The lying liars are lying to you about their lies and their claims that others are lying to you

Clear so far? Good.

Independent – The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war: A week after the US Defence Secretary criticised the media for ” exaggerating” reports of violence in Iraq, The Independent has obtained examples of newspaper reports the Bush administration want Iraqis to read. They were prepared by specially trained American “psy-ops” troops who paid thousands of dollars to Iraqi newspaper editors to run these unattributed reports in their publications. In order to hide its involvement, the Pentagon hired the Lincoln Group to act as a liaison between troops and journalists. The Lincoln Group was at the centre of controversy last year when it was revealed the company was being paid more than $100m for various contracts, including the planting of such stories… Criticising the media last week, Mr Rumsfeld said: “Much of the reporting in the US and abroad has exaggerated the situation… Interestingly, all of the exaggerations seem to be on one side…. The steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists.”

WebProNews – Bush Recommends Blogs: “Our major media don’t want to portray the good,” said a woman in the audience. “If the American people could see it, there would never be another negative word about this conflict.” … “One of the things that we have to value is that we do have a media,” answered the President. “There’s blogs, there’s Internet, there’s all kinds of way to communicate which is literally changing the way people get their information. So if you’re concerned I would suggest that you reach out to some of the groups that are supporting the troops, that got Internet sites and just keep the word moving.”

Short version: It’s the evil leftist media that is lying to you, not the Bush administration. The evil leftists wish us to fail in Iraq. The evil leftists wish the terrorists to succeed. The Bush administration has such poor control over the media that they need you to help them show the people the truth! Or the terrorists will win!

(ahem)

Meanwhile, in Fantasy Land, the fun continues…








Posted in It's War! It's Legal! It's Lovely! | Comments Off

ID Cards – please excuse the link-dump:

Spy Blog – The final vote on the Identity Cards Bill 2005 – Ayes 301 (including the Conservative front bench) Noes 84
NO2ID – ID Cards bill passes
BSSC – Official: It’s Compulsory
Perfect.co.uk – Anyone who opts out is foolish
BlairWatch – ID cards – now the lunacy is unleashed
Spy Blog – Identity Cards Bill betrayal in the House of Lords
NO2ID – Lords 29th March 2006, 17:00: Conservative treachery
Chicken Yoghurt – Our list of allies grows thin
Make My Vote Count – Lord have mercy
A great letter from yesterday’s Indy: The Labour manifesto commitment on ID cards was: “We will introduce ID cards … backed up by a national database and rolling out initially on a voluntary basis as people renew their passports”. The present Bill, however, would compel people to apply for an ID card when they renew their passport. In their attempts to link the Bill to the manifesto, the Government have come up with some shocking statements, such as “passports are voluntary documents”, “applying for a passport is matter of free will” and “this is not compulsion by stealth”. Far from blocking the Government’s manifesto pledge, as ministers claim (report, 29 March), the Lords have consistently attempted to amend the Bill to make it consistent with the manifesto. It is the Government’s heavily-whipped majority in the Commons which is being obstinate and unreasonable here, in refusing to accept any amendment whatsoever to the Bill. The Identity Cards Bill is an illiberal, arrogant, unnecessary piece of legislation. It grants enormous powers to the Home Secretary: but we are expected to believe the Government’s assurances that these powers will be used reasonably. The Government’s behaviour in attempting to railroad this Bill through shows what value we should place on these assurances.

Bloggerheads (June 15 2005): (T)he Act gave ministers the power to draw up an exclusion zone anywhere up to one kilometre from the Palace of Westminster. The map of the zone reveals Home Secretary Charles Clarke has used his new power to the full extent. To. The. Full. Extent. Remember that the next time someone speaks reassuringly about ID cards.

And now, a few words from the Sun, the only newspaper that continues to back ID cards, which laughingly begins by downplaying their role as the Downing Street Echo these past 9 years…

The Scum – Good ID: Charles Clarke often catches it in the neck over crime and illegal immigration – usually from The Sun. But the Home Secretary is entitled to be pleased after a breakthrough in the fight against both. The marathon battle over ID cards ended yesterday as the bill became law. There may be genuine fears about a scheme which, despite government denials, will eventually be compulsory. But whatever detractors claim, ID cards will help the fight against terror and organised crime. And by the time it’s up and running, every major country in the world will be following suit. We may even be able to stop evil sadists like Latvian murderer Viktor Dembovskis getting into the country.

UPDATE – Silicon.com – New ID cards agency set up after Queen approves bill: The government has wasted no time in starting work on the controversial ID card scheme after the bill became law this week, and has set up a new agency that will be tasked with introducing ID cards… Home Secretary Charles Clarke has already announced that the Labour government will make the scheme compulsory if it wins the next general election and a new agency to issue passports and ID cards has already been set up.








Posted in The War on Stupid | Comments Off

Hot Water

Don’t you find it a little odd that Mary Creagh, the Labour MP who is worried that we all might burn ourselves has never formally objected to a government that approves of boiling people alive? Perhaps she thinks that if she looks after the boo-boos, the murders will take care of themselves.

Meanwhile… the battle over ID Cards is hotting up and push is about to come to shove. (It would pay to keep an eye on the news, NO2ID and SpyBlog today and tomorrow.)

Meanwhile… I’ve heard back from a few people who have written to their MPs about Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, and there are two stock replies; supporters seek to reassure us that controls are in place (while wilfully ignoring the fact that the proposed bill is of the self-amending variety), and opponents tell us that they are indeed worried about the bill but don’t have any actual plans to fight it. (More here if you need it.)

Meanwhile… the parliamentary investigation into the loans scandal has been delayed by the police investigation.

Meanwhile… Non-Brownite Labour MPs with a brain/conscience scramble to find their testicles.

Meanwhile… our government’s involvement in Guantanamo bay looks deeper and sleazier by the day and Jack Straw plans to spend the weekend chumming up with a key player in the Bush administration. (They have a special relationship based on selective perception; Jack can read a memo entitled “Receipt of Intelligence Obtained Under Torture” and see no sign that torture is being used for our ‘benefit’ and Condi can read a report entitled “Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside the United States” and see no sign of a potential threat.)

Meanwhile… yet another uncomfortable moment in our government’s relationship with the Bush administration, heightened by the impending visit by one of their officials, has resulted in the release of a nasty little beastie that hasn’t enjoyed free reign since Bush came to town…. read Chicken Yoghurt on the ‘anti-American’ gambit – oh, and BlairWatch (and be aware that the ‘threat of violence’ and/or ‘protestors side with terrorists’ arguments cannot be too far behind).

Meanwhile… the slug in charge of the Home Office – the chap who thinks you should be detained without trial for up to 90 days so the police can ask you ‘a few questions’ and cynically uses victims of terrorism to justify such measures – has graciously allotted 10 minutes for a victim of terrorism, but only to diffuse the situation he created by being too sensitive/important/regal to answer questions himself.

Meanwhile… as anxiety over upcoming local elections builds (and signs do not look good), preparations are underway to cynically use the plight of hard-working local councillors who – in David Blunkett’s words – “are trooping the streets night after night in the endeavour to persuade people to vote Labour”… but we all know that a vote for these ‘innocent bystanders’ will be used and portrayed as an endorsement of Blair.

I’m sorry, but I’m not having any of it (and I’m not expecting the earth to be split asunder by the following announcement, I’m just letting you know where the line is for me).

Labour bods have until this weekend to rid us of this dangerous, abusive, self-serving, lying and murderous regime by any legal/democratic means possible.

If Monday does not bring a clear signal of their intention to deal with this problem with the urgency it requires, then – as far as I’m concerned – it’s all-out war on Labour during the local elections… starting *from* Monday.

No prisoners. No exceptions.

This shit must end.








Posted in Tony 'King Blair | 1 Comment

Was it a mistake?

Was it a mistake, or was it part of the plan? I’m going to ask that question again in a few moments, but first, this:

Blair and Howard are using their wagons to form a very small circle; “We must stand firm on Iraq.”

Jack Straw contributes with a new strategy document due for release today, which will maintain that the No. 1 threat we face is international terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

So not the current culture of torture, abuse and corruption that fuels and/or enables international terrorism, then?

Independent – Britain ‘complicit’ in human rights abuses at Camp Delta: All the detainees in the report consistently testified that UK authorities were aware of their plight and unwilling to intervene despite the knowledge that they were either at risk of torture or said they had been tortured. There is no suggestion British authorities played any part in torturing the detainees but the report does argue consistent co-operation between the US and UK has led to an “international chain of abuse” that flies in the face of the British government projecting itself as a leader in the field of human rights.

That report is here.

As for weapons of mass destruction… well, again, you’ll just have to wait for the question… and, again, we have a minor ‘distraction’ to get past first:

Y’see, the New York Times has more on the 2003 memo

NYT – Bush Was Set on Path to War, British Memo Says: During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons… The memo indicates the two leaders envisioned a quick victory and a transition to a new Iraqi government that would be complicated, but manageable. Mr. Bush predicted that it was “unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups.” Mr. Blair agreed with that assessment. The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation… “The U.S. was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in U.N. colours,” the memo says, attributing the idea to Mr. Bush. “If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach.” It also described the president as saying, “The U.S. might be able to bring out a defector who could give a public presentation about Saddam’s W.M.D,” referring to weapons of mass destruction. A brief clause in the memo refers to a third possibility, mentioned by Mr. Bush, a proposal to assassinate Saddam Hussein. The memo does not indicate how Mr. Blair responded to the idea.

Kevin Drum puts the latter points in perspective here; “Yes, that’s the president of the United States talking about deliberately faking a UN overflight in order to provoke a phony confrontation with Saddam – or if that didn’t work, trotting out a defector to lie about Iraqi WMD. Honor and dignity, baby, honor and dignity.”

There’s also Bush and Blair agreeing that it was “unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups” to deal with. I’ll give you a moment to reflect on that and Blair’s clearly stated position that he would do the same thing again if faced with the same circumstances.

(pause)

All done? Good.

Me, I want to backtrack to this: The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq.

And if they couldn’t find any in time, they would simply get a defector to lie about their existence.

It casts new light on this, does it not?

Guardian – Blair caught in Iraqi arms row (Feb 5 2004): Tony Blair’s credibility over his use of intelligence before the Iraq invasion came under fresh assault yesterday when he said that at the time of the war he was personally unaware that Saddam Hussein did not have the ability to fire long-range chemical and biological weapons… Mr Blair made clear that at the start of the war he had had no knowledge of the fact that the government’s infamous claim that Iraq could mobilise its banned weapons within 45 minutes of an order referred only to battlefield, as opposed to long-range, arms.

Remember what the Sun – the mouthpiece of Downing St – sold the public? That the weapons referred to in the carefully-massaged dossier could be launched on our troops in Cyprus. In 45 minutes. Amazingly, Geoff Hoon claimed that he had known the intelligence only referred to battlefield weapons but did nothing to correct media reports at the time because he was out of the country and therefore unaware of what Downing Street’s primary propaganda rag was printing.

So now it’s finally time for a repeat of that question:

Was it a mistake, or was it part of the plan?

To put it another way; was Blair incredibly incompetent or did he deliberately mislead Parliament?

A full and independent inquiry might finally provide an answer, but neither is a good one.








Posted in It's War! It's Legal! It's Lovely! | 3 Comments

Condi is coming to town

Condiwatch.co.uk – a response to Jack Straw’s invitation of Condoleezza Rice to the North West of England in March/April 2006








Posted in George W. Bush | 2 Comments

Your duty is clear

I would like to apologise to women everywhere… shortly.

First, there’s this:

I didn’t reach Page 45 of today’s Independent until Justin and Rachel brought it to my attention. I had other things on my mind this morning.

But I’ve read in now… and by Blair’s God it’s glorious!

To get to the guts of it now, you’ll need to click here and fork out, but it will be worth your time and money, I assure you.

This opinion-piece refers to this incident, also reported in the Telegraph and – quite tellingly – used as ammo by the Scum as part of their recent turnaround in a way that suggests that they either don’t know the meaning of the word ‘bereaved’, or couldn’t care less if a July 7 bomb victim is alive or dead (so long as her plight can be used to further their agenda).

Ah, yes… the apology. Getting to that…

Matthew Norman is of the opinion that only one word can be used to describe Charles Clarke; it is a word that Clarke himself (insert: reportedly/allegedly/supposedly) bandies about quite often, and is described as “the one word we are not allowed to use even in so grown-up a newspaper unless it comes wrapped in sanitising quotation marks”…

I am about to use that word now, and I want you to understand in no uncertain terms why I am using it in this way

It is a beautiful word that describes a beautiful thing… but then, the same could be said of words such as ‘liberty’ or ‘freedom’ (until such words drip from the lips of our ‘defenders’).

So (apology goes here) consider yourself warned; this word is about to be spat out in an ugly fashion as a nasty weapon against a nasty man who uses it in an even uglier fashion for far, far nastier means.

I am convinced that – if enough people use this word in this way – the world will soon become a more beautiful place.

Consider this a test of will for the battle to come…

Harden yourselves.

Prepare yourselves.

Begin your journey to a better life by letting the world know that Charles Clarke is a cunt.

Yes, you heard me… a cunt. Of the very lowest order.

That is all.

(Static link added to sidebar because I really, really, really gosh-darn mean it.)

UPDATE – For those who find this word a tad strong/improper, I suggest the following alternative: slug








Posted in The War on Stupid | 4 Comments

Yes, in your name

New York Times – In Secret Unit’s ‘Black Room,’ a Grim Portrait of U.S. Abuse: As the Iraqi insurgency intensified in early 2004, an elite Special Operations forces unit converted one of Saddam Hussein’s former military bases near Baghdad into a top-secret detention center. There, American soldiers made one of the former Iraqi government’s torture chambers into their own interrogation cell. They named it the Black Room…

Quite an anomaly, yes?

I bet you all feel safer now.

(Mirror here.)








Posted in It's War! It's Legal! It's Lovely! | Comments Off

If you must stay on your arse…

All those not going over the top should be submitting a story or project about sofas.

To answer a question that’s now been asked twice: I’m not on the judging panel, and the Terms & Conditions only stop two Friends of Bloggerheads from entering (those who helped to build the back-end and are therefore closely associated with the project).

Get writing, get shooting, get blogging.

Cheers all.

(Alternatively, you could spend the rest of the day playing the incredibly popular game Don’t Shoot The Puppy, which fell off its host yesterday, but is now mirrored here.)








Posted in Consume! | Comments Off

Blair: the head, the tail, the whole damn thing

As you can see, it’s a beautiful day, the beaches are open, and the folks here are having a wonderful time (and I’m sure you can guess which movie I watched last night)…

New Statesman – The men in grey suits must do their duty: Blair has to be persuaded to stand down. The announcement should take place this spring, with a leadership contest in the summer. (via)

I disagree. For the good of the Labour Party, for the good of the country, and for the good of the whole bloody world, Tony Blair must not leave Downing St voluntarily… and if he does, he must be forced to resign in shame. (And before anybody makes any smart-arse remarks about intervention, I would remind them that this measure is far from pre-emptive.)

Why? Because someone has to be called to account or the next batch of power-mad bastards – here or abroad – will think they can get away with exactly the same thing.

I’ll move onto the guts after a few stabs at the heel:

Blair is a pretty straight sort of a guy

BBC – Capita boss quits over Blair loan
BSSC – Crapita Protection Racket
BlairWatch – Was Rod Aldridge Going to Resign Anyway?
Independent – Contractor who lent Labour £1m quits over sleaze fears
Guardian – Capita chairman quits after criticism of loan to Labour

There’s a lot to say here this morning, so let me be brief about this particular issue; if the PM approves a scheme that sees a winner of major government contracts *approached* for a loan because it neatly sidesteps a law controlling donations (that they themselves championed; bully for them) then that is corruption. There’s no denying it.

Now we lunge for the guts, and we begin with bankruptcy…

The Blair-led coalition currently passing itself off as the face of the Labour Party is bankrupt in every sense of the word. Their finances, their morals, their authority… they have squandered it all and abandoned everything but the facade that keeps them in power.

And we continue to let them get away with it… to the point where soon they’ll be able to write their own laws without democratic oversight.

Your right to protest

If you got so mad about this (or anything else for that matter) that you decided to congregate at Downing St this afternoon to protest, there are already laws introduced by this government that allow the police to round you up and shut you up.

Take a look at Belarus and witness your future; it only took riot police 15 minutes to round up 200 protestors who – like may international observers – thought the election was more than a little fishy. But protestors first enabled the authorities by losing their will and dwindling in number. The media helped by ignoring or denouncing the initially 20,000-strong protest… police bullying, the weather and a lack of will did the rest. Then, finally, Lukashenko was confident that he could sort the whole thing out with a dustpan and brush.

Here I wish to make a quick point about precedent and accountability… Lukashenko knew that he would get away with this if he didn’t shoot anybody. Here’s why.

Now you need to take a moment and look at the worldwide numbers during the most recent protests over foreign policy and consider that we here in Britain only boast one man willing to stick to his guns (so to speak).

The media is to blame

Meanwhile, we are assured that the media never report any good news from Iraq and that this is what is causing all of the problems. (That, and people object to Blair ‘purely because they disagreed with him about Iraq’, so can’t we all please move on? For the sake of the Iraqis? Please?)

Bush claimed a day or so ago that this behaviour enabled the terrorists… the same terrorists that he created a playground for in that same country. Pretty neat trick, huh?

Bush and Blair use this same tactic when confronted with images of abuse and torture. Here’s a clue for you, Jack… if you think awareness of this kind of behaviour enables terrorists, then don’t employ these tactics in the first place!

For fuck’s sake…

(breathes)

We don’t do torture

And now, some more images of torture and abuse, deliberately released by leftist apologists as ammunition for the terrists:

Salon.com – The Abu Ghraib files: Three years and at least six Pentagon investigations later, we now know that many share the blame for the outrages that took place at Abu Ghraib in the fall of 2003. The abuse took place against the backdrop of rising chaos in Iraq. In those months the U.S. military faced a raging insurgency for which it hadn’t planned. As mortar attacks rained down on the overcrowded prison — at one point there were only 450 guards for 7,000 prisoners — its command structure broke down. At the same time, the pressure from the Pentagon and the White House for “actionable intelligence” was intense, and harsh interrogation techniques were approved to obtain it. Bush administration lawyers, including Alberto Gonzales and John Yoo, had already created a radical post-9/11 legal framework that disregarded the Geneva Conventions and other international laws governing the humane treatment of prisoners in the “war on terror.” Intelligence agencies such as the CIA were apparently given the green light to operate by their own set of secret rules. But while the Pentagon’s own probes have acknowledged that military commanders, civilian contractors, the CIA and government policymakers all bear some responsibility for the abuses, to date only nine enlisted soldiers have been prosecuted for their crimes at Abu Ghraib (see sidebar). An additional four soldiers and eight officers, including Brinson, Pappas and Army Reserve Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who was in charge of military police at Abu Ghraib, have been reprimanded. (Pappas and Karpinski were also relieved of their posts.) To date no high-level U.S. officials have been brought to justice in a court of law for what went on at Abu Ghraib.

And guess what? We were there, too. We also participated in Guantanamo. And allowed up to 73 planes to refuel in our country as the U.S. shipped an unknown number of suspects to countries where they could be tortured for our ‘benefit…. countries like Uzbekistan.

In my darker moments when I begin to lose hope and/or the hammering of willing media causes me to doubt my sanity, I often turn to this:

Team Blair pulled out all the stops to protect the drunken womaniser David Blunkett when he actually did naughty things with his penis that led to shady visa dealings… and even when he was brought down, Blair stood by him and said that he left office “with no stain of impropriety against him whatsoever”. But when then-ambassador Craig Murray refused to shut up about torture and murder conducted by our then-ally Uzbekistan, they pulled out all the stops to destroy him with false claims of drunkenness, womanising and shady visa dealings.

That says it all for me… Blair uses morals as a weapon to protect actions and polices that are morally repugnant (and just plain wrong, even in purely practical terms).

Respect the victims

In July 2005, I resisted the temptation to ‘respect’ the victims of the London bombings and let Bush and Blair have their wicked way with them and then posted this: On Thursday the 7th of July, both Tony Blair and George W. Bush climbed over the bodies of the dead, dying and wounded in order to claim the moral high ground. I’m sorry there isn’t a more pleasant way to say that; it’s just the way it is. They also used this atrocity to further cement their foreign and domestic policy. The same policies that prompt and/or enable such atrocities. In the process, they recruited human beings in no position to disagree with them . Sadly, this is not a first for Tony Blair.

It took a while for others to realise just how cavalier they could be about this, though the then-ally Scum newspaper woke a lot of people up when they hijacked a victim of terrorism to help Blair sell his 90-day detention plan. And they’re still at it now… showing that they don’t know or care if those victims are alive or dead… all that really matters to them is if a collective/individual plight can further their agenda.

Ditto for Blair. Here’s a fucking bombshell for you… he only ‘cares’ about victims when the cameras are rolling:

Rachel North – Ready to speak out: I have worked out that I gave my details out eleven times at least, possibly more, but by 24th October I was still, apparently, not on an official Department of Culture Media and Sport list of survivors, and nor were many other passengers. This is staggeringly incompetent: I and other people managed to climb out of a bombed train, find each other, look after each other, and now we have almost 100 survivors’ names and details. We have executed a successful media strategy, helped each other find counsellors, fill in compensation firms, find lawyers, medical help, dealt with hundreds of media enquiries, safeguarded ourselves from nutters and weirdoes trying to infiltrate the group, organised a 6 month memorial ceremony, set up a website, campaigned for a public enquiry, liaised with the police, all whilst holding down a day job and recovering from injuries and PTSD. And nobody has given us any funding: we haven’t asked for it we did it all by ourselves, for free. Meanwhile someone, somewhere has a salary or a grant and a job description that is about looking after victims of July 7th. I’d like to know what they are bloody well doing, frankly.

Chicken Yoghurt – Justify this: However you look at it, Rachel North and the other survivors of the July 7 bombings have been badly, inexcusably let down. They’ve had to fight for every scrap of help and recognition. I’d like to hear a government minister try and justify this. No doubt it’d be hand-wringing laments of being “unable to go into details of individual cases” and “things are improving” and “INSERT NON-SPECIFIC PLATITUDE HERE”. No wonder the Government don’t want a public inquiry into the bombings. Tales of the careless, aloof, unfeeling and incompetent treatment of these people are the last thing this grubby and limping administration needs right now.

Now I want to get back to loans and a different kind of bombshell… primarily because the paperwork seems to be above board.

Bear with me… you’ll need some background:

We don’t use chemical weapons

I shan’t bother you with tales of napalm. We knew it was being used in Iraq. Well, sensible people did. Blair’s team turned a blind eye and pretended to be surprised when it almost blew up in their faces. So to speak II. What I want to talk about is white phosphorus…

A white phosphorus round, when used only for illumination or screening, is a perfectly legal device. But when you use it as an anti-personnel device, it becomes a chemical weapon. Even the Pentagon agrees on this point… when they’re not using as an anti-personnel device in Iraq… erm… to stop a dangerous tyrant who supposedly had large reserves of chemical weapons and the will to use them.

Now, please pay attention, because I have not blogged this before, as I only have two sources and have not been able to pursue the matter… but I figure if I’m wrong, then John Reid will be in touch soon enough with the relevant legal papers and we can sort the whole thing out from there.

The first source was a soldier; one of Tony Blair’s true believers who – it must be pointed out – didn’t know who he was talking to. He was perfectly willing to go and fight and die for the ‘good cause’ in Iraq, even though (and I personally found this quite telling) he had no idea who Rupert Murdoch was. So I think it’s fair to say that he had no axe to grind.

He told me that all of the training paperwork and processes teach soldiers how to deploy white phosphorus for the purposes of illumination and/or screening. They learn how to store, load and fire the weapon in a way that is completely in keeping with the law. Then their corporals give them repeated informal briefings on how to use it to clear rooms, bunkers and trenches. Rooms, bunkers and trenches full of people.

But, of course, all of the paperwork seems to be above board.

The second source involved a confrontation with someone who should know about such things. And not a ‘friendly’, I should add. His response was to assure me that I would be sued from here to kingdom come if I dared to publish the claim. I noted the lack of denial (Boy, they are good at this, aren’t they?) and made my question more direct. No denial followed; only a rather graphic outline of what it would cost me if I published the claim.

So, here I am. It’s done. I’ve made the claim. Would anyone care to confirm or deny it? Or perhaps sue me to kingdom come? Perhaps John Reid would care to deny knowledge that it happens (all of the paperwork seems to be above board) and then act surprised when it turns out to be true.

This shit must end

All of these matters and more need to be addressed. Without fear. I say we that we should let the record show that Britain stood up for what’s right and gave Blair what for.

Yes, we may end up with an interim, crippled or Tory government as a result, but – at this stage – that’s better than what we have and more than we deserve.

One last time, folks…. over the top we go. And this time let’s finish the job.

Attention all troops

This is a formal call for an ammunition check. What have we got that we haven’t used? What have we got that can be used again? Count it, check it, and get ready to use it. Blair must fall.








Posted in Tony 'King Blair | 11 Comments

Guantanamo: Straw cornered into (limited) action on foreign nationals

It’s the ultimate job interview; the people wearing the white hats in the ‘war’ on terror will imprison you, abuse you and torture you until they find your mental and physical limits… and then they’ll offer you a job.

This makes sense to me… it’s all part of New Game (that’s the New Game with New Rules; where sometimes you have to torture bad people and sometimes you have to torture good people to find out who the bad people are).

But I did find it a little odd that they would imprison, abuse and torture someone who was already working for them.

Still, they know best… and if Jack Straw thinks that anyone who isn’t a British citizen (and is almost certainly a terrist) can rot in hell for all he cares, then who am I to arg*… wait a minute… what’s this….?

Independent – Straw to demand release of ‘MI5 man’ in Guantanamo after U-turn: In a foreign policy U-turn, Jack Straw has agreed to intervene in the case of a British resident who has been held in Guantanamo Bay for the past three years. The concession emerged during a court hearing yesterday after lawyers had alleged that the Iraqi-born businessman, who has lived in Britain since 1985, was an MI5 informer. Until yesterday Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, had said that the British government would not make any representations on behalf of American prisoners who were not British citizens. The Government maintains that – as foreign nationals – Bisher al-Rawi, Jamil el-Banna and Omar Deghayes have no legal right to the assistance they seek. But the judges heard yesterday that the Foreign Office had conceded that representations would be made to the US authorities for the release of Mr al-Rawi because of the particular circumstances of his case. His lawyers said afterwards that the decision to intervene was only an expedient way of avoiding the publication of sensitive information about MI5’s relationship with Mr al-Rawi.








Posted in It's War! It's Legal! It's Lovely! | Comments Off