THE LAST DITCH An Englishman returned after twenty years abroad blogs about liberty in Britain
British values - just what are they?
If it's the right thing, why don' t they tell the families?

The truth is out there (preceded by "not")

BBC NEWS | UK | Paedophile checks scheme defended.

The British state says that 11 million people must be certified and logged by a state authority before they can safely be allowed to give their children's friends a lift to the swimming pool. This is as offensive (and revealing) a concept as could have been conceived by our uppity public "servants."

A government employee sexually abused and then killed two little girls for his sadistic pleasure. Had the school been private, its screening and hiring policies would have been challenged and its management would have been held to account for its failure to protect the children in its care. As it was a state school, its management is of course perfect. So we all become suspects instead.

Ignore all examples of child abuse by "carers" in state institutions. Ignore the risk that the database will be abused to smear, punish, and/or blackmail those who offend the state's minions. Any such incidents will be mere aberrations, for in their eyes we are the dark and they are the light. Only when that light shines upon us can we truly be safe.

You may be surprised to read that the linked BBC piece actually lists everything that is wrong with this scheme. You just have to break the code. Ignore the appeals for calm. Forget the soothing Newspeak job-titles ("chairman of the Independent Safeguarding Authority"). States have always been adept at making evil sound cuddly; consider for example the French "Committee of Public Safety". In particular, be careful to ignore all noble-sounding objectives, like "...protect children from paedophiles...". The more noble the objective sounds, the more wicked the measures the state seeks to justify.

To find the truth, look to the things any given apparatchik denies. In this example, the Witchfinder General chairman of the ISA tells us that the scheme is NOT about;

  • interfering with the sensible arrangements which parents make with each other to take their children to schools and clubs;
  • subjecting a quarter of the population to intensive [note the weasel qualifier] scrutiny of their person lives
  • creating mistrust between adults and children
  • discouraging volunteering
So there you have it. The scheme, perfectly-described in bullet points. The truth is in there. You must just know how to look.

Comments