I’ve seen the Bing search engine promote Tony Benn’s funeral to the top 3 searches, while the BBC coverage almost hide’s the funeral! For god’s sake, people cheered and applauded with gratitude in the streets as the coffin went past! There was NO jeering.
Many people on social media have commented that the Tory government is manipulating the news output through changing the hire & fire of those that run the corporation to tory supporters and lobby groups. This is readily apparent today, when comparing the BBC output for the funeral of a revered MP, Tony Benn, to that of Thatcher, the former leader, loathed and derided my millions. See Mike, for instance.
Benn, top 3 on Bing!
Many on Facebook and Twitter have pointed out this difference. So I checked an alternate stream…. the load page of Bing (Microsoft’s search engine). That’s it here.
You will see that the top 3 web searches are (were):
Ukraine IMF Bailout
Tony Benn Funeral
Obama meets Pope
BBC Hide, BBC Change?
BBC Shove It
I was hoping to get some screenshots of the search results, but since I started typing, the results are now driving the BBC up the rankings! (Initially, the BBC was not to be seen!)
I can only assume that this is due to some BBC editorial decisions following on from a myriad of postings onto the BBC FB and Twitter pages of photo memes and comments like this one.
Here’s Benn’s summarised. Follow the links through. Thick crowds, not the thin cold lines at Thatchers, all guarded and marshalled by thousands of police.
You have to ask, why such a difference? The answer is obvious, but you won’t find the BBC expanding on it. Only latterly has this belated report come out, now snuggled down and buried under the 2 year fudge of an enquiry into energy business prices. It says,
A large crowd holding trade union and anti-war banners lined the route of his funeral cortege.
There were tears and sustained applause as the procession arrived at St Margaret’s Church, yards from the House of Commons.
So why the subterfuge? Matt Cole in small print says,
You could tell Tony Benn’s coffin had arrived at St Margaret’s before you could see it – because loud spontaneous applause broke out.
Yeah right. Too late Matt. Just too damned late. You should have less fear. They cannot hurt you by speaking the truth out loud right from the off. Now’s the time to take a hold of the BBC and make it what it should be – after all – we all pay for it.
The lowest common denominator mentality is alive and well in Glorious Britain. “Most people” (according to a man-in-the-street soundbite on the BBC News yesterday, so it must be true) now think benefit scroungers are the ruin of the nation and treated like dogs. Truly – the news article used this man to justify the April 1st cuts.
Also, at the last count, over 58,000 would be quite happy for the couple in this screenshot to be strung up, bashed to death in prison, hung drawn and quartered, dumped in the streets of Derby – you get the idea.
Deeply Disturbing Doubts
But this looks really bad to me.
Q. Oh! How so? You saw the telly last night, didn’t you?
Well actually, that’s part of the point.
How is it that just a few hours after the three convictions for parents Mick and Mairead Philpott, and their friend Paul Mosley, how is it that three main TV channels are running in-depth full length investigations into the three and the deaths?
How is it they all have recorded interviews with witnesses and others that knew the threesome?
How is it that the police, weeks ago, released secretly recorded audio of the threesome while the trial was in progress?
How is it that the Daily Mail ties the child deaths and lifestyles of the threesome to the benefit scrounging ethos of the recently introduced welfare cuts?
I’ve Seen It All Before
The media hysteria and manipulation of facts we’ve all seen before. How do the 58k Facebook lynch mob so easily forget this?
Daily Mail Headline Change After Vile Benefits Murder Comments Backlash
Like the cowards that the Daily Mail is, it punches up nasty headlines to get the sales, gets a backlash, then can’t stand by its own words – so changes them. Here’s how:
Initial Headline and URL
DM Initial Welfare Headline
The URL for this page is http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303120/Mick-Philpott-vile-product-Welfare-UK-Derby-man-bred-17-babies-milk-benefits-GUILTY-killing-six.html- but just try clicking it!
You’ll find that you are redirected to a wholly different page, similarly designed but with a different headline. Click Here to try. The original page that you should go to is on the right.
Redirected page with New Headline
DM Redirected Welfare Headline
If you clicked the link you’ll be taken here, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303120/Mick-Philpott-Judge-hears-good-father-awaits-sentencing-killing-SIX-children-house-blaze.html which looks like this image on the left.
But let’s thank goodness that Facebook wasn’t around in 2002 so that dishy doll psychos like Michelle Keegan couldn’t spill their vile venom under the disguise of public comment. She now has a more recent one saying “This cunt needs hanging share if you agree”
Obviously. I’m a Buddhist.
Also obviously, the man as presented and as I see him, and the others likewise, are the pits. But this does not deserve a witch hunt with thousands up and down the country baying for their private parts to be burnt in oil. Those doing so should better beware.
Faulty Convictions Abound
Because British justice has a long running habit of throwing curved balls. For the last few decades we’ve seen a continuous stream of high profile murders and atrocities, where;
Philpott et al certainly appear as scum, guilty of the deaths of their children.
But give it time. The spotlight glare into which the case has been placed coupled to the hysterical benefit-loaded media commentary give good grounds for a flawed judicial process.
At the time of Timothy Evans conviction, a similar media frenzy was in place.
Similarly for the Birmingham Pub (not) Bombers
and Judith Ward the M62 (not) bomber
All of these (and more) have had long drawn out media frenzies where the hang ’em and flog ’em brigade appeared, just as now, like a syphilis from the sewers of unclean thoughts. They should be better than that, better than a killer.
Folks should learn from history. Getting hot and bothered now will not resurrect the dead children.
Public Breast-beating Over Middleton Paparazzi Photos
You must understand that there is no news today.
Everything is celebrity, sport and royal in the UK.
Everyone has a media correspondent, a sports correspondent and a royal correspondent.
Reporters just report on the latest twitter feed. No-one searches.
There are several aspects to this boob photos media blizzard.
There’s the mass media almost to a man, fawning and groping at half truths.
There are many ordinary people wondering what’s going on.
We now have several (mainly establishment types) people making exaggerated claims about the camera location. Well, I’ve checked.
The photos were NOT taken “over a mile and a half away”, nor “well over a mile” away, nor “about a mile away”, nor “from a long way off, in private woods”, but about half a mile away. The house is clearly visible, along with the windows, railings and garden stuff that appear in the photos on Google Maps Streetview.
I’ve chosen a point ~ 900m from the building as one of many good vantage points. Go down now to see it.
If I used my hand-held camera taking a shot, I could see the whites of the eyes…. Yes really! To demonstrate — here are two pictures that show the capability of my hand-held Panasonic Lumix, DMC-TZ30.
Be careful when clicking as I’ve uploaded the shots at full resolution. Once loaded, click the little green arrow to see the pictures in all their full-size glory – you will need to scroll both vertically and horizontally to find the yacht when on full-size.
They are hand-held, on a normal day, just like many of my recent shots from my recent French vacation. I have many high-res scenic shots – I’ll have to check them through – who knows what I’ll find LOL.
No Zoom: There’s a Yacht here – Can you see it? Click to see just how really small it is.
20x Optical Zoom of Yacht – Now can you see it? Click and you’ll see a tanker in the background which I couldn’t see at all with the naked eye. These two shots and more are visible at lower resolution here on Christine’s Beach Hut.
If someone was on the yacht, I could see them. The boat is several miles offshore – nearly on the horizon actually! So don’t let the Streetview shot below fool you – the house is a lot closer than it looks, even from the position I’ve chosen here. It is only 900 metres away!
The house is dead centre in this link. So it is a private house visible in public, much like me in my bedroom at night with the curtains open, okay? My camera could have easily shown them doing anything. Easily. Yet if I can be easily seen in my bedroom at night (i.e. clearly a private place as they keep repeating) I can get done for indecent exposure? Right?
Hopefully, by seeing the capability of my own camera in conjunction with a normal Streetview of the area, you can now see how incongruous the claims that this is a private place actually are?
The firstworldwar.com website shows the standard issue British rifle in WW1 as having guaranteed accuracy up to 600m. This had no optical scope, just sights to be used by a normal man. This means a kill shot at 600m, not just wounding, which shows the hand/eye/gun precision easily possible from anyone. 900 metres doesn’t look so far now, eh?
I also remember reading in “With a Machine Gun to Cambrai”, the author George Coppard saying that he picked off men at a similar range with just one or two rounds from his heavy machine gun. This is despite the juddery nature of a heavy machine gun.
At that time, Diana and Fergie had caused much embarrassment with their girlie antics. Charlie’s behaviour outside the public face of marital fidelity was well known and became ever-more detailed as time passed. Phil the Greek was his usual self and scandal after scandal built up until the Castle burnt down. So that was that – then.
Now we have Harry getting his kit off to the amusement of the world (in a €6000 a night hotel suite on a serviceman’s salary, note), but being dismissed as “just letting off steam but must be more careful in future”. And almost synchronously in time with Harry, it now appears, Kate & Wills feel so assured in their new-found popularity that they can do anything. They certainly have the money for it.
But you know – they can’t.
If they want the esteemed position that they publicly project and behind which the combined forces of a fawning mass media enforce, then they must behave like it. They cannot behave like normal holidaymakers and not expect a come-back no matter how “ordinary” Kate was supposed to have been. You can’t be a “highness” and not expect attention? They cannot say and do anything – for one thing, our constitution forbids it!
For another, the public will hate it and they need the public much more than we need them.
Why don’t they all just go away? I won’t mind a bit. Maybe this’ll be a turning point as the penny drops?
Privacy – What Privacy? – added 18/9/2012
The BBC has now leapt onto my referencing Google Streetview as an aid to showing relative privacy. Of course, the devil-in-the-detail of this is not mentioned as I’ve done above.
BBC Copies Me – Chateau d’Autet Click image for BBC webpage
But that’s not my point here, is it? Neither is my point that criminal proceedings are now starting. My point is that for all of us….
Our Own Privacy is Zilch.
We are (or will be):
Subjected to full intimate body scans at airports by faceless private “agencies”
Have our emails and web activity saved and analysed at leisure by faceless private “agencies”
Followed down every street, across every junction, inside every shop by CCTV “security” cameras run by faceless private “agencies”
Have our phones tapped by faceless private “agencies”
Have our shopping habits monitored by faceless private “businesses”
Have our finances, credit cards, driving licences all cross-referenced ad infinitum with our passports, our insurances, our taxes and more – by faceless private “agencies”
…and all of this is done to us while the few that own these “agencies” and “businesses” flaunt their wealth, hide their money, holiday in their tax havens, pay no taxes, are as secret and private as they choose to be, collude to manage information and the law, and then have the audacity to tell us how to behave. Royalty is just the icing on top of a very rich cake…..
And here’s where more hypocrisy creeps in as those reversions to type are conveniently forgotten.
As we all know, Charles, William’s dad, was knocking off Camilla his mistress both before and during his marriage to Diana, Wills’ mother. Much like Edward VII & Langtry. All of the UK knows this. Now Camilla is supposed to be “accepted”, according to our fawning press. A few grannies during the jubilee said she looked nice….well that’s it then!
Yet in France, for years the hobbled press kept secret the facts of former President Mitterrand’s mistress and his second family….a bit like secret polygamy, but in a Catholic country….? Yet millions get their kit off in summer all over France?
Clearly, French privacy is wholly different to the British version. I can get done for undressing while forgetting to shut the curtains, but in France my privacy to do this is upheld?
Ye-es I hear Paxman saying again.
Media Guff and Fawn
So how can we accept protestations about “rightness” from these people when nothing is said about actions and happenings either then or now which go clearly against their public statements and media view of their lifestyle?
If the next likely Prince of Wales, Wills, turns out like other former Princes of Wales’, do we wash it away but say that sensationalistic reporting of public/private sunbathing “hotties” is wrong?
Because a “hottie” is what Kate is – she’s smart, apparently intelligent, elegant and (most importantly for the press), hot in a swimsuit – as earlier photos revealed. (Remember the debate in all the papers about who was hotter, Kate or Pippa? Of course you do, but you’d forgotten, hadn’t you?).
The success of the Daily Mail website hangs on her and other sensationalist voyeuristic shots of hundreds of “hotties” – here’s today’s Kate article; note the HUGE list down the right for articles, near half of which are for scantily clad women.
The comments at the bottom, like I said, for the most part, go totally against the fawning theme of the piece. One repeats the mile and a half lie so that mud has stuck again.
Indeed, for those with long memories, the video at the bottom harps on about Berlesconi’s ownership of the magazines and his publication of Diana’s car photos “minutes after the accident”.
Now, maybe you remember that following Diana’s crash, The Daily Mail solemnly pledged never to use paparazzi photos again?
Yet virtually all the links down the right of any Mail page are paparazzi pictures! They have to be – they’ve sacked nearly everyone and the paper would fold without them.
Porn Baron Protests and Threatens to Close Magazine!
It’s the Irish one that’s interesting! It’s co-owned by Richard (Dirty) Desmond, who besides running UK TV’s Channel 5 and publishing the Daily Express and tit paper The Daily Star, also runs porn channels Red Hot TV and Television X. This growth was part financed by selling off his earlier publishing business which included such salubrious titles as Asian Babes and Readers Wives. Notably, his celebrity magazines of OK! and New! are full of paparazzi photos……. like, dah?
Now, to top it all, Desmond has said he wants the Irish paper closed….. – 17 Sep – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19621188 He must be after a knighthood or something because his history shows that prurient disapproval is not one of his strong-points. It’s laughable.
The lady (and Desmond) doth protest too much, methinks. – Hamlet
Mass Media Princely Support, Public Split
Checking the comments following news reporting, I note a two-thirds majority telling Kate to keep her kit on if she doesn’t want to be rumbled. This is despite the media claiming “over-whelming condemnation” or whatever.
It’s just simply not there. Most of the public aren’t swallowing it.
Sooner or later there will be a backlash against the Royals if they keep this up. Let well alone, it’d have blown over, much like Harry’s knob-tastic exposures. But keeping it going, on and on, using their inherited and publicly provided wealth to pursue legal redress shows them seriously out of touch with the common mood, no matter how much the mass media are beefing them up.
The recent Hilsborough revelations show that media collusion is not a new thing.
Tits and Bums
A lot of people are behaving like bums or making a tit of themselves.
Those in “the establishment” are doing what those in the establishment normally do, which is to fawn and whine, pontificate and lie, all to keep ranks under the firm expectation of a gong at some point.
Then there are the “granny types” who all think she’s lovely and that the queen does a marvellous job.
There’s a few who see it as an attack on women, part of the objectification of women that’s happened for millenia and has now gone past saucy postcards, through Page 3 and porn mags (like Dirty Desmond’s) to full on ubiquitous internet porn and the gyrating phone girls on Freeview. (All very valid, but not my gist)
Then there’s everyone else!
These are in two camps, I think;
those that don’t care either way but think the royals should think themselves lucky to get free holidays and trips and well looked after for the whole of their lives
BEE DIGITAL MEDIA LIMITED (also has website bee-digital.co.uk)
Kate Middleton Topless Photos – Prince William and Kate Suing Publication
Apart from that, there are loads of others. One that caught my eye was a website called Divided States, a US political site. They had a web-page here, http://www.dividedstates.com/kate-middleton-topless-photos-prince-william-and-kate-suing-publication/ which they’ve now pulled. How coy.
Fortunately, the Google Cache shows us this – the full copy of their original posting – click here or the screenshot for the cache. (full image available on request)
So am I a tit or a bum?
Is Oliver above?
Is Berlesconi? Berlesconi certainly has gripes with the UK following his latin faux-pas with the queen and others….? Maybe he’s publishing just for revenge?
Wills, with his experience, has behaved like a knob. He should have known better. He slipped up, which is a possible explanation for the rapid response unit being thrown into action. It was notably absent following the Harry incident.
But really, what everyone has totally forgotten, is the old adage:
Don’t throw stones when you live in a greenhouse.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks. – Hamlet
For now, Assange will have to stay in the Embassy. Ecuador has asked for assurances about his safe passage, but as it stands, Hague and Cameron look the foolish chumps for what they are and won’t back down.
My guesses, are:
That Assange will have a “mysterious” accident or similar and the nasty people in the world will breathe a sigh of relief – the embassy is no doubt bugged and all communications in and out religiously monitored. His undetected escape looks unlikely. Food, drink or water could be tampered with; holes could be drilled, hypodermics, germs or gas through the walls – who knows? Like a Sherlock Holmes/locked room mystery, try the poisoned ice dart through the keyhole? See http://wramsite.com/forum/topics/breitbart-murder-by-heart-attack-the-cost-of-exposing-our-corrupt and http://youtu.be/tzIw44w00ow CIA Whistleblower talks about Heart Attack gun
Assange will have to wait for a change in UK government. Even so,
should he get a plane to Ecuador it can be shot down (remember the start of the Rwandangenocide?).
Should he get a boat, it can “disappear” in a storm…
Should he arrive safely he can be either murdered in secret or by a public presidential decree – remember Trotsky in Mexico, Allende in Chile, Che Guevara in Bolivia, Bin Laden in Pakistan, Rudolf Diesel on the English Channel?
At low level of current probability, those in charge of the USA and UK must fundamentally change their attitude towards freedom of information and accountability in public office.
The emails etc. which are at the real centre of Assange’s troubles show elected and non-elected officials behaving with scant regard to either their own laws, international laws or natural law.
It is for them to recognise this which will allow Assange back into normal society and thus face the law courts in Sweden.
As I said, a very, very low probability in the current climate since those in power, those in the emails, those on the tapes, those on the videos (like the machine gunning of innocent civilians), all of those need to recognise their culpability at worse, or at least that they’ve been shown to have acted like idiots and now have egg on their face.
Reminder: The Initial Swedish Set-up
Forgetting the secret US indictment from over a year ago revealed in the Stratfor secrecy emails, Sweden issued an arrest warrant, then dropped it, then “sort-of” reopened the investigation before barring Assange from Sweden? I know. You work it out. It’s all detailed succinctly in this Telegraph page from June 2012.
Bizarrely though, this Foxnews rant/explanation from Glenn Beck (both not noted for their liberal stance…!) is even better at describing the events for which Assange was arrest warranted with in Sweden. Pay close attention and you’ll see how what we are now being fed by Hague and the Obama administration is seriously at odds with this very precise investigation and summary made soon after the events in question… http://youtu.be/npBvNJl6X9w
Ecuador’s Key Points
An English translation of the eleven key points, derived from The Dissenter, is here:
Julian Assange is an award-winning communications professional internationally for his struggle for freedom of expression, press freedom and human rights in general;
That Mr. Assange shared with the global audience was privileged documentary information generated by various sources, and affected employees, countries and organizations;
That there is strong evidence of retaliation by the country or countries that produced the information disclosed by Mr. Assange, retaliation that may endanger their safety, integrity, and even his life;
That, despite diplomatic efforts by Ecuador, countries which have required adequate safeguards to protect the safety and life of Mr. Assange, have refused to facilitate them;
That is certain Ecuadorian authorities that it is possible the extradition of Mr. Assange to a third country outside the European Union without proper guarantees for their safety and personal integrity;
That legal evidence clearly shows that, given an extradition to the United States of America, Mr. Assange would not have a fair trial, could be tried by special courts or military, and it is unlikely that is applied to cruel and degrading , and was sentenced to life imprisonment or capital punishment, which would not respect their human rights;
That while Mr. Assange must answer for the investigation in Sweden, Ecuador is aware that the Swedish prosecutor has had a contradictory attitude that prevented Mr. Assange the full exercise of the legitimate right of defence;
Ecuador is convinced that they have undermined the procedural rights of Mr. Assange during the investigation;
Ecuador has found that Mr. Assange is without protection and assistance to be received from the State which is a citizen;
That, following several public statements and diplomatic communications by officials from Britain, Sweden and USA, it is inferred that these governments would not respect the conventions and treaties, and give priority to domestic law school hierarchy, in violation of rules express universal application and,
That, if Mr. Assange is reduced to custody in Sweden (as is customary in this country), would start a chain of events that would prevent the further protective measures taken to avoid possible extradition to a third country.
What’s clear is that Ecuador is actually in a win-win situation here.
LONDON, ENGLAND – JUNE 22: outside the Ecuadorian embassy.(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)
They recognised the sabre rattling of William Hague and David Cameron for what it is – that the UK cannot pick and choose which international treaties to abide by without acquiring the severest opprobrium of its own people and parliament.
Of course, there’s the “sticks and stones” argument which the government may ignore by barging in, armed to the teeth, anyway, but also the long-lasting risks to the whole British diplomatic force who will be placed in the severest of danger. This latter they cannot ignore.
How can the UK pontificate on others when behaving worse than a bull in a china shop?
Ecuador has its own internal problems and this crisis will strengthen the hand of its President Correa, but also its standing in the eyes of all the little countries of the world, especially those in South America, historically in the thrall of US might.
They point out that Assange is only wanted for questioning in Sweden and that Sweden has refused to question Assange on Ecuadorian “land”, the embassy.
They point out the red herring issue of Sweden in its entirety, in that several public and private threats have been made or allured to against Assange by the governments of Sweden, USA, UK and that his own country hasn’t offered any protection (of course, we all know that the Aussie government is following the UK & USA like sheep).
So Assange is in dire and immediate threat of kidnap, torture, summary trial by a military court, execution or imprisonment in inhumane conditions. We all know the USA is guilty of this having been caught red handed several times as has the UK in its collusion.
So the UK & USA are not havens of justice, guardians of the rights of Man, protectors from dictatorships nor international peacemakers.
Their actions from Vietnam through to Chile, from Egypt through to Bahrain, from corrupt banking to multinational deforestation programs, from Stratfor and the secret surveillance society to drone bombings of civilians shows them to be pariah states on the same footing as Zimbabwe or North Korea, say.
Ecuador has rightly recognised all of this, and more.
As part of their statement, they stood on the following points (derived from Google translate!):
a) The asylum, in all its forms, is a fundamental human right which creates obligations erga omnes, that is, “for all” states.
b) The diplomatic asylum, shelter (or territorial asylum), and the right not to be extradited, expelled, delivered or transferred, human rights are comparable, since they are based on the same principles of human protection: no return and no discrimination without any adverse distinction based on race, colour, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, or any other similar criteria.
c) All these forms of protection are governed by the principles pro person (i.e., more favourable to the individual), equality, universality, indivisibility, interrelatedness and interdependence.
d) The protection occurs when the state of asylum, refugee or required, or the protecting power, consider the risk or the fear that the protected person may be a victim of political persecution or political offences against him.
e) The State granting asylum seekers qualify causes, and in case of extradition, assess evidence.
f) No matter which of its forms or forms are present, the seeker is always the same cause and the same legal order, ie, political persecution, which causes it lawful, and safeguard the life, personal safety and freedom of protected person, which is the lawful purpose.
g) The right to asylum is a fundamental human right, therefore, belongs to jus cogens, ie the system of mandatory rules of law recognized by the international community as a whole, do not support a contrary agreement, being null treaties and provisions of international law they oppose.
h) In cases not covered by the law in force, the human person remains under the protection of the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience, or are under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience.
i) Lack of international agreement or domestic legislation of States can not legitimately claim to limit, impair or deny the right to asylum.
j) The rules and principles governing the rights to asylum, extradition no, no delivery, no expulsion and transfer are not converging, as far as is necessary to improve the protection and provide it with maximum efficiency. In this sense they are complementary international law of human rights, the right to asylum and refugee law, and humanitarian law.
k) The rights of protection of the human person are based on ethical principles and values universally accepted and therefore have a humanistic, social, solidarity, welfare, peaceful and humanitarian.
l) All States have the duty to promote the progressive development of international law of human rights through effective national and international action.
Here they kick down the quasi-judicious use by the UK of the 1987 Act regarding Embassies and the like in the UK.
They state the various rights of Man as defined in the United Nations and elsewhere (in case the UK has forgotten them!!!)
They point out the various ethical issues.
Ecuador has produced a clear and unambiguous statement, totally unlike the shadowy cloak and daggers stuff from Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States of America.
United pops up a lot in the state’s names. They’re united, but only united in shame and devilishness corruption. This is the reason for their stance – it’s nothing to do with national security and everything to do with covering their own backs.
The truth is really out now. Notably, bonkers Boris has been quiet on the issue so far – he never thought much of Cameron and I guess it’s even less now!
Declaración del Gobierno de la República del Ecuador sobre la solicitud de asilo de Julian Assange
Embarrassment is not it though. The real reason is our discovery of Straw & Blair’s hypocritical dealings over wars and torture, kidnap and illegal detention without trial, things that Straw’s government, and now our own coalition one, seek to hide. That’s a deep guilt.
Was it guilt over the knowledge that as he was the head of an unaccountable web of spies, they were doing everything that any free democratic nation would naturally think abhorrent?
That’s the special relationship for ya! Straw brought in the US-UK one-sided extradition agreement in 2003. The following yearhe and Blair were found out to have started the war in Iraq on false pretences. There then followed the endless investigations that dragged on for so long that folks forgot what they were about.
A collusion between the military, the law and politics from the establishment, designed to legally obfuscate by the dreary analysis of the minutiae of the webs of illegality they’d hatched?
We now find out, in the same year, 2004, that Straw and Blair were (supposedly) in government, Fatima Bouchar and her husband, Abdel Hakim Belhaj were captured, bound in gaffa tape (her eyelid bound open for 17 hours during this process), kidnapped and transported to a foreign power (Libya) where they were tortured and imprisoned for seven years.
Straw said he knew nothing, so what exactly was he paid for? Was he a stooge, a calm reassuring personae, quietly acquiescing to misdeeds on the grandest of scales in exchange for lifelong protection and a nice pension?
Abdel is now in the ruling government of Libya, having fought and beaten Gaddhafi, with The West’s help, let’s not forget….
Cover Up Illegal Government Work by Invoking Secret Trials, “in the national interest”!
Killer Drone Aircraft
It’s all true. Our own (and the US) secret services kidnapped and transported innocents from our own and foreign soils to foreign powers. This was all done without the intervention of a judge, without court orders and in many cases (those in Guantanamo Bay for instance), without any immediate or subsequent trial. They’re still doing it!
Bush, Cheney, Obama, Blair – their handiwork – it is estimated that >3ooo civilians have been killed by drones
The only difference between the recent actions of Jack Straw, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Blunket, Teresa May, Ken Clarke & David Cameron, and the historical actions of Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao and Adolf Hitler are that in the former, there’s been no trial and the people are still alive, and in the latter there were usually show or peremptory trials usually followed by immediate execution.
Though life is precious, today’s innocents (innocent unless proven guilty, remember) may have at times wished they were dead.
The targets have no chance to surrender, and the Afghan government has raised concerns. The drone strikes are dubbed ”Kill TV” or ”Taliban TV” because soldiers watch live video feeds of bombs and missiles detonating, with one source admitting it is uncomfortable viewing: ”You can see everything.”
Because the real devilish forces, whereby a supposedly civilised country like the United Kingdom can kidnap and torture with impunity, still exist. Pregnant Fatima Bouchar was not a terrorist and nor was her husband. Their terrifying ordeal at the hands of our secret service stands testament to that.
These are the real devils in our midst. They are the real terrorists. Under false pretexts they continue to bomb civilians with drones and kidnap and torture those they can’t kill. Though from different political persuasions, successive governments draft laws cover up the previous one’s actions.
What an evil nasty bunch they are. Cameron and his crowing cohorts are just the latest in a long line.
MPs and judges can retire to fully indexed-linked pensions, unlike the rest of the public sector workers who have been recently brutalised and scape-goated in the press for the thieving behaviour of gambling banker-politicians.
MPs and judges are protected from harm by the very secret services they’ve steered and governed while the rest of us are made
to feel fear at home, where none exists
to feel loathed abroad, when we have done nothing
All due to the evil machinations of these few folk.
The Real Reason for Secret Trials and Internet Censorship
Question: Why Pictures of Drones and Dead Innocents, Yet not many Kidnaps?
A. Simple. It’s the same mentality of person that sends in the drones to kill innocents as kidnaps innocents. In fact, it’s the same people. They stand there smiling on our TVs, in suits, with the appropriate amount of gravitas dependant on the situation.
The real devils in our midst. The real terrorists.
Over the last couple of days the strangest thought has plagued me. Two simple ugly words have kept emerging, only for me to lock them out and ridicule them as bizarre. Simon’s dead. Just to write it down feels like … Continue reading →
If you ever needed confirmation that the UK is not run by a shadowy cabal of sinister plotters but a bunch of chinless fucking idiots then the upcoming Digital Economy Bill is a good place to start. As well as … Continue reading →