-Caveat Lector-
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: January 21, 2007 11:49:53 PM PST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Where Is "V" When the UK Needs Him?
Blair Set To Radically Enhance
British Police State
While the non-debate over who'll be Britain's next leader
continues, Blair aims to cement the Big Brother agenda before he
leaves
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
A series of policy review documents have been published today by
the Cabinet Office of the British Government that detail Tony
Blair's desire to implement radical "crime tackling" measures that
would not look out of place in the most hellish of dictatorship
states on the face of the planet.
Blair has said that measures including microchipping the mentally
ill and injecting sex offenders with hormones to negate their
desires, so called "chemical castration", are aimed at ensuring
that a "new New Labour" agenda will take the Government into the
next election after he steps down.
Blair announced that the measures were intended to shake up a
public that are "getting bored" of the government.
One document, entitled Crime, Justice And Cohesion, says there will
have to be "trade-offs" between liberty and security as technology
and profiling are used to tackle crime.
The policy paper also calls for the possible implementation of
technology such as face and voice recognition, a DNA database,
identity cards, and satellite surveillance.
The papers come at a time when Blair is fiercely defending plans to
centralise data on all citizens, calling it "sharing data in a
sensible way so the customer gets a better service", while critics
and opposition MPs are labeling it "a database from the cradle to
the grave".
The plans for a central database are nothing new, we have
previously highlighted the long term agenda to centralise
information into one giant hub that will link into the already
existing DNA database and hook up to a national ID card.
Without ANY parliamentary debate or legislation, every person in
this country is being targeted for inclusion on a DNA database from
birth. Hundreds of thousands of children aged between 10 and 18
have had their DNA added to the database despite never being
cautioned or charged for any offence.
The British government has also passed legislation to make every
offence arrestable. Under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act, this
includes not giving your details if stopped by police. Every
suspect arrested, even if proven innocent, has their DNA added to
the criminal database and stored forever in perpetuity.
Meanwhile EU officials are crying out for a massive pan-European
network of DNA and fingerprint databases which would also be open
to the Department of Homeland Security in the US. This does not
bode well for anyone who values privacy given that the UK, the most
advanced big brother state, is also the biggest critic of such a
project.
Medical records would be stored on the database also, as well as on
an implantable chip that may be given to anyone considered to be
mentally unstable. Under the new mental health act you can be
sectioned for mild depression.
Take the recent case of Anna McHugh, who visited her GP after a
failed intensive cycle of IVF treatment. She admitted that she was
a little depressed and needed some help.
Four hours later she found herself admitted to St Pancras Hospital.
Then, having admitted to the attending doctor that she had
contemplated suicide, she was sectioned under Section 5.2 of the
Mental Health Act and detained in a lock-down ward. When her
husband tried to rescue her, she was held in a headlock while a
doctor discussed her case with him.
In light of this and many other cases, is it so far fetched to
imagine people being forcibly implanted with microchips under the
mental health act?
The government doesn't seem to think so.
The paper also notes how Switzerland prescribes heroin rather than
the substitute methadone to addicts and prisoners in Texas are
forced to wear pink T-shirts to make them look gay.
Blair will be proud to see these things and more associated with
his legacy in Britain.
---------------------------
"THOSE DAMNED PROLES!" (Can State-Run EUGENICS be Far Behind?)
21 January 2007 23:36
The Government is ... concerned about the growing divide
between a fat, depressed underclass and a slim-line elite ...
By Marie Woolf and Francis Elliott
03 December 2006
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2035175.ece
It's a big fat figure -- and it is getting bigger each year.
Britain's worsening obesity crisis is already costing the country
£3.3bn annually, a bill that will expand along with our ever-
increasing waistlines.
The entire developed world may be putting on weight. But Britain is
piling on the pounds faster than most -- a trend confirmed by the
fact that our children are among the most obese in the world.
While the economic costs of Britain's obesity crisis are alarming,
its social consequence could be catastrophic.
A government study commissioned by Caroline Flint, the public
health minister, predicts how a fat, depressed underclass is set to
sprawl beneath a slim elite. And Britain's children are at the
forefront of this social revolution.
"Trends indicate there may be continued polarisation of the
population, into the junk food-eating, less-educated poor and
functional food-eating, better-informed higher classes," warned a
report by the Foresight Programme in the Office of Science and
Technology.
The future of the NHS itself is at stake. Once health insurance
firms vary premiums by weight, how long will a divided nation
support a health service swamped by the poor and obese? It is
little wonder ministers are prepared to risk accusations of
"nannying" in their efforts to get individuals to change their
behaviour.
This week, GPs will be asked by the Government to hand out
questionaires to all patients visiting their surgery. The surveys
are designed to establish just how unfit and overweight the nation is.
Most people in the UK fail to meet the Chief Medical Officer's
recommended guidelines of half an hour of moderate activity at
least five days a week. Children should spend an hour exercising
every week if they are to fend off the threats of obesity, heart
disease and diabetes, but an increasing number are settling in
front of the television with a packet of crisps instead.
Physical inactivity costs the nation £8.2bn a year, for example, in
lost work days and NHS bills. This week Sport England will publish
a survey indicating just how inactive we are. The survey of 364,000
people will show which areas of the country are the most sporty and
which age groups are most likely to participate in sport.
Efforts are already under way to save the next generation. One of
the most successful pilot programmes to cut weight was run by
Hastings and Rother Primary Care Trust, which used a £200,000
health service grant to set up programmes aimed at teenage girls,
"overweight and sedentary children" and teenage mothers.
The Girls Getting Active programme, aimed at 10- to 16-year-olds,
built physical activity into fashionable and social programmes,
including street dance classes. "We wanted to appeal to girls who
might not be very sporty, for example with trampolining and power
walking and games," said Hayley Martin, Local Exercise Action Pilot
(Leap) physical activity co-ordinator at the Trust.
For older people, the thought of signing up for football or hockey
after work is deeply unappealing. Some may have been turned off
sport at school, and it is this group that often shies away from
sporting activities in later life, leading to a host of problems
including diabetes, depression, hypertension and heart disease.
Health experts have been trying for years to send out the message
that remaining healthy need not involve competitive sport but can
be achieved through a host of everyday activities, including
walking. To reinforce this message, the National Institute of
Clinical Excellence will this month publish a report on how people
can integrate moderate exercise into their daily lives.
The health watchdog is expected to recommend that, instead of
taking the lift, people climb the stairs or carry the shopping home
instead of leaping into the car for a five-minute trip.
There is some room for optimism. A government pilot scheme to get
people involved in physical activity has proved an overwhelming
success. The Department of Health has invested £2.5m in programmes
to get "priority groups" - including overweight children and the
inactive elderly - to increase the amount of activity they undertake.
Using novel means to make physical activity fun, the pilots across
the country have invested in boxing and tango dance for the
over-50s, street dance programmes for teenage girls and "twister on
the beach" parties.
The results from Leap have shown a dramatic improvement in the
amount of exercise people took. A report to be published this week
will show that 60 per cent of participants who were classified as
either sedentary or lightly active achieved the Chief Medical
Officer's recommended guideline of being moderately active after
participating in Leap.
What really convinced the Government that the programme, run by NHS
trusts, should be extended across the country is that it showed
"physical activity interventions are cost-effective and can save
the NHS money in the long term by reducing ill-health".
The programme was designed to improve not only physical but also
mental health. Now the Government is to urge local trusts to invest
in such programmes. Admirable as these initiatives are, the odds
are against them turning the situation around completely. There is
-- as yet -- no example anywhere in the world of an effective
national programme that has reduced obesity rates.
According to the Foresight Programme: "There are no proven,
national-level precedents for action to reverse obesity. We found
insufficient evidence of effective programmes that have reduced
obesity ... Indeed, we were told that these do not exist."
Dr Stephen Morris, of the Health Economics Research Group at Brunel
University, and an expert on obesity, agrees that there is very
little evidence that such policies work. "Initiatives like dance
classes on the NHS are probably cost-effective if people actually
take any notice. Policy-makers like to suggest advice because
advice is cheap. But how many of us have paid the £400 joining fee
for a gym and gone three times? The problem is there is very little
research as to what interventions actually work."
Looming in the background is the issue of compulsion. If people
won't take advice and cannot be tempted from their sofas by dance
or football classes, should we start forcing them to be active? The
notion is not as outlandish as one might think: ministers are
seriously considering forcing parents to accept that their children
should be weighed in what will amount to a compulsory obesity
screening programme.
This summer the Department of Health announced plans to weigh all
children in England when they start primary school, and again when
they leave, as part of the Government's campaign against obesity.
The results of the survey have not yet been released, but at a
Department of Health seminar last week, officials admitted that
fewer than half of the children had been measured.
Additional reporting by Martin Hodgson
--------------------------
Smokers and alcoholics 'should pay for operations'
"A poll by the British Medical Journal found that 40% of doctors
believed that overweight people, smokers, and drinkers should be
denied medical treatment."
Sarah Hall
The Guardian (UK), June 29, 2006
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329516628-110418,00.html
Smokers who need heart bypasses and alcoholics who need liver
transplants should not get them free through the National Health
Service <state-sponsored medical insurance plan>, according to four
out of 10 hospital doctors. A quarter of those questioned in a
survey also believe obese patients should not be given free anti-
obesity drugs or receive free orthopaedic treatments.
The majority also oppose free gender reassignment and cosmetic
surgery, and a third believe that patients suffering from
infertility should have to pay for IVF (in vitro fertilisation)
treatment.
The findings emerged in a poll conducted by the medical pollsters
Medix for the Hospital Doctor newsletter sent to all 70,000
hospital doctors.
It comes amid increasing awareness of drug rationing - provoked by
the "postcode lottery" over the breast cancer drug Herceptin - and
of financial constraints imposed by the NHS's £1.3bn deficit. It
follows a smaller poll earlier this year for the British Medical
Journal which found that 40% of doctors believed that obese people,
smokers and heavy drinkers should be barred from treatments.
At present, doctors are supposed to oppose treatment only if there
is a clinical reason for doing so, such as a patient being so obese
that there is too great a risk of their dying if they undergo
surgery. But financial reasons were cited by one primary care
trust, East Suffolk health trust, last year as it barred obese
people from having hip and knee operations.
The survey, of 663 doctors, reveals that only 42% believe that
alcoholics should receive liver transplants on the NHS, with 41%
opposing this. Nearly half believe that smokers should be able to
have heart bypasses on the NHS, but 37% do not, and 13% are undecided.
Only 63% believe obese patients should be given free anti-obesity
drugs, and only 59% believe they should receive orthopaedic
treatments such as hip and knee replacements. More than three-
quarters back charges for herbal medicine and homeopathy treatments
and 63% fees for cosmetic operations such as breast reductions,
nose jobs and varicose veins.
Nearly a third (31%) believe elective caesarean sections should be
paid for. Opinion is split on IVF, with 33% saying patients should
bear the whole cost, the same number believing it should be
partially subsidised and a quarter saying it should be provided to
those with significant need. At present, infertile couples are
meant to have one free cycle on the NHS.
Comments from those surveyed suggest frustration with patients
treated after excessive smoking or drinking and a demand that they
take responsibility. One doctor said: "In a health insurance
culture, a habitual smoker who suffers a [heart attack] or lung
cancer should expect to 'pay' a premium for their lifestyle."
Another said: "There is no point in putting joints into very obese
people or doing vascular surgery again and again if the obese
patient has not shown efforts at weight reduction before the op, or
if the vascular patient demands to smoke his first post-op
cigarette on day one."
But Chris Spencer-Jones, chairman of the BMA's public health
committee, accused such colleagues of wanting to "ration healthcare
on the basis of prejudice".
"Most taxation is paid by poor people, many of whom smoke, are
obese and drink too much, and we should be helping rather than
criticising them. The public health perspective is very clear: we
don't blame people."
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
