You sleazy, lying, paranoid delusional criminal terrorist scumbags Bush and Blair, You can run, but you cannot hide from the truth. The world's Bloggers ara a comin' after ya! Woooo Ha!
Count me in!
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Blair Bush Al Jazeera Bomb Account... Watch this space!
You sleazy, lying, paranoid delusional criminal terrorist scumbags Bush and Blair, You can run, but you cannot hide from the truth. The world's Bloggers ara a comin' after ya! Woooo Ha!
Count me in!
Monday, November 28, 2005
There is no longer any justification for this
The invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq now has no legitimacy whatsoever. Lofty aims and claims of disarming Saddam of his WMD and then of spreading democracy have now been shown to be cruel deceptions.
The ever changing rationale for entering and then staying in Iraq cannot hide one underlying truth. Pre-emptive invasion of a non-threatening sovereign state is immoral, unethical, illegal and evil.
The invasion did not disarm Saddam, he was already disarmed, as our intelligence prior to the war suspected. Not one single pre-invasion claim of Saddam retaining his WMD capability has stood up to scrutiny. NOT ONE! In fact, every claim that he was was disproved BEFORE the invasion happened.
So we had to invade to protect the Iraqis from their brutal dictator. Saddam was another Hitler, threatening the entire world. This was bullshit too! Claims of his putting people through meat grinders proved to be just as false as his fantasy WMD arsenal. Yes he was a brutal dictator, but no worse than many, many others in the world, yet still, he was not a threat to us and in fact was becoming less dictatorial with every year that passed. As he feared assasination, he was becoming more and more reclusive and spent the majority of his time writing awful romance novels.
Now the UK/US have illegally invaded a nation that was no threat, used chemical weapons against civillians, set up torture facilities where innocent people where tortured to death and now we have, former Iraq Prime Minister, Allawi coming out and saying that the situation for Iraqis is now worse than under Saddam Hussien!
When will this madness end with the public trials of Tony Blair and George W Bush?
Saddam's trial rightly continues today, Bush' and Blair's MUST follow soon!
The ever changing rationale for entering and then staying in Iraq cannot hide one underlying truth. Pre-emptive invasion of a non-threatening sovereign state is immoral, unethical, illegal and evil.
The invasion did not disarm Saddam, he was already disarmed, as our intelligence prior to the war suspected. Not one single pre-invasion claim of Saddam retaining his WMD capability has stood up to scrutiny. NOT ONE! In fact, every claim that he was was disproved BEFORE the invasion happened.
So we had to invade to protect the Iraqis from their brutal dictator. Saddam was another Hitler, threatening the entire world. This was bullshit too! Claims of his putting people through meat grinders proved to be just as false as his fantasy WMD arsenal. Yes he was a brutal dictator, but no worse than many, many others in the world, yet still, he was not a threat to us and in fact was becoming less dictatorial with every year that passed. As he feared assasination, he was becoming more and more reclusive and spent the majority of his time writing awful romance novels.
Now the UK/US have illegally invaded a nation that was no threat, used chemical weapons against civillians, set up torture facilities where innocent people where tortured to death and now we have, former Iraq Prime Minister, Allawi coming out and saying that the situation for Iraqis is now worse than under Saddam Hussien!
When will this madness end with the public trials of Tony Blair and George W Bush?
Saddam's trial rightly continues today, Bush' and Blair's MUST follow soon!
Friday, November 25, 2005
Why? because we trusted lunatics?
So we went into a destructive, deadly debacle in Iraq because Saddam Hussien had WMD and was using them on his own people and torturing his own people to death.
Except; he didn't have them, and we've used them on his own people and, despite them having a very poor version of democracy, now Iraqi's are still being tortured to death.
Was it because we trusted in the paranoid delusions of lunatics?
How can we prevent the next mistake?
./ later
Except; he didn't have them, and we've used them on his own people and, despite them having a very poor version of democracy, now Iraqi's are still being tortured to death.
Was it because we trusted in the paranoid delusions of lunatics?
How can we prevent the next mistake?
./ later
A News Revolution Has Begun
by John Pilger
The Indian writer Vandana Shiva has called for an "insurrection of subjugated knowledge." The insurrection is well under way. In trying to make sense of a dangerous world, millions of people are turning away from the traditional sources of news and information and to the World Wide Web, convinced that mainstream journalism is the voice of rampant power. The great scandal of Iraq has accelerated this. In the United States, several senior broadcasters have confessed that had they challenged and exposed the lies told about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, instead of amplifying and justifying them, the invasion might not have happened.
More ...
by John Pilger
The Indian writer Vandana Shiva has called for an "insurrection of subjugated knowledge." The insurrection is well under way. In trying to make sense of a dangerous world, millions of people are turning away from the traditional sources of news and information and to the World Wide Web, convinced that mainstream journalism is the voice of rampant power. The great scandal of Iraq has accelerated this. In the United States, several senior broadcasters have confessed that had they challenged and exposed the lies told about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, instead of amplifying and justifying them, the invasion might not have happened.
More ...
Thursday, November 24, 2005
More proof of delusions? Are they mad?
In a follow up to my last post, I have linked to an article from the mainstream media, USA Today. This article is a must read. It shows clearly that the US Administration did NOT lie about Iraq's WMD. Much worse, they genuinely believed their own paranoid delusional fantasies and were determined and succeeded in launching a terrible war of conquest and then destruction upon a sovereign nation that was no threat.
*NOTE The mainstream media SHOULD have been reporting this information all along, as I and hundreds of other bloggers WERE telling these truths as they came to light. During these last 2-3 years the mainstream media have been slagging off and ridiculing the blogs when we were doing THEIR JOB!!! Now they come clean(ish) and propose to tell us what we already knew all along. The mainstream media were still complicit in passing the government propaganda, without qualification, to the people as truth. They were NOT duped by the administration, or the intelligence services, they complied with them. Further, they would often not report the doubts that the intelligence community were raising prior to the invasion! I welcome the very late conversion of the mainstream media to reporting what really happened, (www.whatreallyhappened.com have already been doing this for some years as have rense.com, informationclearinghouse.info, prisonplanet.com davidicke.com antiwar.com amongst many others ) But now they need to look at the genuine, unanswered questions relating to 911 too, especially the controlled, pre-planned demolition of WTC7 and the prior arranged, multiple 'miitary exercises' taking place that day under the direct control of VP Dick Cheney. We are often told 'the world changed on 911, and 911 is constantly used to validate the on-going destruction of civil liberties at home, and creation of terrorist threat abroad. When the truth of 911 is generally acknowledged as an 'at least' assisted inside job engineered, or allowed, to succeed by the Neo-con cabal. Then, prehaps, the whole phoney war-on-terror house of cards may come crashing down and end this nightmare of delusion, destruction and death.*
I used to believed that Bush and Cheney lied us to war, and I argued that they were warned of the lack of evidence to support their arguments about Iraq's WMD and yet they continued to push those discredited and debunked claims. Thus supporting my argument that they deliberately lied.
I was wrong.
For them to lie, they would have to know that what they were saying was not true. They were told on many occasions by the UN, foreign intelligence and their own CIA, NSA and others that what they were claiming was not supported by evidence on the ground. That the intelligence could not be corroborated. However, they refused to even acknowledge for a nanosecond, that anything other than their fantasies could ever be real. They genuinely could not accept and therefore did not hear anything that contradicted their pre-created fantasy.
Worse, they created offices within the administration, The Office of Special Plans (under Rumsfeld), The Whitehouse Iraq Group (Under Cheney) that cherry picked and molded intelligence around their own delusional plans. How far did they go to create the reality they believed had to be real? The aluminum Tubes story was total nonsense and the Yellowcake Uranium from Africa was based on a known forgery, but still they believed this self-generated hallucination. The Mobile labs, were in fact Hydrogen balloon inflators, this was easily discoverable, they only had to look at the British receipts! Every single claim made by the administration in public in support of their fantasy world was very quickly proven wrong. How far did the administration go to create their reality? Was Valerie Plame outed as a CIA agent because her team uncovered and prevented the neo-cons from illegally smuggling WMD into Iraq to frame Saddam?
Like a teenager on LSD believing he could fly, they threw themselves off the roof of reality.
They did not therefore lie, but what they did do was far worse, they created policy that ultimately took us to a continuing quagmire of death and destruction based on their paranoid delusion. The Bush/Cheney administration in Washington and the Blair Government in London are not mentally fit to hold office. They are mentally unstable. In earlier, pre-politically correct days, they would be called lunatics. They are psychotic megalomaniacs with paranoid delusions and persecution complexes, add this to the Resident in thief's messianic delusion, linked to an over-compensation to his inferiority complex, and drug/alcohol brain damage and you get an administration that should not have control of a TV remote, let alone the worlds Weapons of Total Destruction.
They should be locked up in secure padded cells for their own, and for the rest of the planet's, safety.
The danger here is that if the level of delusional fantasy needed, (by the collective lunacy of the UK/US administrations), is one that has already created the disastrous Iraq war, then what's next?
These guys NEED to be locked up and QUICK!
Give me a liar over a lunatic everytime.
*NOTE The mainstream media SHOULD have been reporting this information all along, as I and hundreds of other bloggers WERE telling these truths as they came to light. During these last 2-3 years the mainstream media have been slagging off and ridiculing the blogs when we were doing THEIR JOB!!! Now they come clean(ish) and propose to tell us what we already knew all along. The mainstream media were still complicit in passing the government propaganda, without qualification, to the people as truth. They were NOT duped by the administration, or the intelligence services, they complied with them. Further, they would often not report the doubts that the intelligence community were raising prior to the invasion! I welcome the very late conversion of the mainstream media to reporting what really happened, (www.whatreallyhappened.com have already been doing this for some years as have rense.com, informationclearinghouse.info, prisonplanet.com davidicke.com antiwar.com amongst many others ) But now they need to look at the genuine, unanswered questions relating to 911 too, especially the controlled, pre-planned demolition of WTC7 and the prior arranged, multiple 'miitary exercises' taking place that day under the direct control of VP Dick Cheney. We are often told 'the world changed on 911, and 911 is constantly used to validate the on-going destruction of civil liberties at home, and creation of terrorist threat abroad. When the truth of 911 is generally acknowledged as an 'at least' assisted inside job engineered, or allowed, to succeed by the Neo-con cabal. Then, prehaps, the whole phoney war-on-terror house of cards may come crashing down and end this nightmare of delusion, destruction and death.*
I used to believed that Bush and Cheney lied us to war, and I argued that they were warned of the lack of evidence to support their arguments about Iraq's WMD and yet they continued to push those discredited and debunked claims. Thus supporting my argument that they deliberately lied.
I was wrong.
For them to lie, they would have to know that what they were saying was not true. They were told on many occasions by the UN, foreign intelligence and their own CIA, NSA and others that what they were claiming was not supported by evidence on the ground. That the intelligence could not be corroborated. However, they refused to even acknowledge for a nanosecond, that anything other than their fantasies could ever be real. They genuinely could not accept and therefore did not hear anything that contradicted their pre-created fantasy.
Worse, they created offices within the administration, The Office of Special Plans (under Rumsfeld), The Whitehouse Iraq Group (Under Cheney) that cherry picked and molded intelligence around their own delusional plans. How far did they go to create the reality they believed had to be real? The aluminum Tubes story was total nonsense and the Yellowcake Uranium from Africa was based on a known forgery, but still they believed this self-generated hallucination. The Mobile labs, were in fact Hydrogen balloon inflators, this was easily discoverable, they only had to look at the British receipts! Every single claim made by the administration in public in support of their fantasy world was very quickly proven wrong. How far did the administration go to create their reality? Was Valerie Plame outed as a CIA agent because her team uncovered and prevented the neo-cons from illegally smuggling WMD into Iraq to frame Saddam?
Like a teenager on LSD believing he could fly, they threw themselves off the roof of reality.
They did not therefore lie, but what they did do was far worse, they created policy that ultimately took us to a continuing quagmire of death and destruction based on their paranoid delusion. The Bush/Cheney administration in Washington and the Blair Government in London are not mentally fit to hold office. They are mentally unstable. In earlier, pre-politically correct days, they would be called lunatics. They are psychotic megalomaniacs with paranoid delusions and persecution complexes, add this to the Resident in thief's messianic delusion, linked to an over-compensation to his inferiority complex, and drug/alcohol brain damage and you get an administration that should not have control of a TV remote, let alone the worlds Weapons of Total Destruction.
They should be locked up in secure padded cells for their own, and for the rest of the planet's, safety.
The danger here is that if the level of delusional fantasy needed, (by the collective lunacy of the UK/US administrations), is one that has already created the disastrous Iraq war, then what's next?
These guys NEED to be locked up and QUICK!
Give me a liar over a lunatic everytime.
Friday, November 18, 2005
I wanted to write this:
In this article, Justin Raimondo, again, succintly and with a deft attention to detail, manages to put into one column, what I would take 10 to cover in equal depth. Kudos to Justin.
I would simply take minor exception to one point. As I have come to realise over the recent past, reading as I have on the 'non-reality based' philosophy of the neo-cons, that the neo-cons did not actually lie us to war at all.
No, it is worse than that. For the situation to become as it is now, the neo-cons would either have had to not realise and be genuinely in error about the WMD and reception of the iraqis to the western invaders and so prove themselves to be too stupid to hold office, or they lied or worse, they knew they were wrong, but genuinely convinced themselves that they were right and so are dangerously delusional.
They claim that they are so big and powerful that they create the reality on the ground, international law and foriegn and domestic observers be damned! But when their delusional reality is tested by ACTUAL reality, there fake, wishfull thinking version becomes a disaster. Their delusions account for, 'no civilians targetted with white phosphorus', as there were no civilians in Fallujah. They were all enemy combatants in a free-fire zone. Unfortunately for the women, children, babies, elderly and infirm, the white phosphorus was only too real.
What we have in America and the UK at this time is not lying neo-cons, or sadly, even stupid neocons, but dangerously powerful, paranoid delusional neocons with nukes. These people are psychologically unfit to hold any position of power or influence anywhere in the world. I wouldn't even give them the remote control to the TV.
Shame the 25th ammendment only applies to the president and not the whole lunatic bunch of the neocon nutjobs. That include the neo-cons in the Senate, Congress, Parliament and the media too.
They have all rushed this world closer to the brink of a nuclear WW3 based on their paranoid delusions, creating fake terrorism, 911, 7/7, Afghanistan, Iraq, a global backlash against imperialist USA/UK et al in their wake.
Thankfully, we are just starting to see the beginning of the end for these psychopaths.
As the Plamegate controversy starts to eat away at their base and support like a cancer, I agree with Justin, Fetch the popcorn!
./ later.
I would simply take minor exception to one point. As I have come to realise over the recent past, reading as I have on the 'non-reality based' philosophy of the neo-cons, that the neo-cons did not actually lie us to war at all.
No, it is worse than that. For the situation to become as it is now, the neo-cons would either have had to not realise and be genuinely in error about the WMD and reception of the iraqis to the western invaders and so prove themselves to be too stupid to hold office, or they lied or worse, they knew they were wrong, but genuinely convinced themselves that they were right and so are dangerously delusional.
They claim that they are so big and powerful that they create the reality on the ground, international law and foriegn and domestic observers be damned! But when their delusional reality is tested by ACTUAL reality, there fake, wishfull thinking version becomes a disaster. Their delusions account for, 'no civilians targetted with white phosphorus', as there were no civilians in Fallujah. They were all enemy combatants in a free-fire zone. Unfortunately for the women, children, babies, elderly and infirm, the white phosphorus was only too real.
What we have in America and the UK at this time is not lying neo-cons, or sadly, even stupid neocons, but dangerously powerful, paranoid delusional neocons with nukes. These people are psychologically unfit to hold any position of power or influence anywhere in the world. I wouldn't even give them the remote control to the TV.
Shame the 25th ammendment only applies to the president and not the whole lunatic bunch of the neocon nutjobs. That include the neo-cons in the Senate, Congress, Parliament and the media too.
They have all rushed this world closer to the brink of a nuclear WW3 based on their paranoid delusions, creating fake terrorism, 911, 7/7, Afghanistan, Iraq, a global backlash against imperialist USA/UK et al in their wake.
Thankfully, we are just starting to see the beginning of the end for these psychopaths.
As the Plamegate controversy starts to eat away at their base and support like a cancer, I agree with Justin, Fetch the popcorn!
./ later.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
The UK committed war crimes in Iraq too
This is more evidence of the mandacity, the lies and the evil depths to which our leaders have sunk.
We have liberated Iraq from an evil dictator to let them live under an avalanche of Crime, rapes, murders, kidnappings, terrorism and with a worse supply of power, food, water and medicines than under Saddam Hussien, We have used, or supported the use of, internationally banned chemical weapons against civillians.
Don't give me shit about white phosferous NOT being a chemical weapon! it's a chemical and it's a weapon! It's a fucking chemical weapon. PERIOD!!!
We are told by the Pentagon and the UK MOD and the UK Defense Secretary that these were not used against civilians, well that is PURELY a matter of cowardly and sickening semantics.
The US Military, supported by the UK military, cut off the water, sanitation, power and medication to an entire city. They then attacked the hospital, killing patients and doctors and nurses, this in itself was a warcrime. They then prevented women, children, elderly and disabled people from leaving the city. They shot and killed almost everything that moved, destroying Mosques, Clinics, museums and cultural and humanitarian facilities on their way to the total destruction of 75% of the city.
The US and UK uses weasel words to defend it's indefensible actions, words like enemy combatants, and free-fire zone. do you want to see an enemy combatant?
Here's one after the US finished with it:
After all those infants are a fearful enemy. A 300lb Marine with automatic weapons, air support, armoured vehicles and white phosferous needs to be very carefull with such a poweful enemy!
The whole city was turned into a free-fire zone, meaning that everything within the city and out including the Euphrates river, was thought of as having NO CIVILIANS in it. Women, children, babies, the elderly, the disabled, cats, dogs and any other living entity within Fallujah, whether a fighter or not, was DESIGNATED BY THE US AS AN ENEMY COMBATANT AND THEREFORE AS A LEGITIMATE TARGET!
the rules of engagement for a free-fire zone are "KILL EVERYTHING!!!"
Undoubtedly, there were civilians in Fallujah and they were targeted and killed with a weapon (that uses the effect of it's chemical interaction with the air to burn anything it meets so long as there is air present) that has also been banned by laws signed by many countries throughout the world.
Cowardly, deliberately misleading weasel words notwithstanding, civilians were targeted and killed with an internationally banned chemical weapon in Iraq by US troops supported by the US and UK Governments!
What happened in fallujah was as serious a war-crime as it gets (short of using nukes), and we are trying Saddam Hussien for lesser things right now.
ANYBODY that even attempts to describe what happened there as legal, necessary or right is a supporter of war crimes and is an enemy of humanity. Pure and Simple!
./later
We have liberated Iraq from an evil dictator to let them live under an avalanche of Crime, rapes, murders, kidnappings, terrorism and with a worse supply of power, food, water and medicines than under Saddam Hussien, We have used, or supported the use of, internationally banned chemical weapons against civillians.
Don't give me shit about white phosferous NOT being a chemical weapon! it's a chemical and it's a weapon! It's a fucking chemical weapon. PERIOD!!!
We are told by the Pentagon and the UK MOD and the UK Defense Secretary that these were not used against civilians, well that is PURELY a matter of cowardly and sickening semantics.
The defence secretary said he could not answer for the US use of the substance.
But he said: "We do not use white phosphorus, or indeed any other form of munition or weaponry, against civilians...
"We do not use it for anything other than a smokescreen to protect our troops when in action."
A smokescreen to defend the political crimes against humanity commited in Fallujah more like. Fallujah was a civilian center that was also home to Iraqis who believed they were fighting for their homeland against foreign invaders, much as I would similarly fight against anyone who invaded the UK. This is not praise or glorification of the resistance fighters, as many of their acts of violence and depravity can never be condoned or supported in any way, the City was a den of thieves and criminals and violent evil people. However it was also home to thousands and thousands of innocent civilians too, many of whom fled before the attacks, but many of whom also never managed to escape and were killed when they attempted to do so.
The US Military, supported by the UK military, cut off the water, sanitation, power and medication to an entire city. They then attacked the hospital, killing patients and doctors and nurses, this in itself was a warcrime. They then prevented women, children, elderly and disabled people from leaving the city. They shot and killed almost everything that moved, destroying Mosques, Clinics, museums and cultural and humanitarian facilities on their way to the total destruction of 75% of the city.
The US and UK uses weasel words to defend it's indefensible actions, words like enemy combatants, and free-fire zone. do you want to see an enemy combatant?
Here's one after the US finished with it:
After all those infants are a fearful enemy. A 300lb Marine with automatic weapons, air support, armoured vehicles and white phosferous needs to be very carefull with such a poweful enemy!
The whole city was turned into a free-fire zone, meaning that everything within the city and out including the Euphrates river, was thought of as having NO CIVILIANS in it. Women, children, babies, the elderly, the disabled, cats, dogs and any other living entity within Fallujah, whether a fighter or not, was DESIGNATED BY THE US AS AN ENEMY COMBATANT AND THEREFORE AS A LEGITIMATE TARGET!
the rules of engagement for a free-fire zone are "KILL EVERYTHING!!!"
Undoubtedly, there were civilians in Fallujah and they were targeted and killed with a weapon (that uses the effect of it's chemical interaction with the air to burn anything it meets so long as there is air present) that has also been banned by laws signed by many countries throughout the world.
Cowardly, deliberately misleading weasel words notwithstanding, civilians were targeted and killed with an internationally banned chemical weapon in Iraq by US troops supported by the US and UK Governments!
What happened in fallujah was as serious a war-crime as it gets (short of using nukes), and we are trying Saddam Hussien for lesser things right now.
ANYBODY that even attempts to describe what happened there as legal, necessary or right is a supporter of war crimes and is an enemy of humanity. Pure and Simple!
./later
Who bombed the Jordanian hotels?
Take a good look at this image:
supposedly this was the aftermath of a suicide bomber with an explosive belt tied to his chest. OK how come the tables where not blown to bits? it seems unlikely to me that the tables were moved there after the blasts and then placed in a crimescene.
The blast is powerful enough to rip a human to shreds, blast through the ceiling of the room, but, yet, not disturb the tablecloth? and how considerate of the suicide bomber not to get any of his blood on the walls. Oh, and how considerate of the Jordanian security forces to evacuate all the Israeli guests, but why did they forget the Jordanian guests or the other nationalities:
However, the other article appeared earlier and in my opinion is more reliable due to the fact that the other evidence in this case refutes later testimony and media assertions.
This LA Times article states:
The patsy is created and led before the worlds media so that we know who to blame.
Dig deeper people, the truth is not so hard to find. This was a wet false flag psy-op to create support, in the west, for the war on terror.
See This article for more...
./ later
supposedly this was the aftermath of a suicide bomber with an explosive belt tied to his chest. OK how come the tables where not blown to bits? it seems unlikely to me that the tables were moved there after the blasts and then placed in a crimescene.
The blast is powerful enough to rip a human to shreds, blast through the ceiling of the room, but, yet, not disturb the tablecloth? and how considerate of the suicide bomber not to get any of his blood on the walls. Oh, and how considerate of the Jordanian security forces to evacuate all the Israeli guests, but why did they forget the Jordanian guests or the other nationalities:
33 Jordanians
6 Iraqis
2 Bahrainis
1 Saudi
1 American
1 Indonesian
2 Chinese
(Note, no Israeli's in that list from the bbc website)
This Haaretz article denies the earlier claims.
(Note, no Israeli's in that list from the bbc website)
A number of Israelis staying yesterday at the Radisson SAS were evacuated before the bombing by Jordanian security forces, apparently due to a specific security alert. They were escorted back to Israel by security personnel.
This Haaretz article denies the earlier claims.
However, the other article appeared earlier and in my opinion is more reliable due to the fact that the other evidence in this case refutes later testimony and media assertions.
This LA Times article states:
The image at the top of this article clearly shows the aftermath of an explosive planted ABOVE the room, Israelis are forwarned and evacuated,
Amos N. Guiora, a former senior Israeli counter-terrorism official, said in a phone interview with The Times that sources in Israel had also told him about the pre-attack evacuations.
"It means there was excellent intelligence that this thing was going to happen," said Guiora, a former leader of the Israel Defense Forces who now heads the Institute for Global Security Law and Policy at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. "The question that needs to be answered is why weren't the Jordanians working at the hotel similarly removed?"
 |  |
The patsy is created and led before the worlds media so that we know who to blame.
Dig deeper people, the truth is not so hard to find. This was a wet false flag psy-op to create support, in the west, for the war on terror.
See This article for more...
./ later
What a load of CRAP!
ITN News: Jack Straw shocked by Baghdad abuse allegations
7.59AM, Wed Nov 16 2005
OK so Mr Straw is shocked? really? I wonder why he hasn't expressed the same outrage against VP Dick Cheney? It is Cheney after-all that wants the CIA to be exempt from torture.The Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has condemned the alleged abuse of 170 detainees held by Iraqi security forces in Baghdad.
He said he was "deeply shocked" after US troops discovered the malnourished inmates at an interior ministry detention centre on Sunday.
Washington has also said it's troubled by the discovery after some of the inmates were found to be showing signs of apparent torture. Iraqi's prime minister has ordered a full investigation.
He said: "Such behaviour is totally unacceptable. I very much welcome the immediate investigation announced by Iraqi prime minister Ja'afari today and his confirmation that such practices are completely contrary to Iraqi government policy.
"Whoever carried out this abuse must be caught and brought to justice, regardless of rank or background. We look forward to seeing the results of this investigation as soon as possible.
"Steps must be taken to prevent this sort of incident happening again."
Or what about the President, GW Bush?
Those limitations do not extend to the CIA, however. Citing “national security”, the Bush administration has vigorously argued that the CIA be excluded from the restrictions. Bush has threatened to veto a Senate bill to ban torture - McCain is its chief proponent.Jack straw should, perhaps, aim his shock and revulsion at the administration that supported and encouraged torture in the first place.
Now I ask myself, Why did we replace Saddam and in what way are Iraqis better off?
Friday, November 11, 2005
Remember
Today at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month we fall silent to remember the sacrifice of our forefathers who gave their lives to defeat tyranny and fascism. To fight against police states, to fight against detention without trial, to fight against states that use torture and murder as a main plank of policy.
I Remember those heroes and their fight. As the UK and the US routinely use intelligence taken from torture victims, use internationally banned chemical weapons against civilians and desperately attempt to gain total surveillance and detention without trial here, I think their fight continues; not in a physical or violent way, but in a democratic way.
Those MP's who voted against the detention without trial are continuing that fight and those heroes who sacrificed so much for so many would, I believe, be rightly proud that their sacrifice has not been wasted.
Never forget, Never Give Up, Never Surrender.
I Remember those heroes and their fight. As the UK and the US routinely use intelligence taken from torture victims, use internationally banned chemical weapons against civilians and desperately attempt to gain total surveillance and detention without trial here, I think their fight continues; not in a physical or violent way, but in a democratic way.
Those MP's who voted against the detention without trial are continuing that fight and those heroes who sacrificed so much for so many would, I believe, be rightly proud that their sacrifice has not been wasted.
Never forget, Never Give Up, Never Surrender.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
How delusional can they be?
So now the UK Labour party cabinet believe that Blair's authority has been enhanced by losing the terrorism vote and being kicked in the balls by his own back-benchers!
If anyone can explain to me how this can be, email me, because according to John Reid, Bliar's reputation and authority is enhanced when he loses votes. Sorry, I just don't get it!!!
Interestingly, John Major survived 5 years with a much smaller majority, and even a minority government for a while and only lost 4 votes in all that time, That was after an economic recession, and a 4th election victory.
By contrast, Blair with a majority of 66 has been defeated after a few months.
He is a weaker and poorer leader than John Major. Any one can seem like a strong leader with a Government majority of 160+ as were Blairs first two terms.
Of course the Labour party barely won the election anyway with 35% of the voting electorate and only 22% of the adult population supporting Blair, a massive majority went against Blair at the election. He only got 66 seat majority due to the skewed seating boundries that gave labour 60+ seats based on what could have been equal vote numbers against the tories. had the boundries been accurate, labour should have a minority Government.
Blair is now a wounded lame duck with no real power, his political future is in the hands of his back-benchers and he has ZERO authority. The Blatant lies and arrogance of the Labour cabinet will turn even more people off labour.
It was breath-taking arrogance and sleaze that finished the tories. Labour are already much worse than the tories at their worst.
How can the cabinet ministers who trotted out onto the media's screens today say what they do with a straight face? How stupid do they think we are?
I am just glad that I am now, finally, witnessing the end of the delusional, discredited, disrespectful, venal, dishonest, corrupt, obnoxious, catastrophic, quasi-fascist murdering criminals, hell bent on invading a country that was according to their own internal, draft dossiers, NO THREAT TO US OR IT'S OWN NEIGHBOURS!
Now they are sliding slowly into their own pit of paranoid delusional incomprehensible lies and ultimately their own destruction, I am satisfied and enjoying watching their slow demise. When they hit the bottom and are thrown from power under a wave of public revulsion, we should charge them with their crimes and bring them to justice.
I urge all people who have agreed with my writing in the past, to manifest this reality for themselves too. Believe in it. It IS happening.
./later
If anyone can explain to me how this can be, email me, because according to John Reid, Bliar's reputation and authority is enhanced when he loses votes. Sorry, I just don't get it!!!
Interestingly, John Major survived 5 years with a much smaller majority, and even a minority government for a while and only lost 4 votes in all that time, That was after an economic recession, and a 4th election victory.
By contrast, Blair with a majority of 66 has been defeated after a few months.
He is a weaker and poorer leader than John Major. Any one can seem like a strong leader with a Government majority of 160+ as were Blairs first two terms.
Of course the Labour party barely won the election anyway with 35% of the voting electorate and only 22% of the adult population supporting Blair, a massive majority went against Blair at the election. He only got 66 seat majority due to the skewed seating boundries that gave labour 60+ seats based on what could have been equal vote numbers against the tories. had the boundries been accurate, labour should have a minority Government.
Blair is now a wounded lame duck with no real power, his political future is in the hands of his back-benchers and he has ZERO authority. The Blatant lies and arrogance of the Labour cabinet will turn even more people off labour.
It was breath-taking arrogance and sleaze that finished the tories. Labour are already much worse than the tories at their worst.
How can the cabinet ministers who trotted out onto the media's screens today say what they do with a straight face? How stupid do they think we are?
I am just glad that I am now, finally, witnessing the end of the delusional, discredited, disrespectful, venal, dishonest, corrupt, obnoxious, catastrophic, quasi-fascist murdering criminals, hell bent on invading a country that was according to their own internal, draft dossiers, NO THREAT TO US OR IT'S OWN NEIGHBOURS!
Now they are sliding slowly into their own pit of paranoid delusional incomprehensible lies and ultimately their own destruction, I am satisfied and enjoying watching their slow demise. When they hit the bottom and are thrown from power under a wave of public revulsion, we should charge them with their crimes and bring them to justice.
I urge all people who have agreed with my writing in the past, to manifest this reality for themselves too. Believe in it. It IS happening.
./later
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Rejoice, yet beware
Rejoice that the House of Commons has finally found the will to be democratic. Blair defeated, now let's impeach him and try him for war crimes.
However, let's not loose sight of the fact that the extent of the detainment without charge within our quazi-police state has just been doubled.
If this law passes, Innocent people can be removed from society, without being charged of any crime, for 28 days.
Blair has tried to drag the UK further into a totalitarian police state. He has used the problem reaction solution tactic, and terrorism (sponsored by elements within our own security services) to try to justify it. It is a tactic dictators have used for centuries. Our Historic Parliament has given a small way in to this, but stopped at full complience. Let's hope they can do even better with ID cards and other draconian and un-necessary legislation and reject that outright.
I am very happy tonight, but, We are actually closer to the total police state, but the commons has, at least, slowed the charge.
./ later
However, let's not loose sight of the fact that the extent of the detainment without charge within our quazi-police state has just been doubled.
If this law passes, Innocent people can be removed from society, without being charged of any crime, for 28 days.
Blair has tried to drag the UK further into a totalitarian police state. He has used the problem reaction solution tactic, and terrorism (sponsored by elements within our own security services) to try to justify it. It is a tactic dictators have used for centuries. Our Historic Parliament has given a small way in to this, but stopped at full complience. Let's hope they can do even better with ID cards and other draconian and un-necessary legislation and reject that outright.
I am very happy tonight, but, We are actually closer to the total police state, but the commons has, at least, slowed the charge.
./ later
It's time for honesty
The LA Times article shows the US and UK LIED about iraq's WMD. The mainstream media ought now to grow the balls to actually ask questions of the liars and publicly hold them to account for their lies. Not ask them a question and accept their answer as truth, but the actually listen to the answer and ask themselves, hang on, does this tie in with what we already know to be true?
For example, let's not get lost in this bullshit about intelligence failures!
THE INTELLIGENCE DID NOT FAIL! IT WAS ACCURATE! IT SAID THE CLAIMS OF BUSH AND BLAIR ET AL WERE BULLSHIT AND COULD NOT STAND UP TO SCRUTINY.
The time has come for the mainstream media to attempt to get back to even the slightest amount of integrity it had and now ask about the leadership ignoring intelligence and deliberately lying about intelligence to further their agenda of illegal regime change in Iraq.
They have missapropriated govenment funds, lied to Parliament and To Congress and the Senate, Lied to the public, commited mass murder and attrocities and scapegoated and persecuted anyone who has got in their way.
They lied, innocents died!
As Jon Stewart wished, "If only lies left semen stains!"
I re-produce the article below as I hold it to be too important to not risk it being lost in the memory hole.
Lying with intelligence
WHO IN THE White House knew about DITSUM No. 044-02 and when did they know it?
That's the newly declassified smoking-gun document, originally prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency in February 2002 but ignored by President Bush. Its declassification this weekend blows another huge hole in Bush's claim that he was acting on the best intelligence available when he pitched the invasion of Iraq as a way to prevent an Al Qaeda terror attack using weapons of mass destruction.
The report demolished the credibility of the key Al Qaeda informant the administration relied on to make its claim that a working alliance existed between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. It was circulated widely within the U.S. government a full eight months before Bush used the prisoner's lies to argue for an invasion of Iraq because "we've learned that Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and deadly gases."
Al Qaeda senior military trainer Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi — a Libyan captured in Pakistan in 2001 — was probably "intentionally misleading the debriefers," the DIA report concluded in one of two paragraphs finally declassified at the request of Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and released by his office over the weekend. The report also said: "Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may be describing scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest."
He got that right. Folks in the highest places were very interested in claims along the lines Libi was peddling, even though they went against both logic and the preponderance of intelligence gathered to that point about possible collaboration between two enemies of the U.S. that were fundamentally at odds with each other. Al Qaeda was able to create a base in Iraq only after the U.S. overthrow of Hussein, not before. "Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements," accurately noted the DIA.
Yet Bush used the informant's already discredited tall tale in his key Oct. 7, 2002, speech just before the Senate voted on whether to authorize the use of force in Iraq and again in two speeches in February, just ahead of the invasion.
Leading up to the war, Secretary of State Colin Powell tried to sell it to the United Nations, while Vice President Dick Cheney, national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith repeated it breathlessly for homeland audiences. The con worked, and Americans came to believe the lie that Hussein was associated with the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Even CIA Director George Tenet publicly fell into line, ignoring his own agency's dissent that Libi would not have been in a position to know what he said he knew. In fact, Libi, according to the DIA, could not name any Iraqis involved, any chemical or biological material used or where the training allegedly occurred. In January 2004, the prisoner recanted his story, and the next month the CIA withdrew all intelligence reports based on his false information.
One by one, the exotic intelligence factoids Bush's researchers culled from raw intelligence data files to publicly bolster their claim of imminent threat — the yellowcake uranium from Niger, the aluminum tubes for processing uranium, the Prague meeting with Mohamed Atta, the discredited Iraqi informants "Curveball" and Ahmad Chalabi — have been exposed as previously known frauds.
When it came to selling an invasion of Iraq it had wanted to launch before 9/11, the Bush White House systematically ignored the best available intelligence from U.S. agencies or any other reliable source.
It should be remembered that while Bush and his gang were successfully scaring the wits out of us about the alleged Iraq-Al Qaeda alliance, U.N. weapons inspectors were on the ground in Iraq. Weapons inspectors Hans Blix and 2005 Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei promised they could finish scouring the country if given a few more months. But instead, they were abruptly chased out by an invasion necessitated by what the president told us was a "unique and urgent threat."
Bush exploited the worldwide horror felt over the 9/11 attacks to justify the Iraq invasion. His outrageous claim, repeated over and over before and after he dragged the nation into an unnecessary war, was never supported by a single piece of credible evidence. The Bush defense of what is arguably the biggest lie ever put over on the American people is that everyone had gotten the intelligence wrong. Not so at the highest level of U.S. intelligence, as DITSUM No. 044-02 so clearly shows. How could the president not have known?
For example, let's not get lost in this bullshit about intelligence failures!
THE INTELLIGENCE DID NOT FAIL! IT WAS ACCURATE! IT SAID THE CLAIMS OF BUSH AND BLAIR ET AL WERE BULLSHIT AND COULD NOT STAND UP TO SCRUTINY.
The time has come for the mainstream media to attempt to get back to even the slightest amount of integrity it had and now ask about the leadership ignoring intelligence and deliberately lying about intelligence to further their agenda of illegal regime change in Iraq.
They have missapropriated govenment funds, lied to Parliament and To Congress and the Senate, Lied to the public, commited mass murder and attrocities and scapegoated and persecuted anyone who has got in their way.
They lied, innocents died!
As Jon Stewart wished, "If only lies left semen stains!"
I re-produce the article below as I hold it to be too important to not risk it being lost in the memory hole.
Lying with intelligence
By Robert Scheer:
WHO IN THE White House knew about DITSUM No. 044-02 and when did they know it?That's the newly declassified smoking-gun document, originally prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency in February 2002 but ignored by President Bush. Its declassification this weekend blows another huge hole in Bush's claim that he was acting on the best intelligence available when he pitched the invasion of Iraq as a way to prevent an Al Qaeda terror attack using weapons of mass destruction.
The report demolished the credibility of the key Al Qaeda informant the administration relied on to make its claim that a working alliance existed between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. It was circulated widely within the U.S. government a full eight months before Bush used the prisoner's lies to argue for an invasion of Iraq because "we've learned that Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and deadly gases."
Al Qaeda senior military trainer Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi — a Libyan captured in Pakistan in 2001 — was probably "intentionally misleading the debriefers," the DIA report concluded in one of two paragraphs finally declassified at the request of Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and released by his office over the weekend. The report also said: "Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may be describing scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest."
He got that right. Folks in the highest places were very interested in claims along the lines Libi was peddling, even though they went against both logic and the preponderance of intelligence gathered to that point about possible collaboration between two enemies of the U.S. that were fundamentally at odds with each other. Al Qaeda was able to create a base in Iraq only after the U.S. overthrow of Hussein, not before. "Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements," accurately noted the DIA.
Yet Bush used the informant's already discredited tall tale in his key Oct. 7, 2002, speech just before the Senate voted on whether to authorize the use of force in Iraq and again in two speeches in February, just ahead of the invasion.
Leading up to the war, Secretary of State Colin Powell tried to sell it to the United Nations, while Vice President Dick Cheney, national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith repeated it breathlessly for homeland audiences. The con worked, and Americans came to believe the lie that Hussein was associated with the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Even CIA Director George Tenet publicly fell into line, ignoring his own agency's dissent that Libi would not have been in a position to know what he said he knew. In fact, Libi, according to the DIA, could not name any Iraqis involved, any chemical or biological material used or where the training allegedly occurred. In January 2004, the prisoner recanted his story, and the next month the CIA withdrew all intelligence reports based on his false information.
One by one, the exotic intelligence factoids Bush's researchers culled from raw intelligence data files to publicly bolster their claim of imminent threat — the yellowcake uranium from Niger, the aluminum tubes for processing uranium, the Prague meeting with Mohamed Atta, the discredited Iraqi informants "Curveball" and Ahmad Chalabi — have been exposed as previously known frauds.
When it came to selling an invasion of Iraq it had wanted to launch before 9/11, the Bush White House systematically ignored the best available intelligence from U.S. agencies or any other reliable source.
It should be remembered that while Bush and his gang were successfully scaring the wits out of us about the alleged Iraq-Al Qaeda alliance, U.N. weapons inspectors were on the ground in Iraq. Weapons inspectors Hans Blix and 2005 Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei promised they could finish scouring the country if given a few more months. But instead, they were abruptly chased out by an invasion necessitated by what the president told us was a "unique and urgent threat."
Bush exploited the worldwide horror felt over the 9/11 attacks to justify the Iraq invasion. His outrageous claim, repeated over and over before and after he dragged the nation into an unnecessary war, was never supported by a single piece of credible evidence. The Bush defense of what is arguably the biggest lie ever put over on the American people is that everyone had gotten the intelligence wrong. Not so at the highest level of U.S. intelligence, as DITSUM No. 044-02 so clearly shows. How could the president not have known?
We surrender our freedoms at great peril.
Re the have your say debate linked above:
I greatly respect democracy, freedom of speech and having differing opinions from others, and those differing from mine. In light of this I add the following: After Reading comments like, "90 days is worth it for our security", I now fully understand how Hitler came to power. Induhviduals, too cowardly to demand freedom, crawl to their political masters and beg for protection, reducing all our freedoms and destroying our way of life in a way that terrorists could only dream of. Where Hitler and the IRA failed, the British Public succeeds. Surrendering before fake threats, we spit in the face of the sacrifice of our forefathers in 2 world wars.
These heroes fought and died to protect our freedoms and our system of polititians remaining public SERVANTS. We, the public, pay for them to serve us; not for them to be our masters dictating to us when we can be free or not on a whim.
The neocon class of polititian in the US and the UK will not use these laws to protect us, but to protect themselves. They plan to subjugate us and control us through these laws. To prevent dissent to their appocolyptic visions of the future according to the PNAC principles being played out in the theatre of the governing western elite.
Thousands of people have been stopped, intimately searched, detained without charge and questioned under the terrorism act already and the vast majority of these actions have had nothing at-all whatsoever to do with terrorism. The terrorism act is a tool for the police to do what they like under the veneer of legal officialdom. The 90-day detention, unlimited house arrest, and ID Cards will be more tools in the totalitarian toolkit that they must be be allowed to use.
Demand your Freedom now and refuse to have any part of the neocon agenda.
See whare we are heading:
Fallujah nightmares: download the video and spread the link everywhere.
I greatly respect democracy, freedom of speech and having differing opinions from others, and those differing from mine. In light of this I add the following: After Reading comments like, "90 days is worth it for our security", I now fully understand how Hitler came to power. Induhviduals, too cowardly to demand freedom, crawl to their political masters and beg for protection, reducing all our freedoms and destroying our way of life in a way that terrorists could only dream of. Where Hitler and the IRA failed, the British Public succeeds. Surrendering before fake threats, we spit in the face of the sacrifice of our forefathers in 2 world wars.
These heroes fought and died to protect our freedoms and our system of polititians remaining public SERVANTS. We, the public, pay for them to serve us; not for them to be our masters dictating to us when we can be free or not on a whim.
The neocon class of polititian in the US and the UK will not use these laws to protect us, but to protect themselves. They plan to subjugate us and control us through these laws. To prevent dissent to their appocolyptic visions of the future according to the PNAC principles being played out in the theatre of the governing western elite.
Thousands of people have been stopped, intimately searched, detained without charge and questioned under the terrorism act already and the vast majority of these actions have had nothing at-all whatsoever to do with terrorism. The terrorism act is a tool for the police to do what they like under the veneer of legal officialdom. The 90-day detention, unlimited house arrest, and ID Cards will be more tools in the totalitarian toolkit that they must be be allowed to use.
Demand your Freedom now and refuse to have any part of the neocon agenda.
See whare we are heading:
Fallujah nightmares: download the video and spread the link everywhere.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
The Bush Resident in thief DID steal the election
So the General Accounting Office in the US has published it's report into the 2004 US election.
As the report clearly shows, the result is in grave doubt, or rather, the way the result was calculated looks like the ES&S and Diebold election machines did steal the election for Bush.
Read this article for more ...
As the report clearly shows, the result is in grave doubt, or rather, the way the result was calculated looks like the ES&S and Diebold election machines did steal the election for Bush.
Read this article for more ...
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
The Future of Motoring?
PAY as you go :)
A backdoor way for government to track you? Norwich Union insure 1 in 7 UK Motorists. They have been trailing a system of insurance known a s pay as you go. this means that a 'black box' is installed in a vehicle and this communicates with a satellite. Communicating your location, time, and speed. This information shall be used to 'personalise' your insurance product. If you drive at times of day that have more accidents, you will pay more per mile than if you drive at 'safer' times of day. If you are speeding and are involved in an accident, presumably, your insurance would no longer be valid. Even if you were unaware of the speed at the moment of impact.
The government has also been investigating the option of taxing road users in this way too. For busy congested roads, you pay more tax per mile than clearer roads. This raises many questions however, for example,
1. How would you know what specifically you are having to pay per mile and when? the road you are on suddenly becomes congested (due to an accident nearby diverting traffic) will you suddenly find your tax fee going from 5p per mile to £1.50? Or you are driving down a road that routinely cost 5p per mile, but 2 accidents the previos week on that stretch puts the price of that road up to £1.00? How would you know?
2 Who else would be able to get access to the information?
A backdoor way for government to track you? Norwich Union insure 1 in 7 UK Motorists. They have been trailing a system of insurance known a s pay as you go. this means that a 'black box' is installed in a vehicle and this communicates with a satellite. Communicating your location, time, and speed. This information shall be used to 'personalise' your insurance product. If you drive at times of day that have more accidents, you will pay more per mile than if you drive at 'safer' times of day. If you are speeding and are involved in an accident, presumably, your insurance would no longer be valid. Even if you were unaware of the speed at the moment of impact.
The government has also been investigating the option of taxing road users in this way too. For busy congested roads, you pay more tax per mile than clearer roads. This raises many questions however, for example,
1. How would you know what specifically you are having to pay per mile and when? the road you are on suddenly becomes congested (due to an accident nearby diverting traffic) will you suddenly find your tax fee going from 5p per mile to £1.50? Or you are driving down a road that routinely cost 5p per mile, but 2 accidents the previos week on that stretch puts the price of that road up to £1.00? How would you know?
2 Who else would be able to get access to the information?
3Do you feel comfortable with the idea of the Government or a Private Corporation knowing everywhere you drive?
The Big Brother connotations are obvious, but the financial implications are dire too. You will never know exactly how much you are being charged for driving on any particular stretch of road. Will the insurance fee go up if it is raining, or snowing or foggy? will the cheaper insurance during the day create congestion that the Government will charge more tax for?
So basically it is soon getting to the point where I will not drive anywhere any more. I think I shall do without my car and get the bus or walk.
I have nothing to hide, and to me, that is EXACTLY the point!
The Big Brother connotations are obvious, but the financial implications are dire too. You will never know exactly how much you are being charged for driving on any particular stretch of road. Will the insurance fee go up if it is raining, or snowing or foggy? will the cheaper insurance during the day create congestion that the Government will charge more tax for?
So basically it is soon getting to the point where I will not drive anywhere any more. I think I shall do without my car and get the bus or walk.
I have nothing to hide, and to me, that is EXACTLY the point!
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
It's not totalitarianism, nothing to worry about
Tony McNulty, (Home office Minister) has the unfortunate task of defending totalitarianism, (sorry, protecting UK Citizens) and the introduction of the ID Card and it's inherent problems. IE not being able to detect bald people, or brown eyed people or guitar players (being all af these, I know I'm screwed already)
I am sorry I said totalitarianism, because we live in free democracy. I know this is true because according to McNulty:
No that is not a joke, he REALLY said it. And with a straight face too.
And I thought that a government bending and enacting century old laws to suppress dissent, legitimate protest and creating all new laws to detain individuals without trial, place them indefinately under house arrest and criminalise people for their beliefs (support for legitimate and internationally recognised and UN authorised freedom fighters) was the preserve of totalitarian, police states or fascist states. Obviously not; for we have the 'time in the morning of removal test' :D WooHoo good us , we are STILL the good guys.
Speaking of ID cards, be aware of how much of a Ball Ache they will be to get one of these infernal Items? and YES THEY WILL BE COMPULSARY!!! Even under Current government plans, they aim to start the VOLUNTARY introduction in 2007 and have them become compulsary in 2013.
You will have to pay AT LEAST £30.00, but be sure that you are on benefits or a pension first and you do not want it to be a passport. If not the cost will be AT LEAST £97.00
Then be prepared to travel to a registration center to be fingerprinted (all fingers and thumbs) have both retinas scanned and have your photograph taken. All at your expense.
If you are a family of 5, that's over £700.oo for the day including travel and food. (If you live any distance from the registration office)
Once you have done that you can hand in your ID forms, properly filled in or face a fine.
The National Identity Register will contain the following information that has to be provided:
Can you confidently provide all this info? or is this an administrative nightmare for you?
How will you provide the information for section (9) and (30) above? this could include and not be limited to:
Information about numbers allocated to you for identification purposes and about the documents to which they relate; (driving licence, passport, National insurance numbercard, birth certificate, marriage licence number, NHS Number, military ID cards, Bank account numbers, old bank account numbers, credit card accounts, telephone account number, Councils tax account number, store loyalty cards, club membership numbers, Insurance certificate numbers, vehicle registration documents, etc...(These numbers indentify you to these different organisations, do they not?))
Would the Government use your inability to provide specific information as a reason to prosecute you? Certainly. But how about this, would the government use this law on ID cards to persecute you?
Well, let's consider how the labour party have already used old laws in a manner in which they were never intended to be used:
From this article:
Funny that whenever a normal criminal, that may have only killed one or a few people uses the 'GOD told me to' defence, he is either sectioned under the mental health act or the defence is thrown out and they are imprisoned normally,
But when tens of thousands are killed, it's just a good christian standing up fer merka in the woronterra!!!
But of course it's not totalitarianism, so nothing to worry about.
Where are the labour back benchers? Blair is an apoligist for an extremist rightwing religious fundementalist? I can understand the right wing Tory Liam Fox supporting Bush's illegal war of conquest, But a left of centre Blair? and by implication, the WHOLE Labour party that supports this bill.
What has the ID card got to do with Iraq?
Well, bear with me on this. The ID card, (as demonstrated by the above list of details to be stored and the addition to this list of any extra data the home secretary sees fit, like medical, criminal and financial data), shall be used to track everything you do.
Why do they need to track everybody? they claim it is because the world changed on September eleventh. and the rules of the game have changed since 7/7/05. SO we need to protect ourselves against dangerous people.
Yet they have used the anti terror laws against people who have (legitimately) protested against the government.
Walter Wolfgang - the 82-year-old ejected from the Labour conference for shouting "Nonsense!" during Jack Straw's speech was detained under the terrorism act, for critisicing the governement. that has set a precedent.
But Blairs lot only want to stop 07/07/05 from happening again?
ok looky here: ID cards wouldn't have stopped bombs, UK minister says
or here: London Bombings Mastermind is MI6 Asset
or here: Al-Qaeda cleric exposed as an MI5 double agent
So the governement will aim to track every body, all the time (including whilst you travel) and build a risk profile of every citizen. It will be used to track everything you do:
What happens if you order an antiwar book online?or attend antiwar rallies? or verbalise your dissent? if you are a critic of government policy, you are liaible (from established precedent) to be held under the terrorism act.
The ID card will make it easier for the govenment to track it's critics and build evidence of their terrorist tendencies so they can hold them indefinately or just detain them in the run up to elections, say the three months prior to an election so as to (a) create the fear of terrorism with many high profile detentions, and (b) prevent their critics from voting?
The unfortunate thing in all this is that it is in any way plausable. If we truly lived in a free democracy, NONE of this would be even remotely plausable.
But don't worry, Tony McNulty says we are free and under his freedom test, we clearly are.
I am sorry I said totalitarianism, because we live in free democracy. I know this is true because according to McNulty:
"We are not knocking down doors at four in the morning with people booted and suited in riot gear. Most of the removals occur around half-five, half-six, seven in the morning."Phew, I am so fucking relieved!!! . I am so glad he cleared that one up, We live in free democracy because our detainees are carted off to be detained without trial, later in the morning than detainees in genuine fascist states. I feel safer already.
No that is not a joke, he REALLY said it. And with a straight face too.
And I thought that a government bending and enacting century old laws to suppress dissent, legitimate protest and creating all new laws to detain individuals without trial, place them indefinately under house arrest and criminalise people for their beliefs (support for legitimate and internationally recognised and UN authorised freedom fighters) was the preserve of totalitarian, police states or fascist states. Obviously not; for we have the 'time in the morning of removal test' :D WooHoo good us , we are STILL the good guys.
Speaking of ID cards, be aware of how much of a Ball Ache they will be to get one of these infernal Items? and YES THEY WILL BE COMPULSARY!!! Even under Current government plans, they aim to start the VOLUNTARY introduction in 2007 and have them become compulsary in 2013.
You will have to pay AT LEAST £30.00, but be sure that you are on benefits or a pension first and you do not want it to be a passport. If not the cost will be AT LEAST £97.00
Then be prepared to travel to a registration center to be fingerprinted (all fingers and thumbs) have both retinas scanned and have your photograph taken. All at your expense.
If you are a family of 5, that's over £700.oo for the day including travel and food. (If you live any distance from the registration office)
Once you have done that you can hand in your ID forms, properly filled in or face a fine.
The National Identity Register will contain the following information that has to be provided:
- Name
- Other previous names or aliases;
- Date and place of birth and, if the person has died, the date of death;
- Address
- Previous addresses in the United Kingdom and elsewhere;
- Times of residency at different places in the United Kingdom or elsewhere;
- Current residential status;
- Residential statuses previously held;
- Information about numbers allocated to the applicant for identification purposes and about the documents to which they relate;
- Information about occasions on which recorded information in the Register has been provided to any person;
- Information recorded in the Register on request.
- Photograph
- Fingerprints
- “Other” biometrics (iris recognition);
- Signature
- Nationality;
- Entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom; and
- Where entitlement derives from a grant of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, the terms and conditions of that leave.
- National Identity Registration Number;
- The number of any ID card that has been issued;
- National Insurance number;
- The number of any relevant immigration document;
- The number of any United Kingdom passport (within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971 (c. 77)) that has been issued; (If you have ever had a passport issued to you that has been lost or stolen and you do not have that passport's number any more, you are screwed)
- The number of any passport issued by or on behalf of the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom or by or on behalf of an international organisation;
- The number of any document that can be used (in some or all circumstances) instead of a passport;
- The number of any identity card issued by the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom;
- Any reference number allocated by the Secretary of State in connection with an application made for permission to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom;
- The number of any work permit (within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971);
- Any driver number connected to a driving licence;
- The number of any designated document which is held by the applicant that is a document the number of which does not fall within any of the preceding sub-paragraphs; ???
- The date of expiry or period of validity of a document the number of which is recorded by virtue of this paragraph. ???
- The date of every application for registration; ???
- The date of every application for a modification of the contents of his entry; ???
- The date of every application confirming the contents of his entry (with or without changes); ???
- The reason for any omission from the information recorded in his entry;
- Particulars (in addition to its number) of every ID card issued;
- Whether each such card is in force and, if not, why not;
- Particulars of every person who has countersigned an application for an ID card or a designated document; ??? What particulars?
- Particulars of every notification given by the applicant for the purposes of regulations under section 13(1) (lost, stolen and damaged ID cards etc.);
- Particulars of every requirement by the Secretary of State for the individual to surrender an ID card issued to the applicant.
- The information provided in connection with every application to be entered in the Register, for a modification of the contents of entry in the Register or for the issue of an ID card;
- Information provided in connection with every application confirming entry in the Register (with or without change;
- Particulars of the steps taken, in connection with an application mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) or otherwise, for identifying the applicant or for verifying the information provided in connection with the application;
- Particulars of any other steps taken or information obtained (otherwise than in connection with an application mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b)) for ensuring that there is a complete, up-to-date and accurate entry about that individual in the Register;
- Particulars of every notification given by that individual for the purposes of section 12.
- A personal identification number to be used for facilitating the making of applications for information recorded in his entry, and for facilitating the provision of the information;
- A password or other code to be used for that purpose or particulars of a method of generating such a password or code;
- Questions and answers to be used for identifying a person seeking to make such an application or to apply for or to make a modification of that entry.
- Particulars of every occasion on which information contained in the individual’s entry has been provided to a person;
- Particulars of every person to whom such information has been provided on such an occasion;
- Other particulars, in relation to each such occasion, of the provision of the information.
Can you confidently provide all this info? or is this an administrative nightmare for you?
How will you provide the information for section (9) and (30) above? this could include and not be limited to:
Information about numbers allocated to you for identification purposes and about the documents to which they relate; (driving licence, passport, National insurance numbercard, birth certificate, marriage licence number, NHS Number, military ID cards, Bank account numbers, old bank account numbers, credit card accounts, telephone account number, Councils tax account number, store loyalty cards, club membership numbers, Insurance certificate numbers, vehicle registration documents, etc...(These numbers indentify you to these different organisations, do they not?))
At the time of writing the Government has tabled an ammendment to allow the home Secretary to be able to demand any other information including 'sensitive personal data' (eg medical records and criminal records and financial data) to be held in the National Identity Register.
The implication being that at any time, purely at the Home Secretary's (or any future Home Secretary) discretion, he or she can demand that any person, or group of people be forced to provide any data he/she demands. Failure to provide the information will result in criminal proceedings.
Are you worried yet?
But of course, it's not a big brother database and it's not totalitarianism, so nothing to worry about!Would the Government use your inability to provide specific information as a reason to prosecute you? Certainly. But how about this, would the government use this law on ID cards to persecute you?
Well, let's consider how the labour party have already used old laws in a manner in which they were never intended to be used:
From this article:
Had Mr Wolfgang (Walter Wolfgang - the 82-year-old ejected from the Labour conference for shouting "Nonsense!" during Jack Straw's speech) said "nonsense" twice during the foreign secretary's speech, the police could have charged him under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Harassment, the act says, "must involve conduct on at least two occasions ... conduct includes speech". Parliament was told that its purpose was to protect women from stalkers, but the first people to be arrested were three peaceful protesters. Since then it has been used by the arms manufacturer EDO to keep demonstrators away from its factory gates, and by Kent police to arrest a woman who sent an executive at a drugs company two polite emails, begging him not to test his products on animals. In 2001 the peace campaigners Lindis Percy and Anni Rainbow were prosecuted for causing "harassment, alarm or distress" to American servicemen at the Menwith Hill military intelligence base in Yorkshire, by standing at the gate holding the Stars and Stripes and a placard reading "George W Bush? Oh dear!" In Hull a protester was arrested under the act for "staring at a building".AND
The police are also rediscovering the benefits of some of our more venerable instruments. On September 10, Keith Richardson, one of the six students convicted of aggravated trespass on Friday, had his stall in Lancaster city centre confiscated under the 1824 Vagrancy Act. "Every Person wandering abroad and endeavouring by the Exposure of Wounds and Deformities to obtain or gather Alms ... shall be deemed a Rogue and Vagabond... " The act was intended to prevent the veterans of the Napoleonic wars from begging, but the police decided that pictures of the wounds on this man's anti-vivisection leaflets put him on the wrong side of the law. In two recent cases, protesters have been arrested under the 1361 Justices of the Peace Act. So much for Mr Blair's 21st century methods.This blair Government want to defend FREEDOM (their freedom to intimidate, persecute and subjucate) and uphold their way of life. Blair's way of life being lying us into a war, murdering tens of thousands of innocent women, children and the elderly for his and his cronies personal gain and for to advance a fanatical fundementalistic religious war, launched by the most dangerous religious fundemantalist of all, GW Bush!!! As he said, GOD told him to!
Funny that whenever a normal criminal, that may have only killed one or a few people uses the 'GOD told me to' defence, he is either sectioned under the mental health act or the defence is thrown out and they are imprisoned normally,
But when tens of thousands are killed, it's just a good christian standing up fer merka in the woronterra!!!
But of course it's not totalitarianism, so nothing to worry about.
Where are the labour back benchers? Blair is an apoligist for an extremist rightwing religious fundementalist? I can understand the right wing Tory Liam Fox supporting Bush's illegal war of conquest, But a left of centre Blair? and by implication, the WHOLE Labour party that supports this bill.
What has the ID card got to do with Iraq?
Well, bear with me on this. The ID card, (as demonstrated by the above list of details to be stored and the addition to this list of any extra data the home secretary sees fit, like medical, criminal and financial data), shall be used to track everything you do.
Why do they need to track everybody? they claim it is because the world changed on September eleventh. and the rules of the game have changed since 7/7/05. SO we need to protect ourselves against dangerous people.
Yet they have used the anti terror laws against people who have (legitimately) protested against the government.
Walter Wolfgang - the 82-year-old ejected from the Labour conference for shouting "Nonsense!" during Jack Straw's speech was detained under the terrorism act, for critisicing the governement. that has set a precedent.
But Blairs lot only want to stop 07/07/05 from happening again?
ok looky here: ID cards wouldn't have stopped bombs, UK minister says
or here: London Bombings Mastermind is MI6 Asset
or here: Al-Qaeda cleric exposed as an MI5 double agent
So the governement will aim to track every body, all the time (including whilst you travel) and build a risk profile of every citizen. It will be used to track everything you do:
Neil Fisher, from QinetiQ - one of the companies developing the new technology, said the public would want to be able to prove their identity to show they were not a risk.He told the BBC's 10 O'Clock News: "You will want this to be part of your life."
"You will want, in what's fast becoming a digital society, to be able to authenticate your identity almost for any transaction that you do, be it going to the bank, going to the shops, going to the airport."
And you will need it to access all Government services too:
What happens if you order an antiwar book online?or attend antiwar rallies? or verbalise your dissent? if you are a critic of government policy, you are liaible (from established precedent) to be held under the terrorism act.
The ID card will make it easier for the govenment to track it's critics and build evidence of their terrorist tendencies so they can hold them indefinately or just detain them in the run up to elections, say the three months prior to an election so as to (a) create the fear of terrorism with many high profile detentions, and (b) prevent their critics from voting?
The unfortunate thing in all this is that it is in any way plausable. If we truly lived in a free democracy, NONE of this would be even remotely plausable.
But don't worry, Tony McNulty says we are free and under his freedom test, we clearly are.
Thursday, June 09, 2005
Be whatever you wanna be :D
It really doesn't take long to get into doing something new. I never thought of myself as a writer, now I do. It's REALLY easy too. To become a writer all you have to do is write every day!!! It doesn't matter what you write, nobody is going to read most of it anyway, but so long as you write everyday, THAT is what is important.
A good tip!!! Write for the bin. Instead of trying to get every phrase and sentence and paragraph to be prize winning literature. write as if you are going to throw it out anyway. Then just get your ideas down on paper, or on the screen. That way, you are writing. You WILL find that most of what you write will be pretty good anyway. Then you just go through the work you have done and search out the 'pearls'.
With this technique you will be a writer.
That said; you can be anything you want to be. If you want to be it? JUST GO DO IT!
I am now a systems engineer, project manager, web-developer, writer, video producer, director and life coach and I am the best person I have ever been in my LIFE!
You HAVE a great life too. It's just a choice, after all.
A good tip!!! Write for the bin. Instead of trying to get every phrase and sentence and paragraph to be prize winning literature. write as if you are going to throw it out anyway. Then just get your ideas down on paper, or on the screen. That way, you are writing. You WILL find that most of what you write will be pretty good anyway. Then you just go through the work you have done and search out the 'pearls'.
With this technique you will be a writer.
That said; you can be anything you want to be. If you want to be it? JUST GO DO IT!
I am now a systems engineer, project manager, web-developer, writer, video producer, director and life coach and I am the best person I have ever been in my LIFE!
You HAVE a great life too. It's just a choice, after all.
Monday, May 23, 2005
I had a growing experience last night (ooooeeeer missus)
Well, today is truly an end of an era! My clean driving licence is no more. 17 years of endorsement free motoring has come to an inglorious end! I got nicked for speeding last night. So, why am I not depressed?
I learned an important lesson. I was caught, and will take the punishment and I am happy to take responsibility. I have no-one else to blame, no excuses. The reason I was driving so fast is simple. I was driving a long way, late at night and wanted to get home quickly. Simple as that. No excuses, it was my fault, I was wrong. So I have learned and grown from the experience. and THAT is the important part.
My book has come on in leaps and bounds in the last week. I have tentatively called it, "Why have you not evolved yet?" it is a guide to spiritual (not religious) enhancement and personal development. and personal growth. Believe me, the information in this book works! BIG TIME!!! It is magical and get this. It also contains the meaning of life itself!
So it should be available to buy online shortly and the URL will be displayed here :)
Must go, I have a purpose to fulfill :) I Love you all and please, if you only do one thing, make sure you get PASSIONATE about what you love.
I learned an important lesson. I was caught, and will take the punishment and I am happy to take responsibility. I have no-one else to blame, no excuses. The reason I was driving so fast is simple. I was driving a long way, late at night and wanted to get home quickly. Simple as that. No excuses, it was my fault, I was wrong. So I have learned and grown from the experience. and THAT is the important part.
My book has come on in leaps and bounds in the last week. I have tentatively called it, "Why have you not evolved yet?" it is a guide to spiritual (not religious) enhancement and personal development. and personal growth. Believe me, the information in this book works! BIG TIME!!! It is magical and get this. It also contains the meaning of life itself!
So it should be available to buy online shortly and the URL will be displayed here :)
Must go, I have a purpose to fulfill :) I Love you all and please, if you only do one thing, make sure you get PASSIONATE about what you love.
Monday, March 14, 2005
Fascism by proxy
OK so there was compromise over the terrorism bill Aptly named as it allows the state to terrorise the population. Tony blinked first and agreed to the 'sunset clause by another name'. Or so we are to believe. We are also supposed to believe that we need this legislation because (according to Blair) The intelligence and security services want it.
This is the exact same line that Tony used to get support for an invasion of Iraq. "We don't want to do this, but Saddam is forcing us to, the security services said so!"
What utter utter lies! The security services are NOT asking for this legislation. they have said that legislation is for parliament to decide.
So bLIAR IS LYING AGAIN!!!! HOW MANY LIES DO YOU EXPECT IS TO BELIEVE TONY? HOW STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE???
I still have a problem with the standard of proof. The government can now ask a judge to detain anybody they wish, under house arrest, without charge or trial, based on zero direct evidence, supposition and suspicion are all that is required. The fact that a judge has to approve makes little difference. After all it was judges that twice exonerated Tony Blair of any wrong doing over Iraq Intelligence or Dr. David Kelly, in the face of overwhelming evidence. This is fascist control by proxy.
OK, Tony Bliar was not personally responsible for the murder of Dr David Kelly, however he is responsible for the the foriegn policy of the UK and the policy towards Iraq and the twisted half truths and the blatant lies that lead to the situation arising in which Dr David Kelly was murdered.
Are we to believe that the home office cannot find a sympathetic judge? If Blair (or whomever may be pulling his strings) wanted a genuine political opponent out of the way, the rule of law and natural justice will be sacrificed, for political expediency.
I don't care whether a Judge, a politician, or Mother Theresa's ghost was to make the call for house arrest. That call should be made (a) on genuine evidence that a crime has been commited, (b) that evidence must be placed before a jury. Neither will happen now.
We currently have a crime of assisting in, or organising a terrorist attack. (that is not the correct legal terminology, but it's close enough) If the intelligence services or the police believe that a suspect has been involved in organising terrorist attacks, try them in a court under that law. This law is there to prevent people form commiting the terrorist attack in the first place.
Note, It is rarely ever the case that international terrorists turn out to be who we are lead to believe they are. They are usually the intelligence operatives or 'special ops' of some Government's security service operating 'with plausable deniability'. These intelligence services do not only gather intelligence, but perform 'psy-ops' and 'wet-ops' and other buzz-words so beloved of the playstation generation. Watch the History Channel to see where we have been lied to in the past. Where psy-ops lead to revolutions and and military coups to oust democratic leaders and install pro-corporate puppets. Will we have to wait to watch the History Channel in 25 years to see how we have been lied to now? To see who really were terrorists and who were government operatives manipulating the people through a fake war on terror?
With the introduction of this immoral, repulsive and unjust bill into law and with the imposition of the trackable ID card with it's turbo charged big brother on steroids database. It is unlikely that we will be able to access that information in 25 years time. At least not without being considered a threat to the state and therfore being 'disapeared'.
./ Later.
This is the exact same line that Tony used to get support for an invasion of Iraq. "We don't want to do this, but Saddam is forcing us to, the security services said so!"
What utter utter lies! The security services are NOT asking for this legislation. they have said that legislation is for parliament to decide.
So bLIAR IS LYING AGAIN!!!! HOW MANY LIES DO YOU EXPECT IS TO BELIEVE TONY? HOW STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE???
I still have a problem with the standard of proof. The government can now ask a judge to detain anybody they wish, under house arrest, without charge or trial, based on zero direct evidence, supposition and suspicion are all that is required. The fact that a judge has to approve makes little difference. After all it was judges that twice exonerated Tony Blair of any wrong doing over Iraq Intelligence or Dr. David Kelly, in the face of overwhelming evidence. This is fascist control by proxy.
OK, Tony Bliar was not personally responsible for the murder of Dr David Kelly, however he is responsible for the the foriegn policy of the UK and the policy towards Iraq and the twisted half truths and the blatant lies that lead to the situation arising in which Dr David Kelly was murdered.
Are we to believe that the home office cannot find a sympathetic judge? If Blair (or whomever may be pulling his strings) wanted a genuine political opponent out of the way, the rule of law and natural justice will be sacrificed, for political expediency.
I don't care whether a Judge, a politician, or Mother Theresa's ghost was to make the call for house arrest. That call should be made (a) on genuine evidence that a crime has been commited, (b) that evidence must be placed before a jury. Neither will happen now.
We currently have a crime of assisting in, or organising a terrorist attack. (that is not the correct legal terminology, but it's close enough) If the intelligence services or the police believe that a suspect has been involved in organising terrorist attacks, try them in a court under that law. This law is there to prevent people form commiting the terrorist attack in the first place.
Note, It is rarely ever the case that international terrorists turn out to be who we are lead to believe they are. They are usually the intelligence operatives or 'special ops' of some Government's security service operating 'with plausable deniability'. These intelligence services do not only gather intelligence, but perform 'psy-ops' and 'wet-ops' and other buzz-words so beloved of the playstation generation. Watch the History Channel to see where we have been lied to in the past. Where psy-ops lead to revolutions and and military coups to oust democratic leaders and install pro-corporate puppets. Will we have to wait to watch the History Channel in 25 years to see how we have been lied to now? To see who really were terrorists and who were government operatives manipulating the people through a fake war on terror?
With the introduction of this immoral, repulsive and unjust bill into law and with the imposition of the trackable ID card with it's turbo charged big brother on steroids database. It is unlikely that we will be able to access that information in 25 years time. At least not without being considered a threat to the state and therfore being 'disapeared'.
./ Later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)