As Britain moves further and further into a totalitarian state, and it is totalitarian, almost on a daily basis we are faced with another ban of some kind or another.

Bans on various activities for the population are a classic sign of a totalitarian state, as is social engineering, by those who believe that they know best what is good for the people, remove their ability to think and choose for themselves and rule their lives with total rules, total laws which must be followed to the letter. That is totalitarianism.

So what have we seen here in Britain over the past 10 years, and where was the thinking behind these bans. So many times we have heard that this government is devoid of ideas, that they are stealing those from others, so where have NuLabs social ideas come from.

We have seen some of the most ridiculous bans that man could dream up, and for a digest of just some of those I point you to Nanny Knows Best, which I have to say would be most hilarious in the reported stupidity if not for the fact that real people are actually imposing this rubbish on us.

But then we come to the bigger bans and social engineering that we receive on a daily basis and which affects us all. We have had the smoking ban, which makes it illegal to smoke in the workplace, in enclosed public places, hospital and buses, trains and tubes or any form of public transport.

This Ban even extends to the work vehicle, or, depending on how you interpret the law, your own vehicle if you are taking someone to work. It is now being suggested that smoking in your own car at any time would be cause for action against you under safety laws.

The next stage of the major bans is the growing attack on our personal consumption of alcohol. We are all familiar with the bans on drinking in town centers in an attempt to clear out rowdy youths, but now it is being extended to those who drink at home, or in pubs, with a suggestion that limits be placed on the amount one is allowed to consume. (no doubt that there are plans afoot to use the ID card as a monitor for this in pubs, i.e. sorry sir, you have had your 3 pint limit, or I see you had your 3 pint limit in another pub sir, cant serve you).

Now whilst there may be some advice from the medical profession about abuse of almost any substance, there can be no excuse for a either a profession or government to use force to impose its own rather misguided standards on the rest of us.

Then we have the constant government controlled TV adverts about eating more vegetables and fruit, the 5 a day campaigns, juice for all, or smoothies.

So where does government get these ideas.

I thought perhaps the medical profession can shed some light on this, so I looked up articles written in the BMJ (The British Medical Journal) and all comes to light, in this article, written by George Davey Smith, professor, Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR zetkin{at}bristol.ac.uk (18 Dec 2004).

Several health related behaviours came under scrutiny in the 1930s and '40s in Germany, but did the associated campaigns achieve any benefits?

It may seem paradoxical that the robust identification of one of the most important environmental causes of disease of the 20th century occurred in a totalitarian state. The first case-control study of smoking and lung cancer originated in Nazi Germany in 1939 and found that heavy smoking was strongly related to the risk of lung cancer. Such research occurred against a backdrop of considerable official concern in Germany on the health damaging effects of smoking. Dr Leonard Conti, the Reich health führer, established the Bureau against the Dangers of Alcohol and Tobacco in 1939. In 1942 the Institute for the Struggle against the Dangers of Tobacco was established at the University of Jena, where a second case-control study of smoking and lung cancer was carried out. This was a convincing investigation in which the authors showed a sophisticated understanding of the potential biases that could distort epidemiological findings. The institute from which this study was run was supported by 100 000 reichsmark of Adolf Hitler's personal finances.

As well as research on smoking there was much antismoking health promotion in Nazi Germany. The Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls disseminated antismoking propaganda, and in 1939 Hermann Göring issued a decree forbidding the military from smoking on the streets and during marches or brief off-duty periods. In 1942 the Federation of German Women launched a campaign against tobacco and alcohol misuse. Such campaigns were backed by legislation, and smoking was banned for both pupils and teachers in many schools. From July 1943, tobacco use was outlawed in public places for anyone aged less than 18 years. It was considered criminal negligence if drivers were involved in crashes while smoking. In 1944, smoking was banned on trains and buses in cities. It was also prohibited in many workplaces, public buildings, hospitals, and rest homes. The advertising of smoking products was strictly controlled, and there was discussion on whether people with smoking related illnesses should receive medical care equal to that of patients with illnesses not seen to be self inflicted. Many leading Nazis—such as Robert Ley, leader of the German Labour Front, Hans Reiter, president of the Reich Health Office, and both Gerhard Wagner and Leonardo Conti, the successive Führers of German medicine—attested to the benefits of not smoking. Adolf Hitler was the star performer in antismoking propaganda. As one magazine stated, "Brother national socialist, do you know that your Führer is against smoking and thinks that every German is responsible to the whole people for all his deeds and missions, and does not have the right to damage his body with drugs?"

I think you have just read a NuLab policy document.
It tells you much about this government and the policies that is uses.
Unfortunately it doesn't tell you that Hitler was a drug addict however, like many in our own government.

So the Question to the British Public is:
Do you really want your lives to be governed by the Laws, Morals and Practices of the Nazi's.

Of course, smoking and drinking bans are not the only things that this government have taken from the Nazi model of government.

One goal of Hitler’s policy was to eliminate individualism by forcing everybody to adhere to a specific doctrine, social order and way of thinking and to control as many aspects of life as possible using an invasive police force and pre-emptive laws.

Now think about NuLab’s pre-emptive policing laws, such as

ASBO’s,

Voo’s,

Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005,

Police and Justice Act 2006,

Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005,

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000,

The Crime Prevention (Designated Areas) Order 2006,

Identity Cards Act 2006

to name but a few, almost all word for word stolen from the Nazi archives.

To put this into perspective, those laws which it has not raised in the manner above, the remainder have been foisted upon us by the EU.

Now it is estimated that nearly 80% of all the thousands of EU laws have had their origin in or emanated from German legislators or civil servants.

Common Purpose
Common Purpose secretly train people at taxpayers expense in key positions as 'Leaders', to lead beyond their authority, a 'new form of democracy', and has through its network of 'CP graduates' placed key people into Charities, Commissions, Think Tanks, Advisory bodies, the Civil Service, Police forces, businesses and includes amongst its numbers many ministers and key committee members in government, all of whom have had key roles in putting this totalitarian legislation together.

Through the process of regionalisation they are also the ones who are implementing it, to the letter via hundreds of Quango's, local authorities and enforcement agencies.

The new Mental Health Act for instance, largely drawn up by input from the Common Purpose co-founder Deborah Jenkins and Common Purpose graduate Prof John Goddard, who sat on the board of the Mental Health Act commission drew its inspiration from the Nazi's.

An almost identical Mental Health Act was passed in 1939 by the Nazi regime, which eventually led to the Action T4 programme by the General Foundation for Welfare and Institutional Care, in order to save money.

The ultimate aim of Common Purpose is to take us into a regionalised Europe, ruled from Brussels with laws, social conditions and rules, health care, forced adoptions, education and a life style written by the Nazi's.

So we ask you again:
Do you really want your lives to be governed by the Laws, Morals and Practices of the Nazi's.

It is unclear whether Common Purpose is ideologically based around National Socialism or Communism or both, in fact it matters little, because the extremes of both the left and the right are to all intents and purposes the same. The effects of both are Totalitarian.

In true Nazi (or Communist) style, in order to make their 'brand' of democracy more acceptable, in order to cause unrest, out of which will come their type of 'maintained order', we can see Common Purpose is (again at taxpayers expense) funding and supporting the potential for civil unrest, using religious unrest as the trigger.

And finally, there is something that everyone should always remember:

Extreme reform and change that is undertaken without the explicit consent of the people, can only be maintained through force and repression.

So far, there is nothing to suggest that they haven't adopted that from the Nazi's as well, although 60 years after getting rid of Dr Mengele and his kind, Nobel Prizes are still being handed out for this kind of research. Is it possible that all those new government databases could be used for.....


We say that the real politics, and the survival of Britain, is between the Authoritarians and the Libertarians.


Wake UP