The Leveson Inquiry

 

Was set up to closely examine the practises, role, and culture of both Press, and, Media; In public life. It is now due to publish its report.

 

The very first thing the Inquiry ought to have addressed is “LAW”

Because, “LAW”; in Great Britain today, is not properly understood.

It is generally known and accepted by, nearly all, that, “LAW” is something that must be obeyed.

Yet, that is not “LAW” at all.

The ‘true ‘definition of “LAW” is, as described by LORD HAILSHAM, an ex-Lord Chancellor of England.

Who always said, this:

 

“Law is a myth without the consent of the People there is no Law”

 

Thus, “LAW” is naught but the voluntary consent of the People to live by “The Rule of Law”.

The ‘key criterion’ here, therefore, is, “The People”; and, not, the Judiciary, the police, the politician, or, the, ‘profession of law’; that, are merely, ‘administrators’ of law.

 This is where “The Leveson Inquiry” has miserably failed.

Lord Leveson has heard witness testimony from virtually all walks of life in respect to Media, Press, Television, Law, and Show business. The so-called ‘celebrities’ of the nation have been heard in full. Yet, “LEVESON”, has not heard one word of ‘evidence’ from the ‘common people’, at large.

 In all the comment and speculation taking place now throughout the entire British Media and Press, speculating, on what the ‘report’ will reveal in respect to any ‘statutory’ controls to be announced in the report, when, it is published in a few days time. Not, one word is being heard from the ‘common people’. Every, TV studio and all ‘news’ programmes are full of, Politicians, lawyers, celebrities, and the ‘vested interests’ of the Media; but, in all of the debates and interviewing taking place; Not, one Member of the ordinary general public is being seen; or, their, voices, being heard.

 

The entire “LEVERON INQUIRY” and, all public debate and discussion about it taking place in the nation today; is all about, “The Elite”.

 And, that is a disgusting ‘travesty of law’ and a disgrace.

Because,

It is, “The People” who matter most of all.

 

Gordon J Sheppard

LAW: Living today, in a terrible time...

Where, 'LAW' and, true 'LAW', mean nothing at all.

Today, the general concept of 'LAW' held by almost everyone is that,

LAW MUST BE OBEYED

Yet, that is not, 'LAW'

Law is as, Lord Hailshan, an ex Lord Chancellor of England, always used to say,

"LAW IS A MYTH WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE THERE IS NO LAW!

Thus, it is WE THE PEOPLE and, our freely given consent, to 'live by the 'Rule of Law'. That is, LAW.

Great Britain today desperately needs and requires a full scale national debate in respect to LAW.
Because, the travesty's of LAW that are taking place daily now, in respect to the police, and, our Courts and, the Judiciary, are positively obscene.

EXAMPLE

Both the BBC and ITV have succumbed to the intimidation and blackmail of LORD McALPINE and his lawyers, who have threatened them both with prosecutions for libel. Both, have agreed to settle out of court with McALPINE. The, BBC, paid him £185,000; and, ITV has just paid him, 125.000.

Yet, neither, the BBC or ITV, has 'accused' him of being a paedophile. Which, is the assertion, that both McALPINE and his lawyers, are making.

The BBC in the "Newsnight" programme, complained of, never even mentioned LORD McALPINE's name.

And, ITV, who were being blackmailed by McALPINE, in respect of an incident occurring during a "This Morning" programme, never 'displayed' or 'mentioned' his name, or, accused him of being a paedophile. It is alleged by, McALPINE and his lawyers, that when PHILLIP SCHOFIELD passed over a list to the Prime Minister which SCHOFIELD asserted was a list of names that he had secured from the Internet, "in just five minutes of browsing"; that, the 'name' of LORD McALPINE, could be seen by the 'viewer', on that list.

Yet, not a shred of proof has been produced verifying that this is so.

I witnessed the original TV footage clip of that incident, featured on my own television receiver; and, I assert, that in those fleeting seconds, when the list was passed to the Prime Minister, I could not discern any names;, even though I tried slow motion and, stopping the frames. If, I, could not see 'names' on that list; then, nobody else could see them, either.

For, McALPINE's and his lawyers assertions to stand up in 'LAW'; everyone has the right and entitlement to actually see the proof that, McALPINE's 'name' can be clearly seen on that list.

PROOF HAS TO BE ESTABLISHED IN ORDER THAT 'THE PEOPLE' OF THIS COUNTRY CAN SEE THE TRUTH FOR THEMSELVES.

As, I could not see or, distinguish LORD MCALPINE's name displayed on that list. I am wholly confident; no one else could see this, either.

So the obvious conclusions to all this are:

A. That LORD McALPNE and his lawyers, are 'conning everyone' and, they are using blackmailing
and intimidation, in order to secure settlements 'out of court'.

B. That, cowardly, both the BBC and ITV, has succumbed, to that intimidation.

Whatever:

Until irrefutable 'evidence' is produced by McALPINE and his lawyers that, McALPINE, has been truly 'libelled', and, that his 'name and reputation' has been truly damaged;

ALL OF THIS IS MERELY A GREAT TRAVESTY OF, "LAW".

And, the 'establishment' and the 'elite' of this country; are merely treating the 'common people', as, MORONS and IMBECILES.

Furthermore, McALPINE and his lawyers are also intimidating many users and those who post 'tweets' on the social network website, TWITTER. One person so intimidated is SALLY BERCOW, the wife of the “Speaker” of the House of Commons. She posted a 'mischievous comment' about LORD McALPINE. But, it should be recognized and acknowledged by, 'LAW', that posting 'opinion' 'assumptions' and, 'speculations', freely on the Internet, is not LIBEL. It is perfectly legal and lawful to publish the 'opinion' that someone might be a paedophile. I, assert, and contend that this is merely 'free speech', and, 'free expression'. It becomes LIBEL, only if it is asserted, that, they are, a, paedophile.

 It appears to me that both McALPINE and his lawyers; and, virtually all of our People today, cannot istinguish the difference. Or, they are so apathetic that they don't care a damn. And, this is the reason why, McALPINE and his lawyers, can get away with getting, 'big wads of cash', for merely making 'false claims'.

Sincerely
Gordon J Sheppard

 

“Conspiracy to commit a misconduct in Public Office”

 London 20^th November 2012

Today, British Crown Prosecutor’s, charged, Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, two executives who had previously worked at the “News of the World” newspaper, with the criminal offence of, “Conspiracy to commit misconduct in Public Office”.

Now, this is very interesting: because, presumably, when these two face trial; the trial will be held before a Judge; a, Member, of the British Judiciary. Yet, what is so interesting, is the fact, that, the British Judiciary has, for the last three hundred and twenty four years, been committing, exactly the same offence. For, all this time and, even now today, the entire British Judiciary, has ‘conspired with each other’ to lie to and, deceive, the British People, that, it is, LAW, that denies, all ‘challenge’ to ‘elected’ Parliament in their Courts. And, for that denial, of the right, to challenge ‘elected’ Parliament in the Courts, the British Judiciary has conspired and deceived the British People, that, “Article 9” of the “Bill of Rights 1689”, prevents that challenge.

This, assertion, lies, and deceit, of the British Judiciary, is the clear stark ‘evidence’ that they, “Conspire to commit misconduct in Public Office”.

In consequence; I assert, that no Member of the British Judiciary is, fit to try, Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, for the same criminal offence.

 

The proof that the British Judiciary lie, deceive, cheat, and manipulate, LAW, to their own ends; and, exercise, unlawful  power; rests in the fact, that the “Bill of Rights 1689”, far from denying the British People the right to challenge Parliament in the Courts; actually, provides the ‘precedent’ in British, LAW, whereby anyone may challenge Parliament in the Courts, whenever, Parliament, ‘Prejudice the People”.

 "Article 9" of the “Bill of Rights 1689”, reads:
 
"That the Freedome of Speech Debates and Proceedings of Parlyament ought not to be Impeached or Questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament"
 
But, the "Rights Committee" of the CONVENTION (Parliament) of 1688, who created that Bill; made provisions within the Bill, for the protection of "The People". The, ‘Committee’, in creating that Bill and, the ‘rights’ Parliament was claiming from the King, were well aware, and, they knew, that the Bill was only required and necessary, to protect Parliament, from a King. It was never required or designed in order to protect Parliament from, “The People”.  However, the ‘Committee’ was concerned that their Bill, might be misinterpreted and be misused.

So, they, specifically determined, in the Bill, in the paragraph inserted, directly below the listed number of 'rights' Parliament, claimed, from the KING; that, when Parliament 'enacts' "Article 9" or, any of the other "Premises" of that Bill; that, Parliament must comply with the conditions set out in, the "Statute in Force/Bill of Rights 1689/The Said Rights Claimed". This, Statute' determines, that, in Parliament applying “Article 9”; nothing, "SHOULD PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE."

 This is the text of that Statute:

“The Said Rights Claimed”:

“And they do Claime Demand and Insist upon all and singular The Premises as their undoubted Rights and Liberties and that noe Declarations Judgements Doeings or Proceedings to the Prejudice of the People, in any of the said Premises, ought in any wise to be drawne hereafter, into Consequence or Example”

 Here is the stark vivid proof that the British Judiciary is corrupt.

 

Gordon J Sheppard

"Putting rain back in the Sky"

One of the greatest failings of Humankind in Great Britain today, is the way that
'Yesterday' is always judged by the 'standards' of, 'Today'.

And, this has always resulted in great injustice.

Here are two stark vivid examples of this travesty:

The first:

The Nuremberg Tribunal Trials.

Virtually every NAZI war criminal tried at the Nuremberg Tribunal for horrific crimes, pleaded as their defence, that they were only obeying the orders of a superior.

But, the Tribunal judges, corruptly, would not accept this defence. They, ruled that everyone, must be 'individually responsible', for one’s own actions.

These judges, "Put rain back in the Sky".

Because, they completely ignored all that had happened in NAZI Germany, from the very moment, ADOLF HITLER, became 'Chancellor of Germany' in 1933; thru, to the end of World War II, in 1945. HITLER, created the law in Germany known as, the, "FuhrerPrinzip"; (The Leadership Principle);  And, this law, first, applicable to the Military, but, later, during World War II, became applicable to everyone in Germany; required, that every German citizen, must obey the order of a superior officer or, a superior, under the pain of imprisonment, and, even death; if one refused.

The, "FuhrerPrinzip", was an established fact in, German law. And, it, was, LAW.
Yet, the judges in the Nuremberg Tribunal, would not 'recognise; this.
They,

 

 "Put rain back in the Sky".

Every war criminal pleading the defence of "FuhrerPrinzip" spoke the truth in those trials.
But, the 'Judges' corruptly ignored that. “LAW”, for, expediency: The, 'Law of the Victor', of World War II, demanded; that, the 'Vanquished', had no right of claim, to LAW.

Every defendant at Nuremberg was found 'Guilty' of the crimes for which they were tried.

They were either imprisoned for very many years, or, they were executed; hung, by the neck, until dead.

It was the greatest travesty of, 'LAW' and 'JUSTICE’ of this Century.

 

The ‘Holocaust’ and the horrific crimes of Nazi Germany, deserved the severest punishment; but, every defendant at the, Nuremberg Tribunals, deserved a fair trial. They did not get that ‘fair trial’, because, the ‘corrupt’ Judges, “Put rain back in the Sky”.

The second example:

The 'Child Sex Abuse' hysteria prevailing in Great Britain today.
In this wild hysterical furore, escalating, in more and more allegations of, 'child sexual abuse', being revealed every day, there is the demand being made by Government, many politicians, and, the 'Child Protection Agencies', for an 'Inquiry' to be set up, in order to investigate, "The Culture of the BBC". Allegations, are being made, every day, asserting that, BBC stars, deejays, and celebrity personalities, abused young children on the premises of the BBC. It is not the 'Culture of the BBC' that, requires, to be investigated. What, needs to be understood, is the 'culture' prevailing throughout the entire country, at that time:

 

To, judge, "The Culture of the 1960's thru, to the early, 1970's"; in, order to understand; the, accusations being made today. To, judge, these, allegations, being made today, completely ignoring the 'national culture' that was in existence in the country when these 'asserted' child abuses took place, is to completely deny, all that happened in this period, as though, it had never taken place at all.

 

It, is, to, "Put rain back in the Sky".

 

The 1960's brought about the most massive explosion of sexual freedom the country had ever seen, in my lifetime. All the censorship of sex and sexuality, all the repressions, of censorship, sex, sexual experimentation, and, sexual exploration, of both Church and State; were all swept away. Providing the greatest era of SEXUAL FREEDOM, the country had ever seen.

 

Women had the 'pill' which enabled them to experiment and enjoy their sexuality without the fear of pregnancy; The 'mini-skirt' was born, allowing young girls and women to display their legs, high up, almost to their 'bum'; where, their knickers, were frequently 'on show', when they walked in the street or danced in the disco's. Grown up adult women were even whipping off their 'erotically’ charged 'wet kinickers' , throwing them at TOM JONES as he sang and performed. Commercial radio with the, 'pirates' , had smashed the previous radio monopoly of the BBC; and, the radio 'deejay' and the 'pop music artists and groups' , became big star attractions, virtually overnight. Young girls, throughout the Kingdom, embraced this, FREEDOM; and, they joined in. Every pop concert attracted hordes of sexually charged 'horny' young girls 'screaming their heads off' as they watched these artists perform. Anyone who witnessed these young girls at a, “Beatles Concert", could not mistake the 'sexuality' there involved. Young girls became 'fame chasers' throwing themselves at the pop star, pop groups, deejays, and celebrities, exploring, their sexuality; and, even, in some cases, 'notching up conquests on their bedposts', in competition, for sexual favours received.

There was, SEX and SEXUAL FREEDOM, everywhere. A, great, SEXUAL EXPLOSION, for all ages and classes; and, the young girls, were affected as well.

 

 

EXAMPLE: Personal experience:

 

From late 1965 thru to May of 1976 I served as the promotions manager of two commercial radio stations: Pirate, Radio London, and, Capital Radio. During this time I was responsible for all publicity activities of these companies, outside of the actual broadcasting studios. I mounted concerts, pop shows and disco's all over the catchment area, of Greater London. Daily, I was in the thick of, showbiz, and, the pop groups, pop stars, and the pop music industry. Throughout the whole of this period, although, I, witnessed, thousands of young girls and the celebrities; I never once saw any young girl being sexually abused. I, frequently, saw them being 'fondled', often, seeing their 'boobs' being touched; but, always with their complicity, or, at their consent. I also frequently witnessed many of these young girls, competing with each other, to gain points, for the 'sexual conquests' they had achieved.

 

On one occasion, which I recall vividly, I had to accompany a famous American pop group to a BBC studio. They had a 'hit record' out at that time; and, promoting, that record, they were scheduled to perform at the BBC. On arrival at the BBC, the schedule indicated that they were not required immediately, so I left these boys in the dressing room and went out to see the show. Nearing the time when they were required I returned to the dressing room to alert them to get ready. The dressing room was full of young girls, there was smooching and groping, being performed, by all. And, the drummer was missing. Frantically, I searched the building for this drummer; and, I eventually found him in a 'toilet cubicle' with three girls. I screamed at him to get back to the dressing room, and as he sheepishly left; the three girls emerged, 'laughing their heads off', from the toilet cubicle. Wholly, ignoring me, standing there, they then each in turn, claimed that they had won the competition, describing in detail, what they had sexually done to the boy, and, what, sexually, he had done to them. The details described, ranged from the showing and touching of 'boobs', all the way thru, a sexual agenda, culminating, in anal sex.

Now, these girls were not whores and slags, or, of the sex industry. They were ordinary young girls, thoroughly enjoying their sexuality, and, experimenting, with, sex. I made no attempt to report them or to lecture them. I merely 'laughed with them', recognizing fully, that it was the 'culture', of that time.

 

In judging today, anything that happened 'sexually' then; is to ignore the 'culture' of that time.

 

It is,

 

 "Putting rain back in the Sky".

 

 

Gordon J Sheppard