British State Viciously Abuses Child Fantasist 234


The sentencing of a 15 year old Blackburn boy – 14 at the time he committed his thought crimes – to life imprisonment is grossly inhuman. It is not quite as evil as the decision of the appalling Saudi regime to crucify and behead a child dissident, but it is recognisably a product of the same world view. History books will look back on this era as one of astonishing state cruelty.

As I have posted repeatedly, Islamic terrorism in the UK is virtually non-existent. It has killed precisely one person in the last decade. As a massive security industry employing many, many thousands depends for its very existence on this tiny threat, the work of the government, media and security services in exaggerating the “danger” is unceasing and increasingly desperate. It is based on an endless series of stories of thwarted terrorist plots.

The most famous was the liquid bomb plot which in fact had no bombs and no air tickets, and where the traces of “suspicious chemical” found in baby feeding bottles was Milton baby bottle sterilising solution. Then there was the ricin plot with no ricin, and the Manchester “Easter bomb plot” where the “bomb ingredient” found in a kitchen was an ordinary bag of sugar.

In the event of the absence of any terrorism, the focus has shifted to thinking about terrorism, and the result has been the conviction of a series of fantasists who can be held to “prove” the terrorist threat. Of these the very saddest is the State’s crushing of this young child. He had no bombs, owned no weapons, harmed nobody. He was however the “mastermind” behind the dreaded “Anzac Day Beheading Plot” where jihadists in Australia did… nothing whatsoever. Nobody attacked anybody. Some people texted about it.

Aha! But don’t we realise that, but for the tens of billions we lavish on the security services, somebody in Australia definitely would have got beheaded by someone? It was only the arrest of a schoolboy in Blackburn that prevented beheadings in Australia, just as it was only the execution by drone of two men in a car in Syria that prevented something absolutely awful from happening in the UK, somewhere by someone, somehow. “What they are yet I know not, but they shall be the terrors of the earth.”

I don’t understand how stupid you have to be to buy into this stuff. But then I don’t understand what a vicious callous bastard of a judge you have to be to sentence a child to life imprisonment. He is doubtless a very disturbed child and probably very unpleasant to deal with. But he did not harm anyone; pretending he could have is part of the charade of the security state.

I also do not understand why the child’s beheading fantasies get him locked away for life, yet it is apparently OK for the Saudis to behead and crucify anyone they like, and still be grovelled to by the entire British establishment, up to and including the monarch. So far as can be ascertained, the Saudis behead more people than ISIL and for identical reasons, yet I see no Conservative demands to bomb them. One interesting result of the Russian bombings in Syria is that the media are for the first time openly publishing that the CIA and Saudis are funding and arming some of the most dubious combatant groups in Syria.

The power players in all of this, on all sides, are cruel men. Justice Saunders in a British court has just proven that includes the British establishment.


234 thoughts on “British State Viciously Abuses Child Fantasist

1 6 7 8
  • Jemand ( [*censored*] )

    My mentioning of the ‘thank you’ was a courtesy to Fi. I didn’t want him or her to feel slighted for being the only one to offer support and not receive some appreciation for it.

    You’re not too bright, JSD. I don’t control the mods, and they can either confirm that the ip addresses of the respective comments were suspiciously related or inconclusive. Either way, I cannot receive a clearance from them for your speculative, and obviously false, accusation. Why would I risk such embarrassment?

    Indeed, it might have been posted by you so that you could accuse me of sock puppetry as you did. Now that’s suspicious. You certainly are determined to press the issue.

    In any case, you can’t prove your accusation, primarily because it is false, but whatever the reason, you cannot. Therefore your vindictive little game will simply provide a record for others to judge your low character.

    Best wishes.

  • Jemand ( [*censored*] )

    .. A little bit more.

    You made the accusation, JSD, so shouldn’t it be incumbent upon you to present evidence to support your slander? The mod could confirm my having posted a ‘thank you’ to Fi, however I am not expecting anything from himher in my defence. And heshe could be accused of lying. But if I posted a link to the screenshot, would you accept that or would you then accuse me of creating it with software?

    How convenient that people can accuse others of things that they cannot *absolutely* disprove. Hence why the onus of proof falls upon the prosecution and not the defence — in civilised countries.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    04/10/2015 3:52pm

    I don’t buy it. It is perfectly clear from your posting that the issue for you was not to say “thank you” to “Fi”, but to give yourself an alibi for not having said “thank you” earlier.

    Otherwise, why make unsolicited assertions that you could prove that you had said “thank you” earlier, and intended to do so in due course? That’s what was actually worrying you. You barely had a word to say to “Fi”.

    Anyway, it’s an easy matter to resolve, isn’t it? Post your screen shot. How’s that for a simple solution?

    Never mind the sock puppet business for the moment. That’s a red herring now. Happy to pick it up again later. Stick to the point. I say you are a liar, to say that you thanked “Fi” earlier, and it got deleted by the mods. I certainly can’t prove it, short of testimony from the mods. But you can certainly go a long way towards disproving it. Post your screen shot, and let’s all have a look at it.

    Let’s see if you do it.

    John

  • Jemand ( [*censored*] )

    “Never mind the sock puppet business for the moment. That’s a red herring now. ”

    Funny. It wasn’t a “red herring” before. Why the sudden change of heart on the false accusation?

    For the time being, I don’t have to do a damn thing .. you don’t have a case. You concocted what you think is a plausible story to discredit me and I am enjoying watching you discredit yourself with a stubborn insistence that I must disprove false accusations. That tells people what kind of person you are. Petty. Vindictive. Arrogant.

    But please, don’t let me stop you from commenting further on the matter, if you can, because all you can do now is repeat yourself like a broken record with the volume turned up ever louder.

    Go on. Prove me wrong.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    04/10/20154:36pm

    No, it wasn’t a red herring before. And I will be very pleased to come back to it. Your posting at 3:52pm was an attempt to divert the discussion away from whether or not you are prepared to post the screenshot that you say you have, to whether or not the IP addresses for “Fi” and yourself have any connection. And that, Jemand, is why it is a red herring now. You are attempting to change the subject.

    “I have a screen shot of my original, deleted, post, including others, that I will avail in good time.” (Jemand, 04/10/2015, 5:05am).

    Well, I’ve done what I could. I asked the moderators politely to confirm it. I asked you politely if I could see a copy of it. Apparently, the answer’s no. I’m quite willing to let the forum draw their own conclusions about who’s the liar.

    John

  • Jemand ( [*censored*] )

    “Well, I’ve done what I could. I asked the moderators politely to confirm it. I asked you politely if I could see a copy of it. Apparently, the answer’s no. I’m quite willing to let the forum draw their own conclusions about who’s the liar.”

    You haven’t been polite. How do you politely call someone a liar and a sock puppet?

    Let’s get on the same page here.

    1. You accuse me of posting Fi’s comment as a sock puppet but have not offered a reason why I would do so. Would my posting Fi’s comment be :

    a). To give myself a boost in confidence to go on commenting?

    b). To give others the impression that I have the robust support of a standing army of ONE who is prepared to offer me some encouragement in the face of many hostile comments and selective deletions? How would that help me and not expose me to false accusations by idiots like you?

    2. You further accuse me of lying about my having thanked Fi (me) in order to :

    a) Provide an “alibi” for having forgotten to include a reply which was to make Fi’s (my) comment to self appear as if it had indeed been genuine and not an act of sock puppetry; or

    b) Cover myself for having rudely slighted Fi by not expressing gratitude to his/her/my encouragement.

    BUT, JSD (whose commentary reads very much like that of Macky’s, currently M.I.A.) conveniently ignores the fact that if his account were true, then I risk the possibility that a spiteful mod might want to embarrass me for being a sock puppet and liar. Why would I risk that possibility if it were true? The mods here have done it before and I am no one who they owe favours to. Indeed, the mod might remain entirely silent on this matter out of spite.

    JSD, it’s getting pretty twisted, isn’t it? And despite your transparently silly claims to the contrary, I haven’t changed subject at all. You have changed the focus from your false accusations to another one wherein I am being evasive because I have something to hide. Then you play ad hominem by appealing to the reader to use his or her imagination to find me guilty. … Of what? The thing you accused me of but can’t prove because there is no evidence.

    The burden of proof is on you, JSD, and the more you evade that fact, the less credible you become.

    Please continue, and say ‘hi’ to Macky from me.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    04/10/2015 5:27pm

    We can soon untwist it. Post your screenshot. How’s that?

    I’m not Macky, by the way.

    John

  • Jemand ( [*censored* - ask me why] )

    I will. As per my first reply, no sooner or later than I am able and so inclined. Alternatively, you can either prove your accusations or admit that you contrived them in the hope of discrediting me. Don’t forget that the burden of proof lies with the accuser, who is often a liar.

    The ball is, and has always been, in your court where it belongs. How’s that?

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    04/10/2015 5:43pm

    Great. Look forward to seeing your evidence.

    John

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Jemand
    04/10/2015 5:45pm

    Nope. If you want to believe I am Macky, go right ahead, although I hardly think Macky will be flattered.

    Don’t think you’ll get many takers to believe it, though.

    John

  • Jemand ( [*censored* - ask me why] )

    Why have you gone quiet, John? What have you got to hide? Are you behind ‘Fi-Gate’?

    Just explain what motive you suspect I had to post the comment as Fi.

    It’s like accusing someone of tying their own shoelaces without indicating an offence and reason for committing it.

    JSD, what is the crime? Sock puppetry? What is the motive in this instance? ………………….

    Insert the motive in the blank space please john.

  • Jemand ( [*censored* - ask me why] )

    The mods should see by now how much mischief other commentators get up to in an attempt to discredit others. And look at the amount of verbiage expended in rebutting, defending against and challenging impertinent and baseless accusations all of which lowers the tone of this blog.

  • fedup

    ROFL

    “Verbiage” complains the hasbaraista sporting a link to a racist lunatics rantings, and unconscious drivel.

    The unraveling of a packs of lies, that was supposed to be sucking up to the “liberals” and rubbish the enemy (Muslims) in a clever and “unbiased” fashion. However, the arrogance befitting a zionist supremacist miscreant, discounts the intelligence of the goyem to see through the patently obvious and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt pack of lies and deceit.

  • Jemand ( [*censored* - ask me why] )

    ^ A mish-mash of words. Incomprehensible. Incoherent. A psychotic scatterblast of hatred coming from a disturbed member of a community without hope. Having no access to a normal life with employment and friends, the person finds access to the internet and cries out for meaning and purpose. It is simultaneously ugly and moving. But there is no escape from the madness within and perpetual torment that feeds upon itself. It just exists until it exists no more.

  • fedup

    The lying fantasist attempting a full on insult to cover the tracks and peeper further an already plastered thread with its unconscious drivel, included the rants of being “radicalised through oppression” threatening fire and brimstone of the board of Jewish Deputies, and bringing an “anti defamation league” to UK.

    This liar and pathetic story teller was supposed to be an atheist. Pretending its hatred of all Muslims to be the disdain of an “enlightened atheist” not that of a bitter twisted zionist supremacist cretin.

    Now this specimen goes onto having wet dreams of;

    Having no access to a normal life with employment and friends, t……there is no escape from the madness within and perpetual torment that feeds upon itself. It just exists until it exists no more.

    Projections! projections! Anyone having read the interactions in this thread can see the true extent of its doubt about its pitiful existence that is given meaning with spinning yarns and lies in the way of helping the “cause” and getting a few quids for its troubles, as it sends the screen shots of its efforts to its handlers to get the ten dollars a day retainer.

    However it feels aggrieved because in its twisted psyche settling in this blog is a kind of Alia that is to be complimented with abusing the others as in the fashion of settlers in the shitty strip of land (as per French foreign minister) is not allowed. Hence the ( [*censored* – ask me why] ) ROFL rhetorical question, and projections after a total meltdown and still hanging around the blog, in its fight as it sets out in the yet another episode of deceit; Well done for defending your position so well. a glimpse into an addled mind of a wannabe settler “position”. Says it all!

  • Alex Waugh

    ” that’s how terrorism works – by making everyone dysfunctionally fearful of being a victim.”

    No, Jemand, that’s how the modern neo-con, corporatist state works. I doubt very much whether the raft of anti-terrorist legislation enacted in the US and the UK has prevented a single terrorist attack but it sure as hell has made it easier for those countries’ right-wing regimes to spy on and control law-abiding citizens.

    As for the Borch lassie, she was probably going to hurt someone, sometime, regardless. The mere fact that a 15 year old had a 29 year old boyfriend is an indicator that there was a lot wrong in that family. Daesh happened to be the trigger but it could have been anything. Similarly, that sad wee bastard in Blackburn has serious mental health issues that won’t be fixed by throwing away the key. The problem with terrorism is that it provides an all-too-convenient hook for the inadequate, the lonely, the oddball and the downright crazy to hang their hat on. They’re not all terrorists – some of them are just sad, damaged souls who would never have got the idea of a jihadist agenda if the corporate media did not glory so much is ‘exposing’ the evils of terrorism, for which read pushing blood and murder because it sells. If the ISIS videos had not been made available by hypocritical media who, while wringing their hands and saying “Isn’t this awful” were, at the same time, laughing all the way to the bank, this pair would have probably fallen back on the old-time favourite of “The voices told me to do it.” Some kids are just bad and/or mad (mostly mad in my experience).

  • Suhayl Saadi

    The boy clearly needs an appropriate form of detention, sanction and re-education for a defined period of time. But a life sentence (whatever the guidance within that sentence) is wrong.

    The US Airforce just bombed a hospital and killed loads of Afghan patients, workers and lots of foreign aid workers. And it seems they knew it was a hospital. And the Aid agency concerned says there were no Taliban in the hospital grounds. Let’s see whether the US Airmen involved receive medals, as did the Captain of the US ship that attacked and destroyed hundreds of lives in a civilian aeroplane which the US Captain knew was a civilian aeroplane over the Persian Gulf back in the 1980s.

    the truth is, they are so powerful they don;t give a toss. they know they will get away with war crimes.

  • Chris Halkides

    Life in prison is an appropriate punishment for premeditated murder and nothing else in my opinion. Even if this teenager is released in five years, it sounds as if he will always be monitored in some way, which is highly questionable. Regrettably the war on terror keeps chipping away at civil liberties. One wonders how long this will go on.

1 6 7 8

Comments are closed.