Take Back The Power. Positive Ways Forward in 2015 - Early Steps

Conspiracies or not, there is much afoot and amiss in the world. Due to nearly all the media we are allowed to consume being owned by just a few mega corporations, many of the most serious issues are barely covered, if at all. Fukashima for example. Geoengineering, war for profit, GMOs the new world order, the list goes on.

Many people can't or won't accept that there is anything wrong. This is due to many factors, from dumbing down, fluoridation,programing and information overload to death grips (mort-gages), dependants and careers, there is much to distract, disguise or dismiss.

If someone does begin to realise what is really going on, if they can bear to accept it, the situation seems hoplessely daunting. What can possibly be done?

Often the answer to that is ambitious and unrealistic with no realisable short term strategy. It's very good to know where you want to be, you don't need to know how to complete the journey, but before you can start you need to prepare and  know at least the first part of the route.
That said, if the so called apocalypse we've been programmed to expect does come, we need a plan B to get through that to our intentional destination.

This series of articles is a synthesis of my reasearch, philosophy and intuitions into a positive way forward in troubled and troubling times. My attempt to overcome the cognitive disonance and move onward and upward in a meaningful, authentic and useful way.

Simply put, we need to take back our power as sovereign humans answering only to God (of choice). In the U.K. we have been tricked into giving power to our servants (police,mp's,councils etc) and even worse fictions (corporations). We are farmed and sweating to line the pockets of a few, we need to peacefully take the power back.

In the next article I will be discussing proven practical ways to take the power back from the userous beuracratic bullies our so called servants have become.

Testing Finds Cancer-Causing Chemical in Nearly 100 Hair Care and Personal Care Products

I stopped using all "personal care" products years ago, I don't smell apparently and didn't erupt in boils. The reasons I stopped boils down to two simple maxims;

1) Don't put anything on your skin you're not prepared to eat
2) If it sounds like a horrible chemical, it probably is a horrible chemical.

Couple this with my need to read during certain movements and you can see why I stopped. Have you read the ingredients for your products?

"The Center for Environmental Health has a seventeen-year track record of protecting children and families from harmful chemicals in our air, water, food and in dozens of every day products. CEH also works with major industries and leaders in green business to promote healthier alternatives to toxic products and practices. In 2010, the San Francisco Business Times bestowed its annual "Green Champion" award to CEH for its work to improve health and the environment in the Bay Area and beyond."

http://www.ceh.org/making-news/press-releases/29-eliminating-toxics/663-lawsuit-launched-as-testing-finds-cancer-causing-chemical-in-nearly-100-hair-care-and-personal-care-products

Stop Uk gagging law before it's too late...

You might have heard about the “gagging law” currently being voted on by MPs. If you haven’t heard of it, it’s really bad news. If it goes through, it will have a chilling effect on British democracy and on our right to speak up on the issues that matter to us.

Basically, the law slashes the spending limits on campaigning for the year before any election. Campaigns that have impact don’t cost the earth, but they aren’t free.

Community groups, charities and campaigning organisations would all be hit. Election time is when ordinary people have the most influence on our politicians. On the big issues of the day – whether or not to go to war, the future of our NHS, the environment, welfare, immigration, etc. – we'd all be gagged.

The problem is that this law has come out of nowhere and not many people have heard what’s going on. If we’re going to defeat it, we need to get the word out further. If every single person who’s ever joined a local campaign group or taken action with their favourite charity knew that they could be stopped from doing that again, the outcry could explode.

Here’s a simple five minute video you can watch for more information. Can you take a look, and then help get the word out by passing it on to your friends and family?
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/gagging-law-video

Vaccine fraud finally properly revealed

For all those still in doubt about vaccine efficacy/safety, please read this paper from The British Society for Ecological Medicine and then see how you feel.

Here's a taster

"Here I present the documentation which appears to show that the JCVI made continuous efforts to withhold critical data on severe adverse reactions and contraindications to vaccinations to both parents and health practitioners in order to reach overall vaccination rates which they deemed were necessary for “herd immunity”, a concept which with regards to vaccination, and contrary to prevalent beliefs, does not rest on solid scientific evidence as will be explained." Here's the article

How to remove a wheel clamp legally.

Took him a while but nuff respec… TOP TIP at the end in the case of breached adhesion contracts, i.e parking violation, no money at restaurant etc, if you give them your name and address the matter becomes a civil offence and instantly non arrest able, which is nice.

A notice stating anything attached to conveyance without prior written consent is liable to removal by force and a £5k fine over each wheel is easier.

Police elections tomorrow, please vote if you can to slow privatisation

Here’s what the Dorset candidates said to 38 Degrees members about privatisation. Not all of them have given a clear answer about privatisation, some have made a distinction between “back office” and “frontline” privatisation. Others have said they won’t privatise but may consider outsourcing - having a private company take over some parts of the work that police forces do.


Rachel Rogers (Labour):
I have stated publicly on many occasions that I am against privatisation of the police and firmly believe that policing should be a public service, not for profit. I am similarly committed to public service prisons - I find it less than ethical for the state to take away a person's liberty and then allow a private company to make a profit from incarceration.

However, the Government's 20% cuts to policing are well in excess of the 12% that HMIC said was feasible. I am therefore suspicious that the Government's aim is to enforce the privatisation of core services and to pressurise even the most pro-public service candidates (of which I would be one) to make near-impossible decisions. However, my commitment will always be to publicly accountable in-house police services other than for areas where it is sensible and logical to contract out - fleet management, uniform suppliers and IT/telephone infrastructure for example.

I was interested to hear at Labour Party Conference in early October that even G4S don't think the private sector have a place in core policing tasks such as patrolling. They want to run custody services, but in my opinion it is much better to run such services in-house with directly employed public servants.

I do not have any connection with any companies that might be interested in police contracts. Since I was selected as a candidate I have received letters from companies that would fit that criterion and have attended seminars and conferences where such companies have also been present. In order to be as open about these contacts I have published a full list on the Transparency page of my website: http://www.rachelrogers.net/ A copy of the G4S letter can be found here.

Andy Canning (LibDems):
I will not privatise Dorset police services.

I will not allow G4S or similar companies within a mile of any responsible position that I am involved with.

I have no link to any companies that might be interested in police contracts.

Martyn Underhill (Independent):
Can you promise not to privatise Dorset police services?
In relation to privatisation yes I can. However, what a lot of people using the word 'privatisation' are mainly concerned about is out-sourcing. Choosing an external organisation to run a function that has, to that point, been managed in house. Would I consider out-sourcing if I were Dorset's Police and Crime Commissioner? Yes, in certain circumstances I would. There are very many different forms of out-sourcing and the bodies undertaking them can be from the private, public or even third (voluntary) sectors. I consider the Voluntary Sector the best approach, because from my experience, they provide better value for money and outcomes.

Will you allow companies like G4S to get involved in the running of Dorset police?
As contractors, yes, but not as a Company for profit taking a permanent role away from the police. For example, however, some measures may make sense, as contractors.Last year, there was a murder, where the incident was spread over hundreds of yards. It cost tens of thousands of pounds to protect forensically. That was because the scene guardswere six police officers being paid 25 [pounds] ph each, some on overtime. In reality, 4 private security guards, costing 6 [pounds] ph, could have been used, supervised by two police officers. A short term 2 day contract, that makes financial sense.

Do you have any connection to companies that might be interested in police contracts?
No

Nick King (Conservatives):
I don't support 'privatisation' of the police. But then the word 'privatisation' used by so many at the moment is entirely wrong in this context. Let's be clear about the definition of privatisation - it means the transfer of services from the public to the private sector irreversibly, who then run independently.

What those using the word 'privatisation' are concerned about is out-sourcing. Choosing an external organisation to run a function that has, to that point, been managed in house.

Would I consider out-sourcing if I were Dorset's Police and Crime Commissioner? Yes, I would.

If an external body can run a service better and more efficiently than it can be delivered within the organisation then I would look at that. There is of course a caveat to that statement - running a service 'better' means amongst other things retaining the confidence of both its customers and colleagues who have to work alongside it. That's the reason I don't believe that frontline policing should be considered for out-sourcing. I think the public have an expectation that police officers and staff undertake certain jobs, not just on the streets, but also in police custody suits and similar behind the scenes roles.

There are very many different forms of out-sourcing and the bodies undertaking them can be from the private, public or even third (voluntary) sectors. Dorset Police Authority already out sources some of its finance and HR functions to Dorset County Council for example. The financial landscape the first Dorset Police and Crime Commissioner will inherit is going to be really, really tough. If there is an opportunity, through working in partnership with other organisations to reduce cost elsewhere in order that resources can be concentrated on frontline, local policing then I wouldn't hesitate to look at any option.

I've been clear about how I view G4S too. And the best thing I can do is to point you in the direction of this article I wrote on my website back in July: http://www.nick4dorsetpcc.org.uk/news/would-i-outsource-g4s 

I have no contact whatsoever with any companies that would be interested in working for the Police. I've been open too about all the contact I've had from businesses while standing in this election. That detail is here:http://www.nick4dorsetpcc.org.uk/transparency .

Dorset police privitisation