Letter To Norman Baker

[killmicrosoft]

E-MAIL SENT

Question: Can you please explain to me why you are not telling the residents
of lewis district about what is really go on I.E (New World Order).
I am well aware of some of the questions you have bean asking about
Bilderberg ,DR David Kelly and Chemitrails .

I am aware more than most of what is going on as i have read the official
documents from various sources and also know that the EU is by no way a
democracy more like a dictatorship.
I know the intent of the elites and i know you do to if this is not tackled
now we all stand to lose including you .

You know as well as i we are being lied to .

I look forward to your reply

--------------------------------------------------------

REPLY

http://slat2008.googlepages.com/img015.jpg

[killmicrosoft]

Please any suggestions and proof that i can send

[largejack]

Actually it's good that he's got back, unlike someone I can think of... cough David Davis cough, and he hasn't dismissed it off hand, but requires a lot more evidence.

I think we should all have a brain storm... sorry thought shower on this site with whatever evidence we can come up with. The Project for the New American Century might be a good place to start, also Common Purpose and what they're up to.

[drhemp]

I think Norman Baker is a good apple in a very bad bunch. A shame he doesn't join all the dots, but at least he joins some. I heard also he was skeptical about the official version of 9/11.

A friend who lived in Lewes told me he is also very pro-European; I think the problem with some of the Lib Dems is they are pro-EU, because they are idealistic and like the idea of European countries co-operating, but what they don't realise that the structure of the EU does not adhere to liberal ideals. The Lib Dems need to learn that to be a genuine pro-European, they must oppose the EU, as the EU does not act in the interests of EU citizens. I'm pro-Europe, which is precisely why I oppose the EU.

Let's keep Mr Baker informed. I suspect like Michael Meacher, he also is guarded in what he says in public. I heard Meacher say to a small group of us in Dartington earlier this year that he believed 9/11 and 7/7 were inside jobs. I wish they would just come out and say what they privately believe, but for whatever reason, they are scared to do this, so we must encourage the decent MPs and let them know that there are millions of us out there who already know the truth and will applaud them if they have the courage to speak out.

[rich157]

Politics.co.uk - 22 minutes ago

A new controversy has erupted over the government's counter-terrorism bill after it was revealed it grants the government powers to hold inquests in secret.

The measure – section 63 of the bill – was passed over without many people noticing it during the stormy row over 42-day detention but is now taking centre stage just as the House of Lords prepares to vote on the proposals.

The section allows for the government to keep matters secret if doing so is in "the public interest". This could include barring the public from 'public inquests' such as that into the death of Iraq weapons inspector David Kelly, allowing the home secretary to stop a jury being summoned and replacing a coroner with a government appointee.

But lawyers and civil liberties advocates are furious at the changes, which would eradicate a centuries-old right of the public to observe inquiries into a death.

The case of Azelle Rodney, who was shot by police in a 2005 surveillance operation, will be one of the first to be subject to the new rules.

Other inquests which could have fallen under the remit of the changes include that into the death of Princess Diana or the future inquest into the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes by police officers after the failed London terrorist attack of 2005.

"These proposals are completely wrong," said David Howarth, a Liberal Democrat spokesman on home affairs.

"They allow the secretary of state to remove a case from a jury on the vague ground that it is in the public interest – the whole thing is an appalling violation of the separation of powers."

Dominic Grieve, shadow home secretary, agreed, saying the Conservatives would pour on pressure to make sure the Lords reject the bill – a move it is expected to adopt anyway.

"The government has so far failed to make the case for handing it the power to appoint the coroner, disband the jury and hold inquests in secret," he said.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "These proposed changes will ensure inquests are as thorough as possible by ensuring that the coroner can always examine all material central to the inquests even if the material cannot be disclosed publicly."

[tusme]

Please any suggestions and proof that i can send
New World Order - YouTube