia and their ambitions to build an oil and gas pipeline from the gulf to the Mediterranean.

Opposing military interventions and regime change was in the US is like painting a target on your own back. Traditionally it has been The Republicans that took the role of the war party, but since Obama pledged US support for any bunch of dark skinned fanatics trying to oust and equally dark skinned dictator, rooting for foreign interventions has become part of the Democrat platform too. But not for Tulsi Gabbard whose published criticisms of American military meddling in the domestic politics of smaller nations includes a lengthy piece on chemical attacks in Syria.

In spite of the outraged reaction from both ends of the US political spectrum,, she does have a point. In February 2018, commenting on the publication of an OPCW (Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons report on one poison gas incident which stated inspectors found no evidence that the Assad regime was involved, I wrote:

“Experienced chemical weapons experts and independent U.N. investigators such as Hans Blix, Scott Ritter, Gareth Porter and Theodore Postol have all cast doubt on “official” American narratives claiming that President Assad employing Sarin.
Now the US government’s military boss has said on the record that there was no evidence to support this conclusion. In so doing, Mattis tacitly impugned the interventionists who were responsible for pushing the “Assad is guilty” narrative twice without sufficient supporting evidence, in order to justify escalation of US / NATO involvement in the conflict.”

On another chemical weapon event American scientist Theodore A Postol conducted his own investigation because he found the official report unbeliveable. His daming report, sent to Washington, included, along with much more evidence deconstructing the official version of events, this paragraph:

“When the OPCW document [the leaked report from a dissenting OPCW scientist claiming that the chemical weapons attack was staged] indicating staging of the chlorine cylinder attacks in the alleged attacks in Douma on April 7, 2018 was released, I was traveling and in Washington with little time to look more deeply into the matter. I have finally had a chance to evaluate sections of the Douma report S/1731/2019 more comprehensively, including critical observed data and calculations included in the report. The attached PDF file contains my findings in detail.

My review of the conclusions in the UN OPCW Fact-Finding Mission Report (FFM) S/1731/2019 shows that the science-based analysis used in the report and the observed data collected by the FFM bear no relationship to each other.”

So Tulsi Gabbard is in good company when she questions the official narrative on Assad;s chemical weapons atrocities.

Gabbard became the most-googled candidate immediately after the second Democratic Party presidential primary debate, but her success in routing the establishment candidates triggered a renewed surge of personal attacks, character assassination and smears from left leaning mainstream media against her anti-war agenda. Gabbard has been branded a ‘Russian’ spoiler for whichever candidate is eventually picked, Putin’s puppet, an anti American extremist and an apologist for the brutal regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

But the attacks did not stay in the US even though the only election the candidate is involved in is purely an American affair. On Sunday Elliot Higgins, the founder of the UK-based ‘citizen investigation’ outlet Bellingcat, wrote a wlong winded hit piece attacking Gabbard’s negative attitude toward regime change wars. (Now let’s be honest here, none of the regime change wars this century could be said to have succeeded so we should be very sceptical about talk of “a negative attitude towards regime change wars,” in my opinion anyone who unequivocally opposes regime change wars has a very positive attitude towards them.) Higgins took particular exception to her skepticism over alleged chemical weapons attacks in Syria which she dicusses at length on her website.

The attacks were used by the Obama administration to justify missile strikes against the country’s legitimate government and the continued and illegal US military presence in Syria.

While Western governments were quick (too quick in fact,) to lay the blame for Syrian chemical weapons events on the government forces Damascus and Moscow have insisted the attacks mentioned by Gabbard and Higgins were false-flag operations by Al-Qaeda-affiliated militants. One would not normally take the word of either at face value but in this case their denials are backed by the independent OPCW investigators.

Particularly infamous was the one in Douma on April 7, 2018, in which the Oscar-winning ‘White Helmets’ doused unsuspecting children with cold water on camera, so as to fake the treatment of the alleged “victims.” They might not have expected for witnesses to later come forward and speak on the record at the Hague, denouncing the whole affair as staged, a view confirmed by the fact that video posted online showed aid workers in ordinary street clothes working on alleged victims of Sarin gas, a material for which full haz – mat suits are required.

A final point in conclusion, it is ironic that Bellingcat has seen fit to spend some of the US taxpayer money, which it receives through one of its sponsors, the National Endowment for Democracy – on meddling in American election processes ahead of the 2020 presidential campaign. Most of us innocen Brits though meddling in American elections was a task reserved for Russians.

More Fake News Supporting Electric Cars

 

Another advertisement in The Telegraph today for electric cars, this on claining it only costs £4 to charge the batteries to the same level as filling the tank of a conventional car.

I fill up my car’s tank for just £4′: have electric cars reached tipping point?

Screams the headline over a picture of a couple of proud (and surprisingly unburned) Tesla owners and their pride and joy, £75,000 worth of what looks like a family sized car with nothing special about it, apart from the fact that by the time you get to the end of the street you will probably need to stop for several hours to recharge the batteries.

Tony Cuthbert with £75,000 Tesla (picture Telegraph)

 

But does the owner’s boast stand up to scrutiny?

The cost of owning an electric car could come down to equal petrol and diesel within two years, according to auditor Deloitte, but for savvy drivers, going green could already make financial sense  the Telegraph says.

The market for electric vehicles (EVs) is growing at a rapid rate, with the number of models available set to exceed 200 in the next two years. Analysts predict another 10 million electric cars will be on British roads by the end of the next decade. But while the number of models has increased, growth in the numbers of actual sales is positively sluggish.

As combating climate change becomes increasingly important to many consumers, according to maker’s publicity, yet electric cars accounted for only 1.15% of global sales in 2017. I could not find a figure for 2018, but reports say there was modest growth. There are also reports that energy providers are flooding the market with innovative tariffs specifically aimed at drivers of electric cars, but here too the low cost of energy does not compensate for the high initial cost of installation. .

Tony Cuthbert, 59, from Gateshead, has been driving his Tesla Model S for just over a year after deciding he could be doing more to save the planet. His conscience has paid off as the company’s national network of free-to-use charging points, combined with cheap energy at home, means his running costs have fallen. Mr Cuthbert, an IT manager, mainly charges his vehicle overnight at home. He uses Octopus Energy’s Go EV tariff, which provides power at the reduced rate of 5p per kilowatt hour for several hours overnight, meaning a full charge of the Tesla costs around £4.

 

It costs £4 to fill up the tank because the tank isn’t very big.

At 14p/kWh, £4 would get you 28kWh of electricity. 1 litre of petrol is equivalent to 10kWh.

Electric engines are more efficient, so it would give you the same number of km as 5kWh.

£4 is therefore the equivalent of putting 6 litres of petrol in your car, which would cost £7.38 at £1.23 per litre, which is what I paid on Thursday.

The tax on £7.38 (6 litres) of petrol is £4.82, meaning it costs £2.56 for the actual petrol. The tax on £4 of electricity is 19p, meaning the actual electricity costs £3.81. So the only reason electricity is cheaper for filling your car is because the tax is cheaper.

And while it does not entirely account for the discrepancy, I guess the tax is cheaper partly because electricity doesn’t pump exhaust fumes into the air as much at the point of use as petrol/diesel do, but simply moves the dirt to the places where mining of materials and manufacture of batteries takes place, (i.e. not in countrys that have committed to zero carbon targets.

When a newspaper publishes an advertisement disguised as an article isn’t there some law that says readers must be clearly informed the content is advertising material.
The article is just another ad for EVs and Tesla in particular, none of the problems of EVs are mentioned, not even the tendency of Tesla vehicles to barbecue theior occupants.

It isn’t until we get to the comments we read of the vast subsidies governments are giving EV makers due to the punitive taxes on petrol and diesel, or the absolutely filthy and energy intensive industrial processes involved in manufacturing batteries (especially the mining and refining of rare earth metals,) and the equally filthy and energy intensive processes involved in recycling or scrapping batteries.

 

 

Finnish Climate Study Finds No Evidence That Humans Caused Climate Change

A team of Finnish climate researchers led by J. Kauppinen and P. Malmi of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Turku, have have published results of a project which found that the likely human contribution to a rise of 0.1°C in global temperatures over the past 100 years century is just 0.01°C. This is in direct contradiction of  the catastrophic global warming narrative built by research grant phishing Warmageddonist scientists and the bureaucrats of the  UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The UN has of course been making political use of Warmageddonist doom prophecies to advance its Agenda 21 and Agenda 30, both of which look like plans for global governance when subjected to critical scrutiny.

Kauppinen and Malmi write in their research analysis paper, dated June 29, 2019, that their research proves that GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the instances of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. They claim this is why the models used to make the case for catastrophic warming give a minimal natural temperature change, assigning a substantial change to the contribution of the greenhouse gases in the observed temperature.

This is the reason why IPCC has to use a considerable adjustment of data to compensate for the too small natural component. Further, scientists drafting reports for the IPCC have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds. Also, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature.

Kauppinen and Malmi explain:
“The climate sensitivity has an extremely large uncertainty in the scientific literature. The smallest values estimated are very close to zero while the highest ones are even 9 degrees Celsius for a doubling of CO2. The majority of the papers are using theoretical general circulation models (GCM) for the estimation. These models give very big sensitivities with a very large uncertainty range. Typically sensitivity values are between 2-5 degrees.

IPCC uses these papers to estimate global temperature anomalies and climate sensitivity.

However, there are a lot of papers, where sensitivities lower than one degree are estimated without using GCM.

The basic problem is still missing experimental evidence of the climate sensitivity.

Low cloud cover controls practically the global temperature. It turns out that the changes in the relative humidity and in the low cloud cover depend on each other. So, instead of low cloud cover, we can use the changes in the relative humidity in order to derive the natural temperature anomaly. According to the observations, a 1 % increase of the relative humidity decreases the temperature by 0:15°C.

The IPCC climate sensitivity is about one order of magnitude too high because a strong negative feedback of the clouds is missing in climate models. If we pay attention to the fact that only a small part of the increased CO2 concentration is anthropogenic, we have to recognize that the anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practice. The major part of the extra CO2 is emitted from oceans, according to Henry`s law. The low clouds practically control the global average temperature.

the last hundred years, the temperature is increased by about 0:1°C because of CO2 therefore:

The human contribution was about 0:01°C.”

The J. Kauppinen and P. Malmi report is the latest of many reports from research projects which provide evidence to challenge the scare tactics pushed by the purveyors of the climate change hypothesis and politicians seeking to use the climate change scare to erode our rights and liberties.

The facts show the climate models that have been proven wrong at every step, the Earth’s climate is much more complicated than the algorithms that can be programmed into a computer application could deal with, simply because there are so many unquantifiable effects acting on the climate. The CAGWARTs (Carbon- driven Anthropogenic Global Warming Alternative Reality Trolls still haven’t raised teir heads from their computer screens long enough to work out why the satellite temperature data says, Earth hasn’t warmed in twenty years , why there is still snow in winter, cool spells in summer, why Polar Bear numbers are incresing and where the 50 million people who were due to be displaced by rising sea levels by 2015 have disappeared to, (clue: they’re not hiding under harry Potter’s cloak of invisibility.)

READ a translation of the whole report (.pdf)

RELATED POSTS:

EXPLORE RELATED POSTS:

Some clear thinking on climate change
Climate change: CO2 comparison
Climate effect of CO2 overstated
Climate and the IPCC Agenda

Electoral Fraud Scandal In Peterborough By – election Being Covered Up?

from Politicalite:

Thanks to Politicalite’s groundbreaking exclusive coverage of the crooked Peterborough By-Election so far, the Daily Mail have picked up on our story and have revealed a fresh incident of alleged electoral fraud being investigated by the Police:

“A knock at the door of a semi-detached house on a street in the East ward of the city of Peterborough.

It’s the afternoon of April 22, eight weeks before the June 6 by-election in which Labour will squeak to victory ahead of Nigel Farage‘s Brexit Party.

Alone at home is a 54-year-old Asian woman with severe health problems.

On her doorstep she allegedly finds Dr Shabina Qayyum, Labour candidate for the ward in the local council elections, along with two male party officials.


Dr Shabina Qayyum with a Labour Party colleague at the Peterborough election count (Source: Ploiticalite)

What happened next is in dispute. But the resulting allegations were serious enough for the council to call in the police.

Criminal claim was followed by counter-claim; the only certainty is that politics in Peterborough is a dirty business — and has been for some years now.

Labour’s victory by 683 votes, in one of Britain’s most keenly-fought by-elections of recent years, has been overshadowed by accusations of electoral fraud and voter harassment — centred on the Asian community which is particularly active in Peterborough politics.” READ ALL >>>

RELATED POSTS:
Election fraud allowed to take place in Muslim communities because of ‘political correctness’, report warns

France’s FN Win Regional Elections First Round. Now The Cheating Starts.

Postal Voting Has Given Us Third World Politics

Clinton voter fraud
DC Leaks Expose George Soros Manipulating Elections

Police Investigate South Thanet Constituency Election.

Is This Why UKIP Only Won One Seat

London’s Muslim Mayor Rejects Brexit Vote At Gay Pride Event

 

Facebook’s Censorship Drive Backfires As Advertisrs Dump Platform

 Mark Zuckerberg’s bid to set up Facebook as official censor by appointment to The New World Order has backfired spectacularly as major brands are feeing the social media giant’s advertising platform. CrossFit just announced they are shuttering their Facebook and instagram ad campaigns due to censorship, which filters out conservative and libertarian flavoured content and promotes only far left propaganda.

Facebook recently banned one of their affiliate pages without reason or warning. Many other organisations have been purged, somtimes not for actually supporting right wing political views but for simply not being enthusiastic enough about the kind of far left sacred cows Zuckerberg likes to embrace for his virtue signalling exercises. Other unethical behavior Facebook has engaged in around data rights includes collecting private data from users’ home systems without authority, selling said data to advertisers and public relations consultants, ignoring court orders to cease and desist, tax evasion and a host of other bltantly illegal or ethically dubious activities.

The issues raised by CrossFit’s decision reflect conservative concerns over free speech and social media censorship given the political bias shown by the owners of these companies. It seems that in their quest to satiate the outrage mob they have banned too many accounts, often without any reason other than that those sites reflect views that do not coincide with those of some egomaniacal Silicon Valley bilionaire.

When you appease exrtremists by banning one group then those same people demand you ban another group and it never ends. It is a trait of the left wing mindset that it can only ever go further in the same direction. Thus Facebook caving to far left faux – outrage over non – issues like ‘transgender rights’ or banning support for Israel has resulted in their steady decline. Young people are are abandoning the platform as it is now longer seen as cool, but has become a byword for authoritarian and illiberal business practices and political views. And now even it’s biggest backer, the U.S. government is targeting Zuckerberg’s empire with anti-trust measures. As more people and groups get banned on facebook more people decide to leave.

RELATED POSTS:


Speaking Tuth To Power (When power does not want to listen)

In almost every democratic nation our right of free speech is under attack. In Britain, Australia, Canada and all the main European Union member states we see harsh punishments imposed on those found guilty of ‘hate speech,’ laws, which protect certain minorities from any criticism, no matter how reasonable, made by people from the mainstream of society …

Digital Gangsters
Another story on Facebooks dirty deeds.


Facebook Negotiating Multibillion-Dollar US Fine As UK Labels “Digital Gangsters”

Facebook and its executives were labeled “digital gangsters” by a UKParliamentary inquiry into the social media giant’s abuse of users privacy. The company should immediately be subject to statutory regulation the report published at the conclusion of the 18-month investigation by the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport  parliamentary committee recommended …
also read at Boggart Abroad

Facebook Rattled After Report Claims 50% Of Its Users Are Fake

Bradford Abuser Gang Victim Claims Bradford, Rotherham, Rochdale Gangs ‘Linked’

One of the victims of a Bradford grooming gang has told the media that most of the girls at the children’s home where she was placed by local authority social workers were being sexually exploited by gangs of immigrant males. She called for a nationwide inquiry, alleging that numerous grooming and abuse gangs across the country — including the most notorious cases in Rochdale and Rotherham — are linked.

Fiona Goddard, 25, told BBC Look North regional news magazine, “I lived in a care home and I know that most of the girls, barring about three, were all getting sexually exploited as well.

“I also met numerous girls while we were out with other guys that maybe didn’t come from care homes, but came from broken backgrounds and they were all getting exploited.”

On the extent and organisation of the systematic abuse of vulnerable girls from borken homes, she said, “When I was at that house [where she was raped], people came from Birmingham, Rochdale, Rotherham, Blackburn, Glasgow, Oxford.

“It is widespread and they are all linked.”

“There definitely needs to be a public inquiry; it needs to be an independent one,” she added.

Bradford Council’s interim child services chief Gladys Rhodes White said of Ms Goddard’s call for an iquiry, “I’m not seeing evidence that there is a wide-scale, large issue specific to Bradford.

“I think if it did come to light that there were lots of victims that had been missed,” she added, it would be something the Safeguarding Board would want to “look at”. This is typical of the authorities complacent attitude when dealing with sex crimes committed by immigrants.

Ms Goddard came forward with her complaint in 2014, after seeing a report on the abuse of more than 1,500 girls in Rotherham, and warned that while some rape survivors had gone to the police, “there are girls that either lack the understanding or aren’t in the situation where they can [come forward].”

She gave evidence in a trial at Bradford Crown Court last month that resulted in the convictions of Parvaze Ahmed, 36, Naveed Akhtar, 43, Saeed Akhtar, 55, Zeeshan Ali, 32, Keiran Harris, 28, Izar Hussain, 32, Fahim Iqbal, 28, Basharat Khaliq, 38, and Mohammed Usman, 31.

The child rapists were found guilty of 22 offences including inciting child prostitution and rape, in abuse that began in 2008 when she and another unnamed victim were 14 years old; all nine were given terms of between 18 and 20 years — but will likely be released from prison much earlier.

The young woman waived her lifelong right to anonymity to discuss her case and reach out to other potential victims of grooming gangs.

MORE ON GROOMING AND RAPE GANGS:
20 men Arrested For Child Sexual Exploitation In Wakefield
Rotherham; Rochdale; Oxford; London;
Back to Contents table

MORE POSTS:
Hijab wearing, Jihad supporting US Congresswoman refuses to condem stoning of gays