I ask because of a headline from the Independent this morning that I find stunning.

‘Brain damaged patient allowed to die with dignity’, Judge rules.

It is the way the article is worded that interests me – not that Doctors are to be prevented from officiously striving to keep someone alive – but that it takes a Judge to permit someone to die.

Regular readers are well aware of my interest in the Court of Protection, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and related matters. I am not about to rehash them. I am asking whether in the intervening 7 years since that malicious piece of legislation came into being, we, and the media on our behalf, have become so inured of the idea that the judiciary have every right to decide whether we are born, and if we can die, that a headline stating that someone has been given ‘permission’ to die doesn’t raise any eyebrows.

We have heard over the past few years of sperm being taken from unconscious men, without their permission. Then when they are dead, the grieving widow being ‘given permission’ by the judiciary to instruct Doctors to impregnate them mechanically and produce a child into this world.  God’s traditional role – or ‘Fate’s’ if you prefer to reamin aloof from religion – in the matter of sexual congress and pregnancy being entirely superseded by a combination of the medical and the judicial. Families queue up to pray, not to an unknown entity, Fate if you like, that their loved ones might live or die, or that they might be blessed by child – but to an all too human entity called the Judiciary, from whom permission for all these matters now apparently emanates.

At the same time, no self respecting conspiracy theory is without its ‘unnamed’ member of the Royal family, a sprinkling of those same top judiciary and a couple of Chief Constables thrown in for good measure.  All suppressed from the innocent British public by the non-existant ‘D’ notices issued by those in power which are apparently able to transcend the global Internet borders and ensure that even bloggers in lawless Afghanistan tremble with fear at the thought of publicising the news that Muffin the Mule was only ever on television in order to lure innocent toddlers into a deadly paedophile ring. Paedophile rings which can only be comprised of Rothschilds, Jews, top Tories, senior judges, and those above the rank of Superintendant. This is apparently because we are in the European Union or something.

Since the ‘truth’ is self evident on the Internet, and known only to those who frequent forums in the early hours of the morning, I bow to their greater knowledge, and take it for granted that there are no paedophile rings comprised of lowly gas fitters, out of work electricians, and assorted junkies – they would be screaming for them to be unmasked as well if there were.

It logically follows therefore, that paedophilia is not evenly distributed throughout the British demographic, but is something which afflicts perfectly harmless policemen for instance, once they have been promoted to high office. Ditto the judiciary. Goes with the gold braid.

We have the perfect cure for our current troubles. Roll out the tumbrils – it’s called a revolution! Behead your boss, yeah, and his boss also, right to the very top. No more bosses. No more promotion. No one ever in charge, ever again. For the sake of the children. Take out the Bankers, and the politicians, and the senior judges, and Chief Constables; no more ‘judge led’ inquiries, all 13 million quids worth of them; no one to blame, no one to hide the truth from us; no more media moguls, or celebrity figures; nothing to frighten us ever again.

The children will be safe, Muffin the Mule’s reputation untarnished, and God can get back to his old job of deciding when we arrive or leave this world unhindered. He has been recused, this week’s buzz word, from these decisions long enough. Besides, he’s never been known to demand a bonus for merely doing his job.

It was a great system – when did we decide to abandon it?

Ms Raccoon down-the-rabbit-hole.

Andrew Duffin
November 17, 2012 at 13:00

“Permission to die” is all part of the ongoing progress towards a situation
where the State is acknowledged as the ultimate arbiter of EVERYTHING, and its
right to be such is universally unquestioned.

As a smaller example, if I try to provoke a discussion in a social context,
by asking the assembled company, for instance, “WHY do you think all schools
should be run by the State?”, I don’t get reasoned arguments, but polite
sniggers and looks of pity. Everybody “knows” that is how it should be, what
are you, some sort of Fascist*?

Until people wake up and understand that The State Is Not Your Friend, this
will continue, apparently without limit.

* the term Fascist now means anyone who doesn’t enthusiastically support
the approved line on any matter under discussion.

Observor November 15, 2012 at 09:55

Re: your article on the Court of Protection- there is currently a film
project underway (which i cannot disclose too much about because of
confidentiality agreements) that deals with a high profile person in the 1980s
who came under their ‘protection’ and the destruction of his life.

belinus November
15, 2012 at 09:55

http://youtu.be/T3pSQqbZLho

Edna Fletcher
November 14, 2012 at 21:20

The course of natural life and the evolution of intelligence has been
downgraded by the behaviour of modern man and society. Life and its course is
no longer determined by natural laws, but feral behaviours of many and the
laws of a few men in power acted out through the judiciary, who have an unreal
world view about their abilities which amount to little more than linguistic
acrobatic. Such acrobatics no doubt flow outwards in other ways for some.

This is an article from The Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9672790/Civilisation-is-making-humanity-less-intelligent-study-claims.html

Might help explain a lot of recent behaviours discussed.

BTW Anna- Liberty (the Human Rights Group) is asking for an enquiry into
the odious Mental Capacity Act- letters of support to the Chair of the Joint
Committee on Human Rights in Westminster.

belinus November
15, 2012 at 11:26

Liberty are in my mind controlled opposition straight out of the LSE, so
I would expect nothing of substance to come of it.

Edna Fletcher
November 15, 2012 at 12:11

You may be right, as I too think it is an ‘establishment organisation’
with Shami ‘ well in”- but no one else is asking for an overarching
inquiry into the odious MCA or raising ‘concerns’ at ministerial level,
certainly not the state institutions that abuse it and the incapacitated
on a regular basis, denying them their own voice. Some letters from ‘joe
public’ at least let the ‘institution know’ that the public are not benign
to the abuses or the messing up of real human lives, including possibly
their own in the future- with damaging personal and social
consequences.

belinus November 15, 2012 at 21:14

Hello Edna
If I remember correctly shami is Tavistock, Chatam
House

Dioclese November
14, 2012 at 19:54

Nice piece, Anna. My views on this are, I think, also well documented.

Frank Limadere
November 14, 2012 at 17:34

“Take out the Bankers, and the politicians, and the senior judges, and
Chief Constables”

You missed lawyers and estate agents but apart from that aberration, I’m
with you. Should I bring my own pitchfork and blazing torch?

Anna
Raccoon November 14, 2012 at
18:18

No need, I think the Raccoon Arms five a side team still have a kitty
left over from last christmas, I’ll raid that and buy a bulk load….

Ted Treen
November 14, 2012 at 22:31

My kitties wouldn’t hurt anyone, or I’d offer their services…

On a more serious note, I believe all free men have the right to rebel
against a corrupt/incompetent/despotic state.

I further believe that there are times (and we’re at one now) when that
right becomes a civic or moral duty.

ivan November 15, 2012 at 20:48

Maybe we should be looking into piano wire futures or a company that
makes replacement arms for the top of lamp posts – strange how they
removed them from the lamp posts round parliament.

belinus November 15, 2012 at 21:12

Hello Ivan
I do believe you are correct. More than that, it is
the duty of every British citizen to ensure the realm is upheld at all
times on equel terms with the constabularies :
1829 : 9 Principles
of law enforcement adopted by British and Commonwealth
Constabularies
https://www.lifeinthemix.info/2012/08/1829-principles-law-enforcement-adopted-british-commonwealth-constabularies/

Brian November 14,
2012 at 16:04

The D Notice was replaced in 1993 by the DA Notice which
advised editors to refrain, if they chose to accept, from mentioning that MI6
operatives had Tony Curtis haircuts.

Doreen November 14, 2012 at 15:20

Funny you should say that Anna about the fuss just to be allowed to die
naturally. I just remarked in an email to a friend that a very sick feral cat
in my garden has more rights than I do to be put out my useless misery if I
was very ill. The RSPCA man said ‘would it upset me if the cat was put down’?
NO said I very promptly. That Court of Protection 2005 nonsense was made
things complicated and tortuous. After 2005 it became much more difficult to
deal with sudden issues of incapacity, when I was working in Citizens advice.
Everything one dealt with there was made more difficult by that guy called
Brown’s activities. I admire your courage and tenacity to speak out about
certain issues. I am 77 and ran the gauntlet in childhood of strange men doing
strange things. I adored to be ‘playing out’ in the fresh air. I obeyed my
mums instructions if accosted. Now we have yet another dose of peadohysteria,
me too and compensationitis……but hasn’t it gone quiet after ‘the
apology’………yippee?. If you had a hand in that …..many thanks.

Amfortas November 14, 2012 at 15:03

Life matters seem to attract apalling headlines too, as well as death and
illness matters.

Who can forget the Barbara Ellen piece in the Observer on the 29th Nov 2009
headed, “This shameful Liaison does not deserve Prison”. I do not know if a
sub-editor came up with that or the writer but her ( a feminist of course)
article concurred with ‘liaison’ being a fit word to descibe a teacher raping
a child.

She argued that as it was a male child and a female teacher it was far less
serious than a male teacher and female child, so prison was inappropriate.
‘Liaison’ when a female: Rape when a male. She even described the act as a
‘mimic of a relationship’. The boy was ‘up for it’, Mz Ellen supposed.

She is still writing of course, infecting her readers.

Amfortas November 14, 2012 at 15:08

A Ccottish Gentleman describes his reactions to Barbara Ellen’s piece
here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-YxSCVBjFc&feature=g-all-blg

Anna
Raccoon November 14, 2012 at
15:20

Crikey, what columnist would dare to suggest that a female victim ‘was up
for it’?

Dave
November 14, 2012 at 14:43

Off with their heads.

Saul November 14, 2012 at 14:46

Gas Fitters?

Engineer
November 14, 2012 at 15:43

Careful. You don’t want an uncontrolled pressure release.

Engineer
November 14, 2012 at 15:46

Or flooding the cooker….

Saul
November 14, 2012 at 15:48

Just the ones who don’t sweep up when they are finsihed.

NielsR November 14, 2012 at 14:22

Surely that headline should read: ‘Doctors will (should?) not be prosecuted
if live-preserving treatment is withdrawn from brain-dead patient’ Judge
rules.
It’s just stupid headline shorthand.

As for the lampposts and the hempen rope, sure, that option should never be
forgotten. It’s quite possible Greece or Spain will soon give us a graphic
demonstration of the massive cost of a suspension of established law and
order, but you can’t make an omelette, etc. Government ought to be only
tolerated, and grudgingly at that.

Dai Brainbocs
November 14, 2012 at 13:37

Wheneve I see an annoying headline, I try to read the report while
discounting the headline – I haven’t read the one prompting this blog, so I’m
not commenting on that. It’s staggering how often the headline itself isn’t
borne out by the report or the reporter’s angle, before you get anywhere near
what relation the report might bear to the truth. I suspect there are some
fierce rows in newsrooms when a layout sub stitches up a reporter with a lurid
headline.

Saul November 14, 2012 at 14:17

And therein lies the problem. With the reduced attention span of large
numbers of the population, it’s mainly just the headline that is read, and
subsequently passed around in conversation as being “True”, as it is in the
papers, or on the Sky breaking news banner. This is why people are employed
as leader writers. Once you start disecting the story you tend to find that
really there isn’t much of a story in the first place.

The hare November 14, 2012 at 13:23

All good points. However, its probably a bit harder for a gas fitter to
cover up their behavior than say a politician, cabinet minister, chief
constable, or archbishop. That’s the issue. Gas fitters don’t generally have
access to professional PR companies, out of work electricians don’t have the
financial resources to impose super injunctions, and the average junky is
unlikely to be instructing shillings or carter- ruck to sue for libel. I think
that’s one of the reasons that the conspiracy theorists get a bit
unbalanced.

Anna
Raccoon November 14, 2012 at
13:27

“However, its probably a bit harder for a gas fitter to cover up their
behavior than say a politician, cabinet minister, chief constable, or
archbishop.”

Really?

Cabinet Ministers, for instance, are generally very recognisable, easily
nameable, and often have an entourage of media.

Your average gas fitter is not. He can flit from town to town without
being troubled by anyone saying – I know who that is…..

Are gas fitters and electricians not clubbable then?

Dai Brainbocs
November 14, 2012 at 13:46

Plus a heck of a lot more blackmail-able than a gas fitter. This is a
problem I have with the “ring” idea generally. I don’t doubt there are
people who engage in this disgusting vice collectively, but as you ascend
the social pecking order the risks coming with exposure must rise
exponentially.

Mudplugger
November 14, 2012 at 16:03

But there’s strength in numbers. And it’s also a form of ‘mutually
assured destruction’ – you dare not grass on me because I would then
grass on you.
It is suggested that this is the main reason Jimmy
Savile’s preferences for sub-16 females remained unreported for so long
– his range of ‘contacts’ included those with far worse ‘secrets’, so
they knew that reporting him would cause him to blow the whistle on
them. Once he was dead….. well dead men can’t talk.

The hare
November 14, 2012 at 17:50

I seriously doubt that many children in care would recognize a cabinet
minister. I take an interest in UK politics, but I’d be surprised if I
could name 50% of the current coalition cabinet, let alone recognize them
in the street. Lets be realistic, a cabinet minister isn’t going to take
along an entourage to witness the event ! Archbishops, and senior police
officers are hardly recognisable figures, particularly amongst young
children. It’s a sad act of life that justice is often influenced by
financial constraints, and there are no shortage of examples indicating
that these with the financial means are able to pull a discrete veil over
misdemeanors. I accept that those in the public eye present more of an
obvious target, and I also accept that those with a reputation to protect
will tend to defend their reputations through media management and PR, but
it can’t be denied that those who exercise power generally have greater
protection than members of the general public.

belinus November
14, 2012 at 13:14

O dear, having only been a member of the Digital Spy Forum for less than a
month i find myself banned for the third time, this time for 7 days, quote
:

Hi,
We only permit links to third-party sites when they are relevant to
pre-existing discussion.
Paragraph 2.9 of our Terms and Conditions
states:
‘Do not advertise or solicit’
Your posting privileges have been
revoked for 7 days. Any subsequent violations of our Terms and Conditions,
including re-registration attempts during this temporary ban, will result in
your posting privileges being permanently terminated.

Life and death as this report from Anna elucidates appears not to be a
concern for those ever so benevolent stars of the DS, who do not like the
their posters to see what plans are afoot in the schools as regards death of
pupils, and, the WHO memos showing how to turn a vaccine into a three part
murder apparatus.
To be honest the links remained on the forum a little
longer than expected, so there are good people within it. I knew the links had
caused panic as no sooner had I presented them on the DS did I find my site
lit up with intelligence centres across Britain, Ireland, the US and France,
with Russia joining later.

I do believe the legal eagles have won the day again…

Amfortas November 14, 2012 at 13:11

A fairly good idea, m’dear, even if the reasoning is a little shakey. But
maybe we should include the bloody gas fitters with the foolscap invoices.

Robert Bird November 14, 2012 at 13:10

Makes me ponder the thought that the day may be arising when permission has
to be sought to commit suicide.

Thor2Hammer
November 15, 2012 at 00:08

@Robert – “permission”
I don’t think .Gov.Uk ever went THAT far – but
for very many years (Until the ‘Suicide Act 1961′) it was a crime even to
attempt the deed.

belinus November
14, 2012 at 13:04

I believe the Hippocratic Oath operates with god, while Lucifer believing
himself to be god likes to prove this by becoming the determining factor over
life and death.
History to me appears a to be a game between the god of
life and the prince of death, as it would appear today death is becoming the
new life…to save the planet of course…