Police not all rotten and must get their house in order
ilyan.thomas at virgin.net
Mon Jan 17 11:46:17 GMT 2011
One spy in Freemasonry described how difficult it was for a high ranking
regional masons to find someone honest and competent enough to replace him.
Another reported the local Police branch resigning en mass because a
newly arrived Mason was made Inspector when there was long term local
fully qualified and overdue for the job who wasnt.
THey are not all rotten.
On 16/01/2011 21:47, Tony Gosling wrote:
> The Mail on Sunday today (page 8, feature on Mark Kennedy, undercover
> policeman who has been exposed as such) refers to the National Public
> Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU).
> The paper states that the unit runs a nationwide intelligence data
> base of political activists.
> It goes on: 'The unit comes under the Association of Chief Police
> Officers (ACPO). I have always regarded ACPO as a chief police
> officers trade union, so why are they keeping a data base on political
> activists? In any case what is so wrong with being a political
> activist that a data base has to be kept on them. Being a political
> activist is not a crime, or is it?
> The way politics is controlled by the corporate (Fascist) cloud, as
> Robert Francis likes to put it, has essentially consigned democracy
> and real politics to the dustbin.
> Worse still, the feature goes on: '..... the Mail on Sunday has
> previously reported [NPIOU], is a limited company that sells
> information from the Police National Computer, among other concerns'.
> I would like to know:
> 1. What is the legal basis for NPOIU?
> 2. What is the democratic basis for NPOIU?
> 3. Who can buy data from the Police National Computer and what range
> of data is available for purchase?
> 4. Does the data on the Police National Computer come under the Data
> Protection Act?
> 5. What is ACPO's status and is it a trade union?
> 6. Who receives the proceeds from sale of this data?
> 7. Doesn't the idea of a police unit being a limited company that can
> sell data obtained at taxpayer expense (presumably) come under the
> definition of fascism?
> Any answers or comments welcome.
> Dave Davebarnby at aol.com
> PS: I have been reading the book (600 plus pages): 'Inside the
> Brotherhood', it's about Freemasonry. There is a chapter on the police
> (and judiciary) and although the book is some 20 years old, there is
> enough on police masonry for concern (I presume nothing much has
> When you consider this murky (as MonS puts it) unit and Freemasonry in
> the police, then the public may have serious reason to be worried, if
> not terrified.
> I wonder what David Cameron knows or thinks about it?
More information about the Diggers350