Is Britain the NWO Test State?

King Mob · 31-03-2009 12:13am

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Horror pictures like the above will convince the public for the necessity of carrying state ID on all public transport.

Ok just so we're clear here, using emotional or shocking images to convince people of something is bad?

6th · 31-03-2009 12:18am

King Mob wrote: »

Ok just so we're clear here, using emotional or shocking images to convince people of something is bad?

If you have a problem with something report it.

King Mob · 31-03-2009 12:35am

6th wrote: »

If you have a problem with something report it.

I'm nt offend by the picture or anything. I just find it odd that he claims the NWO will use stuff like that as propaganda and implies it's a bad thing when he uses the every same tactic.

Heineken Helen · 01-04-2009 12:24pm

FreeEnergy wrote: »

Hi all,

I bailed out of Britain and came to Ireland in 2004.
It was going from bad to worse even then.
Speed cameras that photograph you in two places then work out the average speed and send you a ticket if you made the journey too quickley.
I have see it with my own eyes.

Ireland thankfully has a constitution.
I read all of it and although i found it a little vague at least you have one.
I have not set foot in the UK since the day i left and i never will again.
My passport expired and I hope to get an Irish one and apply for naturalisation when i qualify (anyone know?)

This can only go on for so long before heads end up on pikes.
It only takes one person to get hungry to stop the ball rolling.

One saving grace in Ireland is that the armed forces are no match for the population in terms of size.

I have never hoped i was wrong more than today.

M.

I just moved from Ireland to England in September and sadly I agree with you. It's a shame cos I like living here but there is SO much invasion into private lives, it's just unreal... but nobody seems to notice. I found a huge difference from Ireland.

The government will convince people to vote yes to Lisbon and that will be the end of us avoiding that invasion in Ireland unfortunately:o but the only thing is, the Irish government is so inept and I believe the Irish people are much more wary when it comes to government intrusion. I used to have these conversations all over Dublin... but if I mention anything like that here, people actually laugh at me :rolleyes:

Heineken Helen · 01-04-2009 12:25pm

getz wrote: »

you are making this up as you go along -under eu law no goverment can restrict its people from traveling within it own country ie the united kingdom-the big problem for britian it seems that everyone wants to live here[except the natives] it is to easy for terrorists to get in from the outside ;remember we have been a target for terrorists for many years [irish and islamic] it is now also becoming a problem for the republic with [imformation from the guarda saying there are 13 known islamic terrorist cells within the republic] you can check this out on any web site-every day now in the uk with its large muslim population you you find the police raiding and finding bomb making equiptment-so far the republic is peace full

:rolleyes: soooooooo much wrong with this post I wouldn't know where to start

meglome · 01-04-2009 3:10pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I just moved from Ireland to England in September and sadly I agree with you. It's a shame cos I like living here but there is SO much invasion into private lives, it's just unreal... but nobody seems to notice. I found a huge difference from Ireland.

The government will convince people to vote yes to Lisbon and that will be the end of us avoiding that invasion in Ireland unfortunately:o but the only thing is, the Irish government is so inept and I believe the Irish people are much more wary when it comes to government intrusion. I used to have these conversations all over Dublin... but if I mention anything like that here, people actually laugh at me :rolleyes:

Invasion? A little fantasy perhaps?

Maybe you should read the very extensive thread on Lisbon where not one person could show in the treaty where any freedom was being taken away. Despite many pages saying it would.

I'm laughing too so don't worry.

meglome · 01-04-2009 3:12pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

:rolleyes: soooooooo much wrong with this post I wouldn't know where to start

Well if you don't start we'll just assume you're making it up and ignore you. Who'll save us all then? eh?

Heineken Helen · 01-04-2009 3:17pm

meglome wrote: »

Invasion? A little fantasy perhaps?

Maybe you should read the very extensive thread on Lisbon where not one person could show in the treaty where any freedom was being taken away. Despite many pages saying it would.

I'm laughing too so don't worry.

Not a little fantasy... stuff that's so much I won't even say it here... I've said it to people who would agree with you generally and even they were shocked and have learned to be a bit more careful.

I'm unemployed and the invasive stuff they can ask and DO never ceases to amaze me. Makes you feel like less of a person and more of a property of the government.

6th · 01-04-2009 3:46pm

Just highlighting part of the charter here.

From the Charter wrote: »

• Claims, Evidence, Proof
If you are stating something as fact please post your sources or any relevant links/info.

Heineken Helen · 01-04-2009 3:52pm

6th wrote: »

Just highlighting part of the charter here.

I can't post it cos it's all personal intrusion and most of it has lead to me believing that anything I DO post..................................................

meglome · 01-04-2009 7:19pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I can't post it cos it's all personal intrusion and most of it has lead to me believing that anything I DO post..................................................

So you've started a discussion in a discussion forum that you won't discuss?

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 1:13pm

meglome wrote: »

So you've started a discussion in a discussion forum that you won't discuss?

Just stating my opinion on what I've observed between living in the two countries.

meglome · 02-04-2009 1:56pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Just stating my opinion on what I've observed between living in the two countries.

Is that the opinion you won't discuss?

6th · 02-04-2009 2:18pm

meglome wrote: »

Is that the opinion you won't discuss?

The Charter wrote:

Where someone states something as their opinion it is just that, an opinion. Asking "why" they believe something if fine, demanding proof/evidence is not.

I know you're not demanding anything just highlighting it sooner rather than later

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 2:31pm

6th wrote: »

I know you're not demanding anything just highlighting it sooner rather than later

Hence the reason I didn't reply. Since a continuation of explaining why would possibly result in a banning.

How about this... I'm applying for jobs at the mo... MANY of the jobs I've seen advertised require a full enhanced police check... I can understand if it were working with kids or something, which some of them are, but some are just simple admin jobs. Perhaps that's being done at home too since it's been a long time since I was looking for jobs in Dublin? Also, most of them, when you apply ask you to fill out an 'equal opportunities' form... which means that, in order to prove they don't discriminate, you have to give them ALL your details which it used to be illegal to even ASK about:eek: kinda defeats the point if you ask me... I will find a link to back this up. Here's a few random jobs requiring CRB checks:

http://www.totaljobs.com/JobSearch/JobDetails.aspx?JobId=43672396&Keywords=crb

http://www.totaljobs.com/JobSearch/JobDetails.aspx?JobId=43738666&Keywords=crb

http://www.totaljobs.com/JobSearch/JobDetails.aspx?JobId=43463983&Keywords=crb

http://www.totaljobs.com/JobSearch/JobDetails.aspx?JobId=43678578&Keywords=crb

http://www.totaljobs.com/JobSearch/JobDetails.aspx?JobId=43660275&Keywords=crb

Equal opportunities form:

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:NOcTaevlXZ8J:www.torbay.gov.uk/equal-opportunities-recruitment-form.doc+equal+opportunities+form&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:2Qt3W6ugGucJ:www.helpage.org/Aboutus/WorkingforHelpAgeInternational/Equalopportunities/main_content/EQUALOPPORTUNITIESFORM05.doc+equal+opportunities+form&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie

That enough links for ya? Well that's just stuff that effects day to day stuff... that's not even scratching the surface.

King Mob · 02-04-2009 2:42pm

You realise most of the stuff on the equal opportunities form is stuff you'd be able to guess by talking to the person for five minutes right?

meglome · 02-04-2009 2:48pm

I would ask why not? I mean I run a business and if you're hiring someone it can be difficult to tell if they are telling you the truth. Now imagine you work with children or other vulnerable people.

http://www.crb.gov.uk wrote:

The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB), an Executive Agency of the Home Office, provides wider access to criminal record information through its Disclosure service. This service enables organisations in the public, private and voluntary sectors to make safer recruitment decisions by identifying candidates who may be unsuitable for certain work, especially that involve children or vulnerable adults. The CRB was established under Part V of the Police Act 1997 and was launched in March 2002.

Prior to 2002, access to police checks was mainly confined to organisations in the statutory sector for staff who had ‘substantial unsupervised access’ to children. There were many other organisations that could not access these checks and yet had staff with similar access to vulnerable groups. The CRB enables many more organisations to access these checks as part of good recruitment practice.

Organisations wishing to use the service can ask successful job applicants to apply for one of two types of check. The type of check required will depend upon the nature of the position. These are called Enhanced and Standard Disclosures, both require a fee but are free of charge to volunteers.

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 2:48pm

King Mob wrote: »

You realise most of the stuff on the equal opportunities form is stuff you'd be able to guess by talking to the person for five minutes right?

and some of it you wouldn't, i.e. whether they have kids, a disability may not be apparent, whether they're single or married, their age, etc. It's not just about gender and race... some of the ones I've filled out have asked about pretty much every kinda medical condition under the sun... and of course you sign at the bottom that, if you haven't told the truth, any contract would be null and void:rolleyes: so you may actually HAVE to tell them that you do get really bad periods every 6 months or so :eek: which, is none of their business at ALL.

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 2:50pm

meglome wrote: »

I would ask why not? I mean I run a business and if you're hiring someone it can be difficult to tell if they are telling you the truth. Now imagine you work with children or other vulnerable people.

I do understand IF you're working with children or vulnerable people... of course... but many of them are just for normal office jobs. Why should I have to go to the police and PAY for a form to prove I'm telling the truth?

King Mob · 02-04-2009 2:55pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

and some of it you wouldn't, i.e. whether they have kids, a disability may not be apparent, whether they're single or married, their age, etc. It's not just about gender and race... some of the ones I've filled out have asked about pretty much every kinda medical condition under the sun... and of course you sign at the bottom that, if you haven't told the truth, any contract would be null and void:rolleyes: so you may actually HAVE to tell them that you do get really bad periods every 6 months or so :eek: which, is none of their business at ALL.

And? If it would effect your work it would be important to tell an employer.
But that's not on those forms.
Why is it so weird that they would ask whether you're married or single or how many children you have?

And where exactly is the conspiracy?

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 3:14pm

King Mob wrote: »

And? If it would effect your work it would be important to tell an employer.
But that's not on those forms.
Why is it so weird that they would ask whether you're married or single or how many children you have?

And where exactly is the conspiracy?

Because I've been told by people at the job centre and also from agencies that it's illegal to ask those questions (for the record I'm single and childless). It's weird cos it's none of their business... how do they know IF it will affect your work? Many people have kids and are as reliable and efficient as those who don't, yet it could go against you in your application... an employer may assume that someone with kids would take more time off.

It's not a conspiracy if it's there for all to see... it's just that on the one hand they tell you something is illegal, on the other hand they can ask it but in a different way. So if you put down that you've no stomach troubles, and suddenly you get a stomach bug, the employer may well be entitled to sack you for 'lying' on your application. Or if you DO say that you suffer from bad periods, is it then ok to call in sick once a month for a couple of days and say 'well I told you so'? I highly doubt it. On the other hand, if you do get it bad one time and have to call in sick, this may now become a sackable offence:rolleyes:

The key words being 'if it would affect your work', I'm fine with them asking if you've a disability which would affect your work cos they DO need to know this... but if it's one that has never affected your work, why do they need to know about this? It may even be understandable ONCE you've got the job that they should know of any conditions in case of an emergency and they can say that's what you have... but why do they have the right to get such personal details on a job application? For the record again, I don't suffer from any of the conditions but it's simply embarrassing filling out the form, and I'd imagine even more so if you DO happen to suffer from diarrhoea:D

King Mob · 02-04-2009 3:40pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Because I've been told by people at the job centre and also from agencies that it's illegal to ask those questions (for the record I'm single and childless). It's weird cos it's none of their business... how do they know IF it will affect your work? Many people have kids and are as reliable and efficient as those who don't, yet it could go against you in your application... an employer may assume that someone with kids would take more time off.

It's illegal to ask how many kids you have? I seriously doubt it.

Heineken Helen wrote: »

It's not a conspiracy if it's there for all to see... it's just that on the one hand they tell you something is illegal, on the other hand they can ask it but in a different way. So if you put down that you've no stomach troubles, and suddenly you get a stomach bug, the employer may well be entitled to sack you for 'lying' on your application. Or if you DO say that you suffer from bad periods, is it then ok to call in sick once a month for a couple of days and say 'well I told you so'? I highly doubt it. On the other hand, if you do get it bad one time and have to call in sick, this may now become a sackable offence:rolleyes:

I pretty sure no employer can sack you for getting sick. If you put down you have no stomach problems then get a bug. You still don't have a stomach problem, just a temporary illness. All employer give you sick leave.

Heineken Helen wrote: »

The key words being 'if it would affect your work', I'm fine with them asking if you've a disability which would affect your work cos they DO need to know this... but if it's one that has never affected your work, why do they need to know about this? It may even be understandable ONCE you've got the job that they should know of any conditions in case of an emergency and they can say that's what you have... but why do they have the right to get such personal details on a job application? For the record again, I don't suffer from any of the conditions but it's simply embarrassing filling out the form, and I'd imagine even more so if you DO happen to suffer from diarrhoea:D

So where exactly do they ask you about bad periods? Which illnesses do they ask about?
How do you know they discriminate based on these illnesses?

And again where's the conspiracy?

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 4:25pm

King Mob wrote: »

It's illegal to ask how many kids you have? I seriously doubt it.

I pretty sure no employer can sack you for getting sick. If you put down you have no stomach problems then get a bug. You still don't have a stomach problem, just a temporary illness. All employer give you sick leave.
So where exactly do they ask you about bad periods? Which illnesses do they ask about?
How do you know they discriminate based on these illnesses?

And again where's the conspiracy?

I didn't say anything about a conspiracy... this thread is about the NWO... which I don't believe to be a conspiracy.

Here ya go... it's grounds for discrimination:

http://www.safeworkers.co.uk/job-interview-questions-should-not-be-asked.html

I will try to find a link to a similar form to the ones I've filled out. There were at least two that had a full list of conditions and you had to answer yes or no.. one was actually simply 'menstrual/period pain' under 'do you suffer from any of the following conditions?' and yes 'diarrhoea' WAS another one:D

And see, you don't know whether they discriminate based on them... but the point is, if they HAVE this information, it makes it easier for them to discriminate. I don't see how having to give that info protects the worker in any way? They may as well insist on a full medical.

http://jobsearch.about.com/od/salary/a/fired.htm

"Lying on a job application is grounds for dismissal at any time in the future and could cost you future unemployment benefits".

getz · 02-04-2009 4:33pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I do understand IF you're working with children or vulnerable people... of course... but many of them are just for normal office jobs. Why should I have to go to the police and PAY for a form to prove I'm telling the truth?

maybe the employer has a right to employ who he or she wants to do the work

Heineken Helen · 02-04-2009 4:42pm

getz wrote: »

maybe the employer has a right to employ who he or she wants to do the work

So they can be racist or sexist? Any form of discrimination is as bad as the other... and they're all illegal... and there's reasons they're illegal. Of course, an employer can employ who he/she wants... but it should only be on the basis of whether they're suitable for the job or not. These laws are there cos employers were abusing their rights.

King Mob · 02-04-2009 5:00pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I didn't say anything about a conspiracy... this thread is about the NWO... which I don't believe to be a conspiracy.

Then why post in a conspiracy theory forum?

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Here ya go... it's grounds for discrimination:

http://www.safeworkers.co.uk/job-interview-questions-should-not-be-asked.html

But not illegal.
If you feel it was the basis of discrimination there's lots of channels to go through.

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I will try to find a link to a similar form to the ones I've filled out. There were at least two that had a full list of conditions and you had to answer yes or no.. one was actually simply 'menstrual/period pain' under 'do you suffer from any of the following conditions?' and yes 'diarrhoea' WAS another one:D

And? Was it relevant to the job? Why was it such a big deal?

Heineken Helen wrote: »

And see, you don't know whether they discriminate based on them... but the point is, if they HAVE this information, it makes it easier for them to discriminate. I don't see how having to give that info protects the worker in any way?

And the employers have no rights?
If the applicant doesn't want to give the information the employer asks for they don't have to apply.

Heineken Helen wrote: »

They may as well insist on a full medical.

Yea some might but not everyone.

"Lying on a job application is grounds for dismissal at any time in the future and could cost you future unemployment benefits".[/QUOTE]

DubTony · 03-04-2009 12:38am

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Hence the reason I didn't reply. Since a continuation of explaining why would possibly result in a banning.

How about this... I'm applying for jobs at the mo... MANY of the jobs I've seen advertised require a full enhanced police check... I can understand if it were working with kids or something, which some of them are, but some are just simple admin jobs. Perhaps that's being done at home too since it's been a long time since I was looking for jobs in Dublin? Also, most of them, when you apply ask you to fill out an 'equal opportunities' form... which means that, in order to prove they don't discriminate, you have to give them ALL your details which it used to be illegal to even ASK about:eek: kinda defeats the point if you ask me... I will find a link to back this up. Here's a few random jobs requiring CRB checks:

It seems very strange to me that a job applicant temping on £7 or £8 an hour should need that type of police clearance. Clearly these employers have put the onus on the employee to prove that they are "clean" and while that's not necessarily a bad thing it is contradictory to the "innocent until proven guilty" standard that we generally live by.

In any application for a job, or indeed in an interview, is illegal to ask the following;

If a person has children.
Age. (Date of birth should only be asked if the candidate is obviously under 18 and only when a candidate confirms that he or she is under 18 can the date of birth be requested).
The marital status of an applicant.
Religion.
If an applicant has dependents (kids or parents).
Race or ethnic background.
Sexual persuasion.
Medical conditions (except to ask if the applicant has any serious medical conditions that could cause a danger to themselves or others, e.g. epilepsy in the case of a machine operator. A full medical can be required as a condition of a job offer but this must be paid for by the employer)

The only personal information an employer is entitled to is pretty much name and address. That's all standard in Irish law, things may have changed in the UK.

Equal Opportunities Form wrote:

This form will be separated from your application form and treated in the strictest confidence. The information you provide will be used for statistical purposes only and will not be used as part of the recruitment selection process. It is helpful if you complete all sections of the form.

While it is clearly states that the form is kept separate from the application, can an applicant be fully confident that it actually will be? The laws are there to ensure that equal opportunities are just that - equal. But these questionnaires make a mockery of the law. Now if there was some sort of American type affirmative action, I could understand, but asking for this information on the basis that it's for research purposes seems very very strange indeed when you consider that the job application and the Equal Opportunities Form are submitted together.

DubTony · 03-04-2009 12:55am

King Mob wrote: »

And the employers have no rights?
If the applicant doesn't want to give the information the employer asks for they don't have to apply.

When it comes to employers filling jobs they have no rights. They don't need them. The anti-discrimination laws are firmly on the side of the applicant as there is no way that an applicant can discriminate against a potential employer.

If "equal opportunity forms" became standard when applying for a job it would be easy for "bad" employers to discriminate against applicants. The laws are there to protect minorities, but if a person can't even get an interview based on something written on a form, he or she can never prove discrimination and so the form in itself is discriminatory. The fact that these forms exist at all means that the whole system is open to massive abuse, and makes the law irrelevant.

If I don't want to employ women who have kids, who's to know that I didn't use the equal opportunities form to weed out the "undesirables"?

King Mob · 03-04-2009 1:04am

DubTony wrote: »

When it comes to employers filling jobs they have no rights. They don't need them. The anti-discrimination laws are firmly on the side of the applicant as there is no way that an applicant can discriminate against a potential employer.

If "equal opportunity forms" became standard when applying for a job it would be easy for "bad" employers to discriminate against applicants. The laws are there to protect minorities, but if a person can't even get an interview based on something written on a form, he or she can never prove discrimination and so the form in itself is discriminatory. The fact that these forms exist at all means that the whole system is open to massive abuse, and makes the law irrelevant.

If I don't want to employ women who have kids, who's to know that I didn't use the equal opportunities form to weed out the "undesirables"?

Isn't that going against innocent till proven guilty?

Have you any evidence that equal oppertunity forms are being used to facilitate discrimination?

And again where's the conspiracy?

DubTony · 03-04-2009 1:17am

King Mob wrote: »

Isn't that going against innocent till proven guilty?

If you're referring to the bit about "weeding out "undesirables"", yes, I suppose it is going against that. That's the point.

Have you any evidence that equal oppertunity forms are being used to facilitate discrimination?

No. I've never seen one of these forms until tonight. The point being made is that the forms can be used to discriminate.

And again where's the conspiracy?

This thread is primarily about invasions of privacy.

Is Britain the NWO Test State?

Comments