MUST READ commentary on Princess Diana inquesti!!

Unresolved questions for ME ..

Who supplied Henry Paul with the presciptions?

How easy was it to fix the accelerator pedal in the car?

What happened to the white car and who was in it?

How does an independent inquest get away with NOT calling back in lieing witnesses and holding them accountable?

How can the leader of the inquest be both judge and jury?

Does no one really care what happened to Princess Diana nor her legacy?

How long does the whitewash continue? Another decade? Two?

Why doesn't the mainstream media pursue an independent investigation?

What changes to world consciousness might Diana have made if she were still alive?

Does anyone believe the lieing royal family - Prince Philip, Prince (blackmailed) Henry .. .. ?

Why do people pay taxes to give SOCIALISM FOR THE RICH in 2007 - they share the profit$ and we share their losses?

Okay, folks who don't read .. like Barak Obama and Gordon Brown and the royals are REALLY going to ensure a human rights first agenda really get pursued .. and you BELIEVE THAT?

Virginia

CORONER ACTS AS JUDGE AND JURY AS HE REFUSES TO ALLOW THE ‘REAL’ JURY EVEN TO CONSIDER A MURDER VERDICT AT THE PRINCESS DIANA ‘INQUEST’

Filed under: Diana Inquest — publiceyes @ 6:29 pm

Establishment puppet ‘Lord’ Justice Scott-Baker has dedicated his life to the Royal
Establishment and no one should be surprised by his blatant bias

• SCOTT-BAKER PROVES THAT THE INQUEST DID NOT NEED A JURY AFTER ALL BECAUSE HE IS BOTH JUDGE AND JURY!

The coroner at the inquest into the death of Princess Diana has prevented the jury from even considering a murder verdict and today Lord Justice Scott-Baker’s beloved Royal Establishment is safe from collapse for the time being….

In a transparent move which surprised no one with a functioning brain cell he ruled out any possibility that the Inquest jury could arrive at a murder verdict and in so doing bring down the entire Monarchy.

The stakes were simply too high and a murder verdict would have destroyed the House of Windsor leaving Britain to become a fully-fledged democratic Republic. Had there have been a murder verdict, the public uproar would have forced the House of Windsor into collapse and possible evacuation to safer climes but this is only a temporary reprieve….

Several weeks ago I was telephoned by the BBC’s News and Current Affairs assistant producer Kathrine Bancroft with a view to commenting on the BBC’s latest anti-Conspiracy Files ‘documentary’. We both agreed during our final conversation that a murder verdict at the Diana Inquest would be “the end of the Monarchy” and this is what was at stake from the very outset.

‘Lord’ Justice Scott-Baker, a lifelong Establishmentarian and Royal lackey, knew only too well what would happen if the real jury at the Inquest delivered a murder verdict and the stakes were simply too high for him to allow any such verdict to be delivered. Instead, he acted as I predicted he would in September 2008 when he banned me from attending the Inquest.

And from the opening day of the Inquest Scott-Baker demonstrated his prejudice against any possibility that Diana and Diana were murdered. He even had the audacity to state that he did not believe that Diana and Dodi were in a real relationship and the famous engagement ring was not an engagement ring at all. By so doing he showed the world that he was dead set against any notion or evidence to prove Diana was murdered.

But in an equally transparent act he ruled that the widely discredited Paget Report be removed from the Inquest’s website and that the jury should not be allowed to consider it. Attentive readers will remember that the Paget ‘investigation’ determined that Diana and Dodi were killed in a tragic accident caused by a drunk, speeding Henri Paul.

Scott-Baker realised that 80 per cent of the British public believed the Paget report was a whitewash designed to deliver an accident record into the history books. And in evidence submitted to the Inquest it was proved that Diana and Dodi’s relationship was real and genuine and the engagement ring was just that. But no apology has been forthcoming from Scott-Baker because in common with all judges and lawyers (overpaid professional liars and parasites on the public purse) he could not be seen to be wrong. This proves again the maxim: “No lawyer will ever go to heaven while there is room for one more in Hell.”

And so the jury, who it is clear were not needed at all because Scott-Baker has taken over the function of judge and jury, are left with five possible ‘verdicts’ of which one is open verdict. Even an open verdict would be a calamity for the Royal Establishment leaving a huge question mark hanging over the House of Windsor and its small army of professional parasites paid for by the long-suffering public….

Therefore, and without any surprise at all, Scott-Baker will now use the last few days of the Diana ‘Inquest’ to guide the jury towards arriving at an accident verdict and the odds are four-to-one in favour. He has stacked the odds in favour of an accident verdict and will do everything within his considerable power to help the tame and irrelevant jury return the verdict the Royal and Political Establishment want.

Princess Diana was the most potent thorn in the side of the
Royal Establishment since Wallis-Simpson

In the same way that the Royal and Political Establishment wanted Diana out of the way because she was a potent threat their to their ongoing gravy train, those same flunkies want it to be recorded in history that her death was a terrible ‘accident’. And we are asked to believe that the Royal Family and its personal security aka British intelligence, who did everything within their power to destroy the princess while she lived, simply stopped short of murdering her - very considerate of them!

It is a “bridge too far” to accept their vainglorious demands and expectations because in the ten years it took for this ‘inquest’ or grotesque theatre to take place, 80 per cent of the British people came to believe that Princess Diana, their princess who reached out to them, the “People’s Princess” was murdered to ensure her silence. Not just on the landmines issue or the Muslim relative to the heir of the throne routine but actually to ensure the devastating secrets in her box tricks held at Kensington Palace did not fall into the hands of a vengeful Mohamed Al Fayed and then enter the public domain with historic ramifications.

And we have heard how self-confessed liar Paul Burrell burned letters addressed to Princess Diana in his garden to ensure they did not leak out. There is also a similar tale from the Metropolitan Police regarding Prince Philip’s letters to Diana and apparently these were lost or ‘misplaced’ - conveniently beyond recovery!

Is there a single rational person in society who believes that there has not been a conspiracy between vested interests to destroy vital evidence so damning it could destroy several members of the Royal Family, particularly Prince Charles? If there is one person who believes this nonsense despite the wealth of evidence to prove this policy of deliberate and attempted eradication of evidence, I will gladly take them through the facts pro bono.

The 31 March 2008 will be remembered as the day when the British Royal Establishment finally concluded their Diana Theatre in Box 73 of the Royal Cinema of ‘Justice’ and in so doing hammered the final nail into their coffin. For within 20 years at current trends, new anti-Establishment socio-political forces will finally triumph over the Royal Establishment and its decadent three-party State.

There is no easy road to victory but through a series of battles with the old order in the public and political domains we will emerge victorious and then the real history of this time will be written by those who were denied their rights and were so compelled to join the socio-political forces of the emerging New Order.

In closing, I urge the great many people who have followed our coverage of what should have been an inquest into the deaths of Diana and Dodi not to despair. This is not a defeat, it is an illusion of ‘victory’ by the Royal Establishment and it is a mark of their sheer desperation to avoid their eventual collapse and total defeat. The wheels of history are turning unstoppably in our favour and in progressive motions grinding the old order into the dustbin of history.

Comments (0)

March 21, 2008

http://publiceyes.wordpress.com/category/diana-inquest/

PRINCESS DIANA INQUEST DRAWS TO A CLOSE AFTER AL FAYED’S JUDICIAL REVIEW IS TURNED DOWN

Filed under: Diana Inquest — publiceyes @ 9:37 am

Halcyon days: Al Fayed with the Queen

The Princess Diana Inquest has drawn to a close with Mohamed Al Fayed’s bid to make the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh give evidence at the Diana inquest rejected by the High Court. There was little chance of his judicial review application succeeding given the fact that the so-called ‘impartial’ coroner had already blocked moves to make the Queen and Prince Philip testify.

Al Fayed’s legal team tried to get a judicial review of the ‘decision’ earlier this month that the Royal couple need not attend the Inquest. The application was rejected before the President of the Queen’s Bench Division, Sir Igor Judge, Mr Justice Walker and Mr Justice Cross. ‘Sir’ Igor said: “This application should be refused.”

And in a dramatic twist in another part of London’s Royal Courts of Justice, Mr Al Fayed was summoned back to the witness box at the Inquest to make it clear that he was wrong when he had earlier told the jury that he had won a decision in another court case. Clearly, the coroner who opened the Inquest by telling the jury that the ring Dodi bought for Diana was not for an engagement in his view, needed to clear up a few loose ends before he begins his week-long summing up to the jury he has already tried to guide against the Al Fayed camp.

Establishment puppet Scott-Baker

At the very outset of the Inquest in October last year Scott-Baker told the jury that he was not convinced that Diana and Dodi’s relationship was ‘genuine’ and he questioned the engagement ring actually being for an ‘engagement’. With his clear opinions expressed to the jury he had inadvertently admitted he was not impartial. It will be interesting to see the extent to which he may try to guide the jury towards a verdict of ‘accidental’ death because anything else will be a disaster for the British Monarchy.

Lord ‘Justice’ Scott-Baker is a lifelong supporter of the Establishment and a career parasite on the public purse from which he has made a small fortune. Any chance of his being impartial in his summing disappeared at the Inquest’s opening in October last year. And throughout he has demonstrated bias against the Al Fayed camp, demanding an apology from John McNamara for the serial liar Trevor Rees-Jones or Trevor Rees as he now calls himself.

Indeed Trevor Rees has changed his story so many times it is extremely difficult to understand on what grounds he deserves an apology of any description. In March 1998 he said that Henri Paul was not drunk and that he would not have allowed Paul to drive if he suspected the acting head of Hotel Ritz Paris security was drunk. But at the Inquest Trevor Rees again changed his tune and his new ’story/fable’ was ‘Henri Paul was drunk and it was all just a terrible accident’ which is pretty good going for a man who claims he cannot remember exactly what happened on 30/31 August 1997.

Rees-Jones spills the beans to the Daily Mirror, March 1998

And even more importantly was the confession of self-confessed liar Paul Burrell who admitted he lied to the Inquest and that Scott-Baker “still allowed me to get away with it.” The reason for this is Scott-Baker did not want to encourage Burrell to say too much about what he really knows regarding the Queen’s admission of “dark forces” at work in Britain.

The fact that the coroner had no power to summon Burrell back to the Inquest to ‘explain’ himself was a factor configured into the plans of the ‘people’ who protect Burrell, while he stays quiet about certain matters. For Burrell knows only too well what might happen to him if he does not stay silent and the firebomb attack on his Cheshire flower shop was a mere warning of what could follow….

So Burrell stays tucked away in the United States where he is safe from the British people who hate him and know him to be a traitor and serial liar, a misfit of the imagination for which he is so renowned. Not that this matters to the stupid Americans who buy into his fairy tales, no pun intended on his bi-sexuality, and spend large sums of money on his Royal Butler ‘collections’. It seems that at last in the land of make-believe Burrell has found his true home….

And Lord ‘Justice’ Scott-Baker allowed him to get away with it and this fact demonstrates exactly where both ‘men’ stand in relation to each other, the Monarchy and the result they are striving to achieve. History will not forget nor forgive them, the more so if the verdict is death by misadventure or most likely ‘open verdict’?

More evidence of Orwellian doubletalk from the BuZhistas

Bush’s inappropriate invasion of Iraq
Posted by: APR on Thursday, February 22, 2007 - 04:57 AM

Bush’s inappropriate invasion of Iraq

By Ahmed Amr

Get out your beltway dictionaries. It’s time to translate Feith-based intelligence from Pentagonese to plain English. A long delayed three year internal Pentagon review has determined that Douglas Feith orchestrated the deliberate and systematic corruption of pre-war intelligence. As a consequence, the Pentagon's inspector general has rendered the verdict that Feith’s conduct was ‘inappropriate’ but ‘authorized’ and ‘legal.’

An indignant Feith was quick to take exception to the Inspector’s finding. He defended his record of falsifying intelligence as ‘good government.’ The unrepentant Likudnik was quoted as saying "I disagree with the inspector general's opinions here mainly because, if heeded, they would discourage policy officials from asking tough questions about the quality of CIA work." Even in Pentagonese – that spells Chutzpah.

The bullshit never stops. New Exec Order empowers Mukasey further ...

Harriet Meirs, I totally detest you as a role model for the women of today.

Veeger

New Bush order strips away intelligence board's duty to to report illegal activities directly to AG

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

February 29, 2008

Executive Order: President's Intelligence Advisory Board and Intelligence Oversight Board

RSS Feed White House News

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to ensure that the President and other officers of the United States with responsibility for the security of the Nation and the advancement of its interests have access to accurate, insightful, objective, and timely information concerning the capabilities, intentions, and activities of foreign powers.

Sec. 2. Definitions. As used in this order:

(a) "department concerned" means an executive department listed in section 101 of title 5, United States Code, that contains an organization listed in or designated pursuant to section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended (50 U.S.C. 401a(4));

(b) "intelligence activities" has the meaning specified in section 3.4 of Executive Order 12333 of December 4, 1981, as amended; and

(c) "intelligence community" means the organizations listed in or designated pursuant to section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended.

Sec. 3. Establishment of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board. (a) There is hereby established, within the Executive Office of the President and exclusively to advise and assist the President as set forth in this order, the President's Intelligence Advisory Board (PIAB).

(b) The PIAB shall consist of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals who are not employed by the Federal Government.

(c) The President shall designate a Chair from among the members of the PIAB, who shall convene and preside at meetings of the PIAB, determine its agenda, and direct its work.

(d) Members of the PIAB and the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB) established in section 5 of this order:

(i) shall serve without any compensation for their work on the PIAB or the IOB; and

(ii) while engaged in the work of the PIAB or the IOB, may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law for persons serving intermittently in the Government (5 U.S.C. 5701-5707).

(e) The PIAB shall utilize such full-time professional and administrative staff as authorized by the Chair and approved by the President or the President's designee. Such staff shall be supervised by an Executive Director of the PIAB, appointed by the President, whom the President may designate to serve also as the Executive Director of the IOB.

Sec. 4. Functions of the PIAB. Consistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the PIAB shall have the authority to, as the PIAB determines appropriate, or shall, when directed by the President:

(a) assess the quality, quantity, and adequacy of intelligence collection, of analysis and estimates, and of counterintelligence and other intelligence activities, assess the adequacy of management, personnel and organization in the intelligence community, and review the performance of all agencies of the Federal Government that are engaged in the collection, evaluation, or production of intelligence or the execution of intelligence policy and report the results of such assessments or reviews:

(i) to the President, as necessary but not less than twice each year; and

(ii) to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the heads of departments concerned when the PIAB determines appropriate; and

(b) consider and make appropriate recommendations to the President, the DNI, or the head of the department concerned with respect to matters identified to the PIAB by the DNI or the head of a department concerned.

Sec. 5. Establishment of Intelligence Oversight Board.

(a) There is hereby established a committee of the PIAB to be known as the Intelligence Oversight Board.

(b) The IOB shall consist of not more than five members of the PIAB who are designated by the President from among members of the PIAB to serve on the IOB. The IOB shall utilize such full-time professional and administrative staff as authorized by the Chair and approved by the President or the President's designee. Such staff shall be supervised by an Executive Director of the IOB, appointed by the President, whom the President may designate to serve also as the Executive Director of the PIAB.

(c) The President shall designate a Chair from among the members of the IOB, who shall convene and preside at meetings of the IOB, determine its agenda, and direct its work.

Sec. 6. Functions of the IOB. Consistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the IOB shall:

(a) issue criteria on the thresholds for reporting matters to the IOB, to the extent consistent with section 1.7(d) of Executive Order 12333 or the corresponding provision of any successor order;

(b) inform the President of intelligence activities that the IOB believes:

(i)(A) may be unlawful or contrary to Executive Order or presidential directive; and

(B) are not being adequately addressed by the Attorney General, the DNI, or the head of the department concerned; or

(ii) should be immediately reported to the President.

(c) review and assess the effectiveness, efficiency, and sufficiency of the processes by which the DNI and the heads of departments concerned perform their respective functions under this order and report thereon as necessary, together with any recommendations, to the President and, as appropriate, the DNI and the head of the department concerned;

(d) receive and review information submitted by the DNI under subsection 7(c) of this order and make recommendations thereon, including for any needed corrective action, with respect to such information, and the intelligence activities to which the information relates, as necessary, but not less than twice each year, to the President, the DNI, and the head of the department concerned; and

(e) conduct, or request that the DNI or the head of the department concerned, as appropriate, carry out and report to the IOB the results of, investigations of intelligence activities that the IOB determines are necessary to enable the IOB to carry out its functions under this order.

Sec. 7. Functions of the Director of National Intelligence. Consistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the DNI shall:

(a) with respect to guidelines applicable to organizations within the intelligence community that concern reporting of intelligence activities described in subsection 6(b)(i)(A) of this order:

(i) review and ensure that such guidelines are consistent with section 1.7(d) of Executive Order 12333, or a corresponding provision of any successor order, and this order; and

(ii) issue for incorporation in such guidelines instructions relating to the format and schedule of such reporting as necessary to implement this order;

(b) with respect to intelligence activities described in subsection 6(b)(i)(A) of this order:

(i) receive reports submitted to the IOB pursuant to section 1.7(d) of Executive Order 12333, or a corresponding provision of any successor order;

(ii) forward to the Attorney General information in such reports relating to such intelligence activities to the extent that such activities involve possible violations of Federal criminal laws or implicate the authority of the Attorney General unless the DNI or the head of the department concerned has previously provided such information to the Attorney General; and

(iii) monitor the intelligence community to ensure that the head of the department concerned has directed needed corrective actions and that such actions have been taken and report to the IOB and the head of the department concerned, and as appropriate the President, when such actions have not been timely taken; and

(c) submit to the IOB as necessary and no less than twice each year:

(i) an analysis of the reports received under subsection (b)(i) of this section, including an assessment of the gravity, frequency, trends, and patterns of occurrences of intelligence activities described in subsection 6(b)(i)(A) of this order;

(ii) a summary of direction under subsection (b)(iii) of this section and any related recommendations; and

(iii) an assessment of the effectiveness of corrective action taken by the DNI or the head of the department concerned with respect to intelligence activities described in subsection 6(b)(i)(A) of this order.

Sec. 8. Functions of Heads of Departments Concerned and Additional Functions of the Director of National Intelligence.

(a) To the extent permitted by law, the DNI and the heads of departments concerned shall provide such information and assistance as the PIAB and the IOB may need to perform functions under this order.

(b) The heads of departments concerned shall:

(i) ensure that the DNI receives:

(A) copies of reports submitted to the IOB pursuant to section 1.7(d) of Executive Order 12333, or a corresponding provision of any successor order; and

(B) such information and assistance as the DNI may need to perform functions under this order; and

(ii) designate the offices within their respective organizations that shall submit reports to the IOB required by Executive Order and inform the DNI and the IOB of such designations; and

(iii) ensure that departments concerned comply with instructions issued by the DNI under subsection 7(a)(ii) of this order.

(c) The head of a department concerned who does not implement a recommendation to that head of department from the PIAB under subsection 4(b) of this order or from the IOB under subsections 6(c) or 6(d) of this order shall promptly report through the DNI to the Board that made the recommendation, or to the President, the reasons for not implementing the recommendation.

(d) The DNI shall ensure that the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency performs the functions with respect to the Central Intelligence Agency under this order that a head of a department concerned performs with respect to organizations within the intelligence community that are part of that department.

Sec. 9. References and Transition. (a) References in Executive Orders other than this order, or in any other presidential guidance, to the "President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board" shall be deemed to be references to the President's Intelligence Advisory Board established by this order.

(b) Individuals who are members of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under Executive Order 12863 of September 13, 1993, as amended, immediately prior to the signing of this order shall be members of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board immediately upon the signing of this order, to serve as such consistent with this order until the date that is 15 months following the date of this order.

(c) Individuals who are members of the Intelligence Oversight Board under Executive Order 12863 immediately prior to the signing of this order shall be members of the Intelligence Oversight Board under this order, to serve as such consistent with this order until the date that is 15 months following the date of this order.

(d) The individual serving as Executive Director of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board immediately prior to the signing of this order shall serve as the Executive Director of the PIAB until such person resigns, dies, or is removed, or upon appointment of a successor under this order and shall serve as the Executive Director of the IOB until an Executive Director of the IOB is appointed or designated under this order.

Sec. 10. Revocation. Executive Order 12863 is revoked.

Sec. 11. General Provisions.

(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) Any person who is a member of the PIAB or IOB, or who is granted access to classified national security information in relation to the activities of the PIAB or the IOB, as a condition of access to such information, shall sign and comply with the agreements to protect such information from unauthorized disclosure. This order shall be implemented in a manner consistent with Executive Order 12958 of April 17, 1995, as amended, and Executive Order 12968 of August 2, 1995, as amended.

(c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(d) This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

February 29, 2008.

More on the mercenary usage clusterfuck: TPM Muckraker

DoJ tells Congress: Prosecuting Blackwater for Nisour Square Shootings Will Be Mighty Difficult

By Paul Kiel - January 16, 2008

No surprise here:

Justice Department officials have told Congress that they face serious legal difficulties in pursuing criminal prosecutions of Blackwater security guards involved in a September shooting that left at least 17 Iraqis dead.

In a private briefing in mid-December, officials from the Justice and State Departments met with aides to the House Judiciary Committee and other Congressional staff members and warned them that there were major legal obstacles that might prevent any prosecution....

The officials from the Justice and State Departments “didn’t say they weren’t going to prosecute,” said one Congressional aide who attended the briefing. “They said there would be a lot of difficulties.”

To review: it's debatable whether Blackwater can even be prosecuted because they don't seem to be covered by any law. Beyond that, the State Department provided the Blackwater guards involved in the incident with limited immunity in order to get their version of events, thus further compromising the investigation. And don't forget that Blackwater quickly mended the trucks involved in the incident, destroying key evidence as to whether the guards were actually under attack when they opened fire (Blackwater says that State gave them the green light to do that).

So those are the difficulties. The DoJ did launch a grand jury investigation after the FBI determined that the guards had indeed opened fire without provocation. But don't hold your breath.

NDP supports legal brothels: stirs controversy

Despite having an $18 billion dollar surplus in the federal budget this year alone, not ONE penny, not one penny was sent to the cities of Canada to end poverty. Yet those crafty Canuck politicians can support this poverty-linked activity.

Help for those who have been sexually abused, those most likely to go into prostitution and the sex trades, have been set back by the closing down by several Canadian woman's centres, defunded by Steven Harper.

So this proposal has people up in arms for sure and it is an indication that Canadians politicians are looking for yet ANOTHER tax grab. For long term, the establishment of legal brothels only serves to undermine a stable society. They are breeding grounds for addiction and drug dealing. Oh, yeah, tell me that they will be policed - guess what they NEVER are. I've been to Amsterdam. I've seen the IV drug freaks on the sidewalk lined up OUTSIDE screaming at people to "buy their wares".

If you want to set up a new lumpenproletariat, there is no finer way to accomplish it than the commoditization and legalization of prostitution. I am not advocating huge criminal penalties for prostitution, merely pointing out the REAL HARD FACTS of what happens when you legalize it.

With the problems rampant in society TODAY, there is nothing more disheartening than to think that politicans have truly sunk this low in Canada. Let's just legalize a few more Robert Pickton events, shall we?? Let's let the poverty of the indigenous continue in BC shall we and not make continual noise about that. Let's see where this thinking all leads ...

And here is why

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'

Last Updated: 12:23am GMT 30/01/2005

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.

She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.

Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.

The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse.

When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer.

"There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases.

"The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."

Miss Garweg said that women who had worked in call centres had been offered jobs on telephone sex lines. At one job centre in the city of Gotha, a 23-year-old woman was told that she had to attend an interview as a "nude model", and should report back on the meeting.
Employers in the sex industry can also advertise in job centres, a move that came into force this month. A job centre that refuses to accept the advertisement can be sued.

Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits.

"Why shouldn't I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?" said Miss Ulyanova.

Ulrich Kueperkoch wanted to open a brothel in Goerlitz, in former East Germany, but his local job centre withdrew his advertisement for 12 prostitutes, saying it would be impossible to find them.

Mr Kueperkoch said that he was confident of demand for a brothel in the area and planned to take a claim for compensation to the highest court. Prostitution was legalised in Germany in 2002 because the government believed that this would help to combat trafficking in
women and cut links to organised crime.

Miss Garweg believes that pressure on job centres to meet employment targets will soon result in them using their powers to cut the benefits of women who refuse jobs providing sexual services.

"They are already prepared to push women into jobs related to sexual services, but which don't count as prostitution,'' she said.

"Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm...

Let the Justice Minister Rob Nicholson against this as well as the editors of local papers. If you live in Vancouver let the Mayor and council know you are against legal brothels and ask them what they are doing to eliminate street prostitution and brothels. At least one local media outlet has stated there are 600 brothels in the city so why haven't they been closed down?

h

Hill Office

House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6

Telephone: (613) 995-1547
Fax: (613) 992-7910
EMail: Nic...@parl.gc.ca
Web Site:* www.robnicholson.ca/
Preferred Language: English
Constituency Offices

2895 St. Paul Avenue, Unit 11 (Main Office)
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2J 2L3

Telephone: (905) 353-9590
Fax: (905) 353-9588

200 Garrison Road Unit 13
Fort Erie, Ontario
L2A 5F6

Telephone: (905) 871-9991
Fax: (905) 871-5046