Dickens' Christmas Carol

It is doomed to wander through the world - oh, woe is me! - and witness what it cannot share.

The Reverend Pike and David Duke.

Israel’s Cyber Warriors Knock Duke Off YouTube
By Rev. Ted Pike
10-4-10

The Internet was probably the least foreseen of events challenging ADL/Israel’s agenda for world control. Leaping across previously Jewish-dominated media boundaries, the worldwide web has given people of conscience unfettered privileges to criticize Jewish supremacism and misbehavior of the state of Israel.

However, in my April 27 article, “Israeli Cyber-Warriors Crash Internet,” I detail how Israel, unable to legitimately dispel overwhelming world criticism, has been marshalling hundreds of thousands of Jews worldwide into an army of internet “cyber-warriors.” These act in unison to skew polls about Israel and disproportionately flood the internet with opinion favorable to the Jewish state and against its critics.
SOURCE
----------------------------------

Pike just wishes he could "marshall" more racists and achieve the same thing he accuses Israel of doing.

Pike believes Alex Jones could and should perform such a role. So what's Pike's complaint other than Israel is apparently more successful than himself, David Duke and Jones at "skewing polls" and "disproportionately flooding the internet with favorable opinion"? Pike condemns the Israelis for supposed success at it and Jones for his supposed failure at it. For Pike, and anti-semites more generally, when they suppose the Jews successfully work together it's a cabal and a dark malevolent conspiracy etc......but when they themselves work towards the same thing (and fail at it!) it's just never enough but an honour and duty all the same. Mad.

Pike continues:

Duke: First Domino to Fall?

After Canada passed ADL/B’nai B’rith’s hate law in 1971, the Jewish Gestapo’s strategy was to first indict those least in favor with Canadians: holocaust questioners and racists. While Duke is increasingly listened to on the far right, he will receive little sympathy in this controversy from mainstream Christian/conservatives who have been deeply imprinted with the negative stereotype of his KKK past and animus against blacks. Yet, in viewing several of his recent YouTube videos, I found everything he said to be factual and logical, without anything that could legitimately be described as racist or anti-semitic.

HAHA. He's a changed man! He hardly mentions Jews anymore....errr......just like Alex Jones.....oh, hold on!? Here's Pike in his letter to Jones -

When you do not faithfully warn against the Talmudic conspiracy, you sin most against your own family and loved ones. If you fail to be a dependable truthteller today, your descendants, shivering in a concentration camp someday, will curse you in your grave for not doing your utmost to identify and oppose the source of the horrific bondage that has come upon them.

The Reverend can't have it both ways, can he? Pike defends Duke against charges of anti-semitism, but attacks Jones for lacking it.

And note the source? Rense. That's Pike, writing at Rense, in defence of David Duke against charges of racism and anti-semitism. Elsewhere I have shown we have confirmation of Rense's friendship with David Duke - during his bust-up with Mark Glenn of the Crescent and Cross about supposed "anti-Islamic racism" featuring at Rense and preventing Glenn from getting published there.

What a merry little go around it all is. All these "independent alternative news" places all know each other. What are they independent of? Not each other, that's for sure.

Reverend Pike - Open letter to Alex Jones (HAHA)

Here's an open-letter from Ted Pike to Alex Jones. Jones heavily promoted Rev Pike and his efforts to stop passing of "hate-crime legislation." Pike has appeared as a guest, has been published at Prisonplanet and has a spot on both Willis Carto's AFP and David Dukes' WhiteCivilRights website.

Here's the letter:

National Prayer Network
AN OPEN LETTER TO ALEX JONES
By Rev. Ted Pike
7 Sep 10

Alex:

I watched with pleasure a two-year-old YouTube video clip of your program in which you indicated you were sick of not speaking the whole truth concerning the threat of Jewish supremacism. (Watch clips at bottom of page.) You then went on to discuss this threat, revealing a knowledge of the subject much more extensive than the great majority of right-wing leaders or talk show hosts.

Yet, for the most part, you have not shared such knowledge with your listeners over the years.

Jewish supremacism is untiring and relentless in its attempt to bring about a Judaic new world order. It is not enough that you occasionally punctuate your radio outreach with such truth, giving token opposition. It should be your habitual response to be vigilant and vocal against the greatest threat to Christianity and civilization that has ever existed.

You said in this clip that you are a Christian. If so, God obligates you to speak the whole, undiminished truth without fear of the Jews. There are at least three reasons you should now tell such truth:

First, as a Christian, God has empowered you with the opportunity and responsibility to be a “watchman,” capable of warning millions. Ezekiel also had that assignment and was told by God that if he did not warn the instant he saw evil approaching he would lose his soul. (Ez. 33)

Second, if you do not speak the whole truth about what you know, you become a deceiver. Half-truths are worse than outright lies. When a leader of your stature claims to have researched a topic yet holds back half of the truth, your followers relax, concluding that if a threat really existed, Alex would tell them! How wrong they have been.

Clearly, you have known for years that an all-pervasive, Talmudic threat exists. Yet, for fear of losing some of your mainline stations and perhaps being called “anti-Semitic,” you have not warned your audience as you should. Instead, you have given airtime to consideration of a myriad of lesser conspiracies, largely distracting your listeners and consuming their energies. In doing so, you have protected the most wicked conspirators from regular criticism and exposure. Since you have not gone to the heart of the problem, your message cannot save America. This is very wrong and unchristian. This is dereliction of duty and will merit the loss of your soul. You must repent of this great sin and do what is right: repeatedly, consistently speaking all that you know of this pervasive danger.

Third, you must do so, not just because God commands you or on penalty of your soul, but because the Christian is obligated to lay down his life, as Christ did, in love for others. When you do not faithfully warn against the Talmudic conspiracy, you sin most against your own family and loved ones. If you fail to be a dependable truthteller today, your descendants, shivering in a concentration camp someday, will curse you in your grave for not doing your utmost to identify and oppose the source of the horrific bondage that has come upon them.

Jesus describes the shepherd who does not adequately protect his flock as a “hireling.” Today, this untrustworthy guide might be a talk show host who is very concerned about the fate of our nation yet is even more concerned with acquiring a bigger following and number of stations. He rationalizes that, because he has become so big, he cannot jeopardize his influence by saying anything that might threaten his outreach. As a result, this “hireling” flees when the ADL “wolf” howls, “Anti-Semitism!”

Over the past five years, America has experienced repeated assaults from ADL-inspired, Christian-persecuting hate crimes legislation. During that period, especially during times of greatest crisis, I have repeatedly left messages imploring you to put me on your show to warn the people and take action. Unlike over a hundred other hosts, very rarely have you responded, and then only at the last minute, giving me perhaps 30 minutes of airtime. That happened more than a year ago, hours before the federal hate bill passed. You told our audience, “No one has done more to save freedom than Ted Pike.” Yet, during the station break, you told me the reason you have virtually never put me on is that you “had forgotten all about [me].” We both know the truth: If I am your guest, I cannot be depended on to avoid the Jewish issue.

The true Christian speaks the whole truth because it is the right thing to do, the responsible loving thing. The fate of many may depend on him. That is why he will not be distracted from delivering the message God has entrusted to him. When we do what is right, looking to God for guidance and protection, He and His mighty angels take special notice. They make a way for the truth to be told, even when there seems no way.

As I recently warned another media leader, WorldNetDaily’s Joe Farah, it is time to leave the endless strategies and self-protection of traditional right-wing power politics. Leaders must return to the ancient, divinely backed command to trust God and the whole truth. If you and other authorities like Farah do what is right, and the people respond in truth, then there is no restraint with God to save America for as long as He wants to.

How long will that be? Just as long as we fear God, not Jews.
SOURCE

Very interesting. I love it when these people fall-out and go for each other. Their vanities expose each other. Brilliant.

Pike's most interesting line was this, I thought: "We both know the truth: If I am your guest, I cannot be depended on to avoid the Jewish issue." And yet Jones did invite Pike several times, published him, claimed he had done "more for freedom" than anyone else, etc. Pike is saying Jones knew Pike's views and his refusal to avoid explicitly referencing Jews. (Pike is pretty candid about it isn't he? lol) And still Jones promoted him. That it wasn't sufficient promotion to satisfy the vanity of Pike is hardly surprising, however, if Jones is really such an enemy of the anti-semites why did he have Pike as a guest at all if, as Pike asserts, Jones knew the score?

Pike, like the others, fails to understand Jones' position: he isn't there to promote explicit anti-semitism, swaztikas and Hitler. That's exactly what he cannot do, and what he attempts to position himself in opposition to (though only superficially, of course).

Jones promotes the Reverend Pike, Eustace Mullins, Willis Carto and his hordes, Mike Rivero, Big Jim Tucker and all the rest - and they simply complain he isn't "going for the Jews" sufficently. lol. Even when that's the exact thing that will most quickly get him exposed as a hater and fascist sympathiser - overt anti-semitism and promotion of nazi notions of jewish world conspiracy is exactly what Jones must avoid if he is to succeed at going anywhere near mainstream. Pike and the others just don't understand.....and Jones can hardly defend himself by admitting his trojan-horse position (which serves himself and the movement both financially and in terms of exposure.)

Jones faces some problems now - if he wishes to continue growing he must continue being very careful about overt anti-semitism. Otherwise he will never break into bigtime. At least not unless anti-semitism becomes more acceptable in the mainstream.....which is what Jones is helping to accomplish, though perhaps too adroitly for Reverend Pike and the extremists to understand. So what will Jones choose if it comes to it? Throw his fascist friends overboard (as he should have done long ago), or spurn the more mainstream overtures of FOX and co?

Regardless, the question remains what people such as Pike were ever doing on Jones' shows anyway.....as Pike clearly suggests Jones knew full-well what Pike was about. Likewise, Jones must have known what Mullins was about, what Willis Carto's "interests" are..... All these fascists and fellow-travellers are his friends, guests and colleagues. These are people with whom Jones has been wilfully colluding so as to mislead his audience to their real intent - anti-semitism. According to Pike, Jones has been allowing these people to say just what they like, so long as they don't directly specify Jews as the target - hence the euphemism found littered throughout Jones' shows.

Update: I just found another version of this "Open Letter" from Pike about Alex Jones. It appears at Barbara Hartwell's website (yes, that Barbara Hartwell)

An interestingly different letter - totally different. Odd for an open letter? Here's the text as it appears at Hartwell's site - and from which she links to Pike's own website. Only the link goes to the other version of the letter I posted which is completely different. Odd. Anyway - here's Hartwell's version:

By Rev. Ted Pike
9 Sept. 10

Last year, prior to passage of the federal hate crimes bill, Alex Jones, after years of ignoring my requests to allow me to warn his huge audience of the hate bill threat, finally put me on his June 8th program.

As I was waiting to begin the broadcast, Jones told me off the air that he had heard me the previous morning on Joyce Riley's program criticizing Jewish supremacists as authors of the hate bill. He said what he was about to tell me was "off the record." He said his broadcasting empire has "gotten so big" with many mainline affiliates that he cannot afford to lose those stations by criticizing Jews.

"But I've got to mention ADL behind the hate bill!" I objected. "ADL is okay," he said. "Talk about ADL all you want, but we can't talk about Jews specifically." He then told me that, with this understanding, there would be many opportunities for me to be on his program, especially as new legislative threats emerged. Having said that, we were on the air. I did go after ADL and, fortunately, did not encounter any time in which I would have been morally bound to become more specific.

Yet I felt violated. I had experienced raw censorship in action, by a national talk show host who touts himself (and is believed by millions) as delivering only the truth -- whatever the cost or controversy.

Jones put me on again Oct 14th for fifteen minuntes. Yet, he was not true to his promise of future interviews, even as I repeatedly left him messages warning of more ADL legislation, such as ENDA and the cyber-bullying bill. Evidently, Jones was as uneasy about having me on as I was about operating under his gag order.

Now, with ENDA and the cyber-bullying bills most likely defeated, I am relieved I did not compromise myself in order to access Jones' vast audience. It is now so critically important that the populist right know which leaders can and cannot be trusted. The fate of our republic hangs in the balance.

What I learned, beyond any doubt, was that Alex Jones cannot be depended upon to provide the populist right with all the facts necessary to understand geopolitical reality. If he will censor the truth concerning a threat as dominant and well-documented as Jewish supremacism, what else will he manipulate?

Jones is widely regarded as the most effective spokesman for the far right, the "king of alternative talk radio."

It is time that lovers of freedom look for another.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rev. Ted Pike is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian/conservative watchdog organization.
SOURCE

Why such a difference in the letters? Did Hartwell change hers or did Pike change his? Odd. Hartwell's version is more revealing, I think.

Update2: Here's a Stromfront thread on Pike's letter to Jones (what is it doing at Stormfront if the issues, Pike and Jones are irrelevant to them?)

Vindication - from the other side

Interesting to find a good example illustrating some of my perspective on Alex Jones written by someone from 'the other side': it's from Subverted Nation, an apparently neo-nazi but unquestionably visciously anti-semitic blog. (IIRC Rivero linked to to it during his dust-up with Alex Jones when he was fired etc. I had posted there at the time in response to an article they'd posted on Jones' being a supposed jew, zionist, whatever)

Anyway, the article shows a consciousness of "the movement" from its own particular, anti-semitic/nazi stance. It references something I have suggested - Jones' use of euphemism rather than blatant anti-semitism eg "the globalists, bankers, socialists and one-worlders" as perennial and historic euphemism for "the Jew". Subverted Nation recognises that some "make excuses for Jones" because of this use of euphemism rather than the explicit use of "Jew" preferred by those openly embracing nazism and anti-semitism. I'm reminded of Poplawski the cop-killer nazi who was linked to Prisonplanet so uncomfortably for Jones. Poplawski was saying exactly this point about Jones at Stromfront - that he "wasn't 100%" sure of Jones' -- meaning he wasn't 100% that Jones was properly anti-semitic/nazi - not 100% that Jones' euphemisms meant what Poplawski (and Stormfront) understand them to mean. (Jones and Prisonplanet spun that "not 100%" line to suggest Poplawski's views were 180 opposed to those of Prisonplanet! ha!!)

Anyway, here's the article:

Alex Jones – I support Israel

Here is all one needs to know about Alex Jones. If this fat retard were a real patriot, he would be telling you the truth about things like 911, the wars, the economic collapse, Obama, the police state, and all the other things he rants about. The truth about these topics are that every last one of them was engineered by, what he calls, the “global elite”. However, there is nothing “elite” about the monsters behind all of our ills, because they are nothing more than a bunch of blood sucking leeches known as JEWS

How many dopes out there still believe that Alex Jones is really on our side? How many people think he ignores the truth about jews, just because he’s playing it safe and politically correct? How many excuses have you heard people make for this overweight windbag? I know I’ve heard dozens myself, but once people start to read sites like SN, it doesn’t take them long to figure out exactly where this chump falls short.

In reality, all Alex Jones is out to do is keep you in fear, because fear paralyzes. At the same time, he’s also out to make sure that anyone who really knows the truth, makes a fool out of themselves trying to share it with others. This is why he brought other psy-op groups like We Are Change, the makers of Loose Change, etc. to the forefront. Simply because their methods sell real good to truthers, but at the same time, make you everyone involved look like idiots. At least, their line of crap sells good to those who haven’t reached an understanding about jews, but to those who have, these people are nothing but criminal conspirators and traitors.
SOURCE

So, more evidence from the far-right that it's aware of Jones and that one of the issues is his use of placeholder euphemism rather than overt anti-semitism.

It doesn't occur to SubvertedNation that maybe Jones deploys euphemism quite consciously so as to avoid mainstream criticism and thereby enable his outreach efforts? It's called propaganda......and hardly works when one is covered in Swaztikas and Heil Hitlering everywhere. Stormfront already does that anyway and how close are they to getting on major TV Networks? Jones can happily take flack from the far-right, it provides him ammunition to defend attacks from elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that Jones certainly is employing classic anti-semitic tropes as euphemisms. The far-right understand it - well, they would. The only question for them is if he really means Jews when he deploys euphemism, or whether the euphemism is to protect Jews.

Poplawski was "not 100%" on Jones.....SubvertedNation is definitely 0%, apparently. Regardless, they both confirm the issue is real and live - does Alex Jones mean Jews or not? For the prosecution I submit the evidence that Jones eulogised Eustace Mullins and heavily promoted him as central plank of his conspiratorial world view - and Eustace Mullins has 50 years of mixing with Nazism and anti-semites eg Willis Carto (whom Jones also heavily promotes). Did Jones not know Mullins' anti-semitism when he called him "a modern-day founding father" and promoted him and his work over and over? Does Jones not know Willis Carto's views even as he promotes his prolific output? Can we believe that Alex Jones does not know his mainstay of guests and opinion come from the anti-semitic far-right?

Rivero - burying Wikileaks because of Israel and 911

Rivero's WRH is ignoring Wikileaks' releases, or where it does mention them, it is entirely critical and dismissive. Odd no? The leaks are extremely damaging to the USA, and hence Rivero should be interested? No, because the leaks show Arab nations urging USA to attack Iran to prevent the threat (to them!) of The Iranian Bomb, completely undermining Rivero's argument which has been that Israel wants Iran destroyed for its own supposed expansionism. Obviously having other Arab/Muslim states fearing an Iranian bomb destroys Rivero's purely anti-semitic slant, so he ignores it, and smears it.

Also, Wikileaks' release seems to provide no evidence for 911 conspiracy whatsoever. That's why Rivero, Alex Jones and the rest of the conspiros submit Wikileaks and Assange to insult and criticism. They even go so far as to suggest these leaks are a deliberate American policy, to defang conspiracism and help a drive to war with Iran etc! Rivero says:

I think Israel did invent WikiLeaks. After all, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange insists there is no 9-11 conspiracy, and not a single criticism of Israel appears anywhere in this latest dump; an impossibility in the wake of the lethal Israeli attack on the aid flotilla last May!

Mental illness beckons, Mr Rivero, if it hasn't taken root already. Mad.

And Rivero even prints Ahmadinejad's response, which sounds just like Rivero himself (Does Iran fund Rivero?)

Iran's president has dismissed as propaganda the leaking of US cables detailing Arab calls for Washington to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the release by the Wikileaks website of thousands of extracts from US diplomatic messages was simply psychological warfare against Iran.

Whilst ignoring all the content of the leaks, Rivero has published a special page (wooo!) on Wikileaks instead. I think it's what conspiros like to call a "hit piece":

Wikileaks, following much media fanfare (reason for suspicion right there) has just released a huge number of documents supposedly leaked to WikiLeaks and no other websites'. The media is denouncing this as a threat to the United States while US politicians wring their hands and wonder when they will be free of the curse of the First Amendment and all that troublesome nonsense about Freedom of Speech. Many observers think this is a propaganda set up and that neither Julian Assange or WikiLaeks should be taken at face value. After all, Julian Assange keeps insisting there was no 9-11 conspiracy and the 9-11 truth movement a "distraction." Apparently Julian Assange has patented conspiracy and nobody else may expose one except himself!

Of course, there is really not that much that is new in this latest dump. Like prior WikiLeaks dumps, most of it is old news mixed with some rather dubious claims. In his last such dump, Julian Assange included a claim that Osama bin Laden is still alive and controlling Al Qaeda. Of course, it is well documented outside the United States that Osama bin Laden has been dead for many years and that Al Qaeda itself is a fake front group created to hoax Americans into endless wars of conquest, much as the fictional Emmanuel Goldstein was used in George Orwell's "1984."

In yet another infamous propaganda attempt, WikiLeaks tried to claim that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, justifying the invasion. No such weapons were ever found.

As for the present batch of documents, again it is a rehash of stories already known to the blog-o-sphere. Even those people who did not know US diplomats spy on their United Nations counterparts did not find it surprising or in any way a new idea.

So what is the real purpose of Assange's little charade? Propaganda.

Propaganda is like rat poison. 95% of it is tasty, healthy food. But the purpose is to get you to swallow the poison. The same is true of the WikiLeaks document dump. The bait are all these old stories which we already knew about, used to convince us that the entire pile is "tasty, healthy food," except that it isn't. Buried in the pile of delicious, albeit past the expiration date morsels are the bits of poison which the US Government knows you will no longer accept at face value from the controlled media, but hope you will eat if handed to you by a con artist posing as hostile to the government.

So, given that 95% of the current WikiLeaks is really old news, as a public service I will point out the bits of poison that Julian hopes you will eat.

1. Iran is bad so you should all want to kill them.

2. Saudi Arabia is bad because they are funding Al Qaeda so you should all want to kill them.

3. North Korea is bad because they gave really long range missiles to Iran for Iran to put their nuclear warheads in, so you should all want to kill them.

4. China is messing with your computers, so you should all want to kill them.

That about sums it up. Oh yes, there is nothing negative about Israel in all these diplomatic messages, an impossibility given the lethal Israeli attack on the Aid Flotilla last May. That suggests who Assange really works for.

Funny thing about rat poison. After a while the rats learn to eat the food and leave the poison behind.
SOURCE

What a complete crock o shite. How has OBL's death been "documented"? Rivero is simply imagining it. lol. And notice how Rivero, a supposed special FX expert doesn't even use a GIF for an image with flat-colour? Again, he's using jpegs when it should be a GIF. He's not just a moron, he's incompetent. Pathetic.

the next hammer falls

Ministers are to set out how they plan to overhaul the benefits system to provide greater incentives for work and sanctions for those unwilling to do so.

Central to the plan, being announced by Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, is a single universal credit which replaces work-related benefits.

Claimants moving into work will keep more of their income than now, but face losing benefits if they refuse a job.

A sliding scale of sanctions will see those refusing work on three occasions having their benefits taken away for three years.
SOURCE BBC
------------

Wow. They are trying to increase the crime rate? They must be. Withdrawing benefits completely from losers is just bound to create a problem with rage and crime.

Seriously - how many unemployed people would 'refuse work 3 times'? It sounds like a sick joke when the government is furiously sacking people as quickly and ruthlessly as it dare. What work is there to refuse? This is a cruel joke?

The 2nd Chief Comedian, the LibDem leader, reportedly says 'the coalition's welfare changes will "reduce worklessness" in more than 300,000 families.'

What is 'worklessness'? I was surprised to find google return some results - seemingly all from British Government websites though. Here's their definition:

Worklessness is a less familiar term than unemployment to describe those who are economically inactive. The economically inactive are people of working age who are not working, not in full-time education or training and are not actively seeking work.

Many are outside the labour market voluntarily, because of family responsibilities or early retirement for example. It can also include those who are out of work because of illness. Such people may be claiming Incapacity Benefit (IB) or Severe Disablement Allowance (SDA).

So being sick or looking after someone who is sick is 'worklessness': are the government saying they will make these people better, or force them to get jobs? It is already doing that......

This whole revision of Welfare is surely just an excuse to smash the system and pay welfare claimants even less. And who will organise the riots of the ill and sick?

We need a National Union of Worklessness-ers.

From the ONS -

For the three months to June 2010, for those households with dependent children, 39.7 per cent of lone parent households were workless, 5.4 percent of couple households were workless.... Of those households without dependent children, 36.8 per cent ofone-person households were workless...

And again:

In 2009, there were three areas across the UK where more than three out of every 10 households had no-one in work, according to new figures from the Office for National Statistics on workless households by local area. These were: Liverpool (32.1 per cent); Nottingham (31.3 per cent); and Glasgow City (31.0 per cent). The next highest rates of worklessness were in Gwent Valleys (27.6 per cent) and East Ayrshire and North Ayrshire Mainland (also 27.6 per cent). By contrast, the analysis shows that the five areas with the lowest rates of worklessness were: Bedfordshire (9.2 per cent); Surrey (10.9 per cent); Inverness and Nairn and Moray, Badenoch and Strathspey (11.0 per cent); Berkshire (11.2 per cent); and Hampshire (11.7 per cent).
SOURCE

------

The Guardian is excellent on this:

A tougher-than-expected squeeze on the unemployed is to be announced today as the jobless face the threat of losing all benefits for as long as three years if they refuse community work or the offer of a job, or fail to apply for a job if advised to do so.

In the most severe welfare sanctions ever imposed by a British government, unemployed people will lose benefits for three months if they fail to take up one of the options for the first time, six months if they refuse an offer twice, and three years if they refuse an offer three times.

Downing Street sources said the new "claimant contract" will come into force as soon as legislation is passed, and may not wait for the introduction of a streamlined universal credit system in 2013-14.

Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, will tell MPs that he is introducing the biggest shakeup of the welfare system since the Beveridge reforms ushered in the welfare state after the second world war. He will say that a new universal credit system will make 2.5 million of the poorest people better off and reduce the number of workless households by 300,000.

The welfare white paper is deemed so groundbreaking that David Cameron chose to laud the measures as he landed at the G20 summit in South Korea.

He said: "The message is clear. If you can work then a life on benefits will no longer be an option. If people are asked to do community work they will be expected to turn up. If people are asked to apply for a job by an adviser they will be expected to put themselves forward. If people can work and they are offered work, they will be expected to take it. This is the deal. Break the deal and they will lose their unemployment benefit. Break it three times and they will lose it for three years."

The regime will apply to all 1.6 million jobseeker's allowance claimants, irrespective of how long they have been unemployed. JSA is worth only £64.45 a week for over-25s, and No 10 said it expected the sanction to be enforced, once warranted, as a matter of course.

Job advisers should not use discretion to let people stay on benefit, Downing Street said, arguing that too many advisers do not make use of the sanctions available to them.

The new workfare regime is certain to be criticised for expecting the jobless to take work at a time when unemployment is forecast to rise. The move could potentially leave thousands of people receiving no benefits other than some money to cover their housing costs.

Many charities and local government leaders will be wary of offering work to unemployed people, especially if they have been in effect forced to take the work or lose benefit. The community jobs set aside for the jobless include clearing up litter and doing charity work.

Cameron argues that the new regime is necessary to prevent a dependency culture. He believes a new universal credit system bringing together tax credits and a range of benefits simplifies the system so much that it will ensure work will always pay in comparison with staying unemployed. Ministers say that, with 5 million people on out-of-work benefits and almost 2 million people growing up in workless households, they have to embark on "root and branch reform".

The new universal credit, costed at £2bn for this parliament, is designed to remove the financial disincentives to work, ensuring that someone keeps a minimum 35p in every extra pound earned. Cameron said: "It simply has to pay to work. You cannot have a situation where if someone gets out of bed and goes and does a hard day's work they end up worse off. That is not fair and sends entirely the wrong message."

Duncan Smith will cast his reforms as a "once-in-a-generation" attempt to get the jobless back to work. But the man credited by Duncan Smith as his greatest influence on poverty reduction criticised the changes . Bob Holman, an academic and community worker from Glasgow who has worked for Duncan Smith's thinktank, the Centre for Social Justice, accused the work and pensions secretary of forcing people into "degrading" jobs.

Asked his opinion about Duncan Smith and his plans for welfare reform, Holman said: "Well, my view has taken a bit of a dent. When Iain came to Easterhouse in 2002, one of the things he expressed admiration for were unemployed people who were working or giving their time as volunteers to our project … now he seems to have turned that on its head.

"He seems to be regarding them with disrespect and saying you're not really a part of society. We're going to force you to do these, what are really degrading jobs, which won't equip them for anything, but in a way are punishing them for not working and in a climate in which jobs are hard to get."
SOURCE

------

So yes, it seems 'worklessness' will be overcome by compelling the 'workless' to do menial jobs that no-one will pay them a worhwhile wage to do. And 'charity work'. Handy, as the government already said it wanted charities to do more. Now we see the Big Society taking it's awful shape. And isn't it vicious. Did anyone seriously vote for this? They never mentioned any of it....

Wow, it's vicious.

"Refusing work means losing benefits" sounds like something that many people would likely agree with. But it really means "Refuse to do anything you are told to do and you lose benefits!" This isn't training people, it's marching them about to do the most menial work. It's humiliation and punishment. That bloke in the Guardian is spot-on. What a bunch of bastards.

And this is supposed to be justified/necessary on the back of economic crisis where banks and big business have been bailed out billions time and again because they fucked everything up. Everyone blames the bankers but some know different - it was all the loafers on welfare.

Students 'Riot' - who can blame them?

There have been violent scenes as tens of thousands of people protested against plans to treble tuition fees and cut university funding in England.

Demonstrators stormed a building in Westminster housing the Conservative Party head quarters, smashed windows and got on to the roof.

Outside, a crowd of thousands surged as placards and banners were set on fire and missiles were thrown.

Student leaders condemned the violence as "despicable".

They say about 50,000 people took part in a march through Westminster earlier.

A stand-off is still taking place between about two dozen demonstrators and the police.
SOURCE - BBC



Add this is the Telegraph report! Modern riots are potentially quite different in this internet age. Everyone can see, and report. Interesting. Surely this is only the first of many such protests. Good.