WARNING: Something terrible could be happening in Parliament on Monday

This is from Tom Watson MP. If he’s right, it’s vitally important that you read the following and act on it:

Last Thursday there was a curious announcement in the Chamber of the House of Commons. At the session to announce future business, Leader of the House, Andrew Lansley said this:

“Monday 14th July — consideration of a Bill, followed by a motion to approve the first report from the Committee on Standards on the respect policy”

If you look on Parliament’s web site tonight, you will not see the name, nor the text of the Bill to be considered.

None of your elected backbench MPs have been told what Bill is to be debated on Monday. It’s Wednesday evening. Tomorrow, MPs are on a ‘one line whip’ ie they can return to their constituencies this evening.

Imagine how outrageous it would be, if tomorrow, the government were to announce emergency legislation to an empty chamber. Imagine if that emergency legislation was to be introduced on Monday or Tuesday, with the intention of it slipping through the Commons and the Lords in a single day. Imagine if that Bill was the deeply controversial Data Retention Bill.

It’s a Bill that will override the views of judges who have seen how the mass collection of your data breaches the human rights of you and your family.

Regardless of where you stand on the decision of the European Court of Justice, can you honestly say that you want a key decision about how your personal data is stored to be made by a stitch up behind closed doors and clouded in secrecy?

None of your MPs have even read this legislation, let alone been able to scrutinise it.

The very fact that the Government is even considering this form of action, strongly suggests that they have an expectation that the few people on the Liberal Democrat and Labour front benchers who have seen this legislation, are willing to be complicit.

No matter what you think about this issue, if you care about democracy, make sure your MP does not walk through the chamber and vote for legislation nobody has had the chance to debate and question.

Hat tip: http://mikesivier.wordpress.com/2014/07/10/something-terrible-could-be-happening-in-parliament-on-monday/

ARTICLE: Government Passes a ‘Gagging Law’ to Outlaw Critics Ahead of 2015 Elections

untitled

Massive hat -tip to Scriptonite

In January 2014 the UK government passed the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill.  A bill gagging charities, NGO’s, bloggers, community groups and most attempts at organised opposition to the government in the year prior to a general election…and just in time for the General Election next year.

What is the Gagging Law?

 The Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill, or Gagging Law, was hailed as the UK government’s answer to the issue of commercial lobbying.

But, this bill does not take on the political power of wealthy corporate lobbyists.  Instead, it kneecaps any attempts at organised local and national opposition by civil society, so as not to influence the outcome of general elections.  It is a gagging law.  The law puts in place a range of bureaucratic and financial barriers amounting to a gag on free speech and effective opposition.  These include:

  • The maximum that can be spent before groups have to be registered with the Electoral Commission £20,000 in England and £10,000 in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.
  • Reduce the overall UK-wide spending limit before elections from £988,500 at present to a new limit of £450,000.  To put this in perspective – campaign group 38Degrees has 1.7m members, this would mean neutering their spending power on posters, staff, adverts and ancillary costs to just 26p per member.
  • Putting in place a spending cap of just £9,750 in a particular constituency, in the year running up to a general election – while the local MP can spend as much as they like until just 4 months from the election.

The new spending limits will come into effect on 19th September this year.

This is the state if affairs after a successful campaign of opposition put forward by the likes of 38Degrees, Oxfam and Caroline Lucas of the Green Party MP, along with concerned bloggers such as Another Angry Voice and Vox Political, and journalists like Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones.  This opposition won important concessions – but the bulk of the bill remains intact and now, law.

What Does this mean for Free Speech?

This means that groups across the political spectrum, find themselves in an unlikely alliance of  opposition to a bill that will silence them all.  Whether you want to bring back fox hunting or save your local hospital, the Bill will prevent you organising to do so.  As 38Degrees put it:

“It’s telling that so many groups who wouldn’t normally agree with each other have united to oppose the gagging law. Groups that speak out in favour of hunting, windfarms, HS2 or building more houses are joining together with groups who say exactly the opposite.”

The British Medical Association: “if the Bill is passed, its impact could be deeply disturbing, especially as it raises concerns about what this would mean for freedom of expression”.

The Trade Union Congress (TUC) Head of Campaigns Nigel Stanley called it a “chilling attack” on free speech.

Iain Anderson, the deputy chair of the Association of Professional Political Consultants said “The bill doesn’t capture the vast majority of what lobbyists do. We want all lobbying covered in a statutory register.”

Tamsin Cave, of pressure group SpinWatch called the Bill a “deliberate act of divide and rule, that has the signature of Lynton Crosby [the Conservative Party's election strategist] all over it…This bill, as it stands, is worse than nothing. It is bogus.”

Liz Hutchins, senior campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said it was a “bad day for anyone wanting to protect the environment, save a hospital or oppose tuition fees”.

And Corporate Lobbying Remains Untouched

 It is beyond challenge that UK politics has become corrupted by commercial interests.  This is not a single party issue, but a systemic issue.  But it is not merely about commercial interests paying campaign donations – we have a broader system of revolving doors between politics and business, combined with patronage and favours that this Bill will not touch.  Here are just a sample of modern examples this bill will do nothing to prevent:

Osborne

In 1994, future Chancellor George Osborne was photographed at a party, with his arm around a sex worker called Natalie Rowe, sitting at a table full cocaine.  In October 2005, Natalie Rowe came forward to release the picture and her story to the press.  Rowe sold her story to the Sunday Mirror.  However, to the surprise of Rowe and the Mirror, Andy Coulson broke the story in a leader column in the News of the World.  Not only that, but the story was spun in a manner entirely sympathetic to Osborne, stating that he was ‘a young man when he found himself in a murky world’.  Rowe’s lawyers allege that Coulson stole the story by hacking her phone, and used it to gain leverage with the future chancellor.

And lo, on news of his resignation from the News of the World – Andy Coulson became Director of Communications at Downing Street, despite recently resigning in shame over phone hacking allegations.  He was recruited on the recommendation of none other than George Osborne.

Theresa May

Present day Home Secretary Theresa May’s husband is a director/shareholder in G4S. May has faced several conflict of interest allegations during her tenure.  One of the most egregious was the case of G4S winning a £200m contract to run Lincolnshire police operations.  G4S had recruited law firm White and Cade to support their bid.  In a stunning coincidence, May invited Tom Winsor, a lawyer from the same firm, to conduct ‘an independent review of police reform’ in the run up to the bid – giving the lawyer access to privy information and contacts.Stephen Green & HSBC

HSBC were found guilty in a court of law of funnelling the proceeds of crime through their books knowingly and deliberately.  This was not the act of some rogue trader.

HSBC set up a subsidiary firm with the specific intention of using it to launder the money of Mexican drug barons.  It spirited over $7bn of the stuff between 2001 and 2007.

Stephen Green, the Chairman of HSBC while all this took place, was appointed Trade Minister by David Cameron and now sits at the heart of UK government.

Philip Green

The owner of retail outlet Arcadia, which owns Topshop, is notorious for his tax avoidance schemes.  In 2005, he gave himself the biggest pay cheque in UK history, £1.2bn.  However, by putting Arcadia in his wife’s name (who lives in the tax haven of Monaco and hasn’t done a day’s work for the company) and channelling funds through a string of offshore accounts, Green managed to shift £300m out of the hands of the taxman.  This money could have paid the full £9,000 a year tuition fees for 32,000 students, or the annual salary of 20,000 nurses.  Instead, it sits in Green’s bloated wallet.

Furthermore, despite building a £5bn empire on the back of sweatshop labour – Green refused to sign a pledge to improve safety conditions for Bangladeshi workers after a series of avoidable accidents which left scores dead and injured.

Yet, the Tories appointed this man as their business tsar, leading an ‘efficiency review’ into government spending.  Therefore while Green refuses to pay his share into the pot of public money, he is given power to dictate how that public money is spent.

Libor

Despite persistent rumours about rate-rigging, and receiving information from several sources that an investigation was required – the UK regulator failed to act until it was forced into action by US regulators in 2012.  So why were the Tories so slow to act?

It might be coincidental of course, but some of the Conservative party’s most generous and powerful donors were involved in the scam.

Former Tory Party Treasurer Michael Spencer has donated almost £5m to the party.  This gave him access to dine with the Prime Minister at Chequers.

His firm iCap was fined £55m by regulators in the US and UK for LIBOR rate rigging, and three of his employees face up to 30 years in jail if convicted.  It is notable that while the US fine stood at £41m, the UK fine was a mere £14m (just 4% of their £330m pre-tax profits in 2008, the height of the rigging).  One might suggest this was a decent return on a worthwhile investment.

Lynton Crosby

Cameron has paid £500,000 to appoint Lynton Crosby as the Tory party election strategist.  Crosby is Cameron’s political compass, steering the Prime Minister to launch and ditch policies, and gain the party victory in 2015.

Crosby is an Australian strategist who helped John Howard to four elections victories, and was behind Boris Johnson’s successful campaign to gain re-election as London mayor.

Other items on Crosby’s CV include lobbying for tobacco firm Philip Morris, and he is reported to have signed a £6m deal to lobby on behalf of the firm just last November.  Crosby has also advised energy firms engaged in Fracking in Australia, championing shale gas over sustainable and renewable energy.

And in a remarkably unsurprising turn of events, this year the Tory party chose to ditch its policy on plain cigarette packaging, Osborne announced a raft of tax breaks on Fracking firms, and David Cameron went from promising “Vote Blue, go Green” to “get rid of all this green crap.”

The Bill will do the sum total of diddly squat to deal with these consistent and endemic abuses of power and privilege.

And don’t think Labour are coming to the rescue either.  I have previously covered the parallel issues for the Labour Party.  Labour will not overturn this legislation if they come to power, they have zero interest in doing so.

What Now?

One word: Resist.

Charities, campaigners, community groups and yes, bloggers like myself, will now figure out exactly what their legal standing is in this dark new age of restricted speech – we just don’t know.  But regardless of whether our opposition is legal or not, in coming months and years, we should not bow our heads in resigned acceptance of this most blatant attack on hard won democratic rights.  It is not enough for us to wave our hands, sigh and comply.  If opposing the government in a non-violent way such as organising a leafleting campaign, or transporting people to protests, or writing blogs and petitions calling on voters to act in their own interests is illegal – then let us break the law.  Thomas Jefferson once wrote: “If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.” Well, man or woman, our time has come.

The rank hypocrisy of Tony Blair: He threw open Britain to millions of immigrants, but now sneers at Ukip

ARTICLE: Assassinating a Prime Minister's Reputation: Ten Ways to Blackmail Tony Blair

One of the foremost enemies of the people is Tony Blair

There is a particular tone of voice that BBC presenters use when announcing that the airwaves are to be cleared for an interview with Tony Blair.

A solemn preamble conveys the sense that after that morning’s tawdry squabbling of contemporary pygmy politicians such as Nigel Farage, this is the main act.

In truth, very few of us outside BBC headquarters want to hear anything more from Mr Blair, apart, that is, from him uttering one single word. Which is why I stay tuned, in the forlorn hope that I might one day hear Blair say: ‘Sorry.’

That is, sorry for leading us into ill-judged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with thousands of casualties on all sides; sorry for permanently damaging our country’s diplomatic standing by fatuously endorsing President George W. Bush’s cack-handed statecraft; sorry for changing, through a purposeful policy of mass immigration, the cultural fabric of our country without first asking if there was a consensus to do so.
Gabble

Mr Blair is a man who will gabble silkily for lucrative corporate bonding sessions or cosy media interviews.

But he will never utter what we actually want to hear from him – the faintest hint of contrition to those of us living in the country that he seems effectively to have abandoned.

Presenter Jim Naughtie was full of credulous deference towards Mr Blair on yesterday’s Radio 4 Today programme.

Inevitably, Mr Blair was not actually in the BBC studio. On this occasion he was ‘joining us from Berlin’ – a change from Ramallah or Dubai or the other places between which he flits on private jets, and from which he tends to broadcast when taking a break from his crowded schedule of lectures delivered for a vast fee.

The most striking aspect of Blair’s performance yesterday was his assumption that the spectacular progress made by Ukip in last week’s local and European elections came out of the blue sky and had nothing – absolutely nothing – to do with him or the policies of the government he led.

‘I’ve always said you have to have proper controls in place on immigration,’ Mr Blair intoned, unchallenged.

This peculiar assertion is punctured by the research of Migration Watch, which estimates that immigration during the New Labour years added three million to our population.

It also ignores the account of a former Blairite speechwriter, Andrew Neather, that from late 2000 onwards the deliberate policy ‘was to open up the UK to mass immigration’.

More than that, New Labour’s open-door immigration policy was designed, Mr Neather said, to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

Well, the consequences of that shamefully irresponsible politicking are now to be seen, both in the eastern European migrants crammed six to a room in East London, and in Ukip’s electoral progress.

Nigel Farage would not be grinning at us from the pages of our newspapers with an empty pint glass on his head were it not for Mr Blair’s policies.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2641199/Tony-Blairs-rank-hypocrisy-He-threw-open-Britain-millions-immigrations-sneers-Ukip.html#ixzz33i7mporI

ARTICLE: Paedophile Politicians Are Above The Law says EU!

smith

By Ben Fellows of Before it is News

Also by Ben Fellows: (2012) Conservative M.P. Ken Clarke -”GROPED MY PENIS WITH HIS HAND…[THINKING] I WAS FIFTEEN AT THE TIME”

The question that I’ve been asking is, how can politicians be above the law? Well according to the European Union, all politicians of member states have immunity against prosecution for all criminal and civil offenses with the exception of hate crimes and parking offenses, which beggars belief!

Article 28 of the Treaty of 8 April 1965 establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities (the merger treaty) lays down that the European Communities shall enjoy in the territories of the Member States such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the performance of their tasks, under the conditions laid down in the protocol annexed to that treaty.

Articles 9 and 10 says…

Article 9

Members of the European Parliament shall not be subject to any form of inquiry, detention or

legal proceedings in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the performance

of their duties.

‘Article 10

During the sessions of the European Parliament its Members shall enjoy:

(a)    in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

(b)   in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of

detention and from legal proceedings.

(c)    Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of meeting of the European Parliament.

(d)   Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Members.’

“UK POLITICIANS ARE IMMUNE FROM QUESTIONING OR PROSECTION”

clarke

So the only time a politician isn’t immune is when they are caught in the act of committing an offense. So if the Cook Report Tapes ever show up then perhaps Ken Clarke could be prosecuted for sexually assaulting me as he would have been filmed in the act of committing a crime. Unfortunately, the lawyers protecting these politicians have placed a time limit on even making a complaint, so Ken Clarke could escape questioning on those grounds if the tapes were found and made public. Effectively, the UK parliament and European Union have given members of parliments a license to get away with murder, literally. In general, this form of immunity is such that, unless the British Parliament or the EU gives its authorization, no member may be arrested or prosecuted for acts not carried out in the performance of their duties.

Of course unless politicians are filmed and recorded twenty four seven then there is no hope of bringing any prosecutions against any politicians within the European Union super state, which is why politicians get caught for minor offenses like parking offenses, speeding offenses or hate crimes. There have been the occasions whereby investigative journalists in recent months have filmed politicians and caught them in yet more “Cash for Questions” scandals but we can’t rely on mainstream media journalists all the time.

So why are Politicians Immune from Prosecution? Well to find out lets look back into the history of the parliamentary system.

In ancient Rome, the tribunes of the people enjoyed special protection in order that they should freely exercise their functions. Anyone who infringed that prohibition was liable to punishment and could even be executed.

Today’s right to immunity is based on the same basic idea, although, fortunatly for me, it does not incur the same penalty! The representatives of the people must enjoy certain guarantees to underline the importance of their office, but more importantly to give them the peace of mind they need to implement their mandate.

The origins of parliamentary immunity date back to a session of the English Parliament in 1397, when the House of Commons passed a bill denouncing the scandalous financial behavior of King Richard II of England. Thomas Haxey, the member who was behind this direct act against the King and his court, was put on trial and sentenced to death for treason. Following pressure applied by the Commons, however, the sentence was not carried out, and Haxey received a royal pardon.

This event prompted the House of Commons to review the right of members of parliament to discuss and debate in complete autonomy and freedom, without interference from the Crown. Freedom of speech, introduced into the House of Commons at the beginning of the sixteenth century was confirmed in the 1689 Bill of Rights, which expressly protected discussions and acts of Members of Parliament from any form of interference or objection from outside of Parliament.

ALL POLITICIANS HAVE IMMUNITY, EVEN WHEN THEY HAVE RETIRED!

eupoliticians-300x169

Unlike inviolability, non-liability has an absolute quality, reflected in particular in the duration of its effects: the protection afforded is maintained even after the member’s mandate has come to an end. In other words all politicians have immunity even when they are no longer politicians and have retired. However, whilst there may well have been very good reasons to safe guard parliament from the interference of the crown. Its clear that these privillages are being abused along with the nations children.

When it comes to Paedophilia, child abuse and sexually motivated crimes should politicians still have the right to immunity?

After all how is abusing children part of their Parliamentary mandate? I have never voted for any politician to abuse children. It’s clear that after the Jimmy Savile case it appears that he had immunity from prosecution along with other powerful Paedophiles and child abusing celebrities. The Daily Star Sunday tells of police being told “Stop investigating if you want to keep your jobs” when investigating an alleged paedophile ring at the heart of Margaret Thatcher’s government. A teenage rent boy had alleged that a cabinet minister at the time, who is still alive, had abused him. He also named judges and civil servants. We now know that they were then and will always be, immune from any form of prosecution or questioning by the authorities.

I was informed by the Metropolitan Police that there were protocols in place that meant politicians are above the law and cannot be questioned. I guess they were referring to these EU rules which now govern us all.

Shouldn’t the public be informed of these EU rules? Where is the report on the BBC and other mainstream news outlets informing the public of the EU’s rules. Perhaps the BBC executives and board members are also immune from prosecution like all the other Paedophiles in the country it seems. Perhaps it’s time to change the EU and UK rules on paedophiles operating in and around Westminister. However, if you think that it’s just the Politicians who are immune from prosecution then think again. These privillages also apply to civil servants, their assistants, witnesses, experts and anyone who is involved in the meetings including private individuals in business .

Isn’t it time for politicians to stop being immune against prosecution in regards to child abuse or will we allow these paedophile politicians to continue to abuse parliamentary rules and our children? Not being immune from prosecution may not stop paedophilies but it will mean that “we the people” can have them arrested and prosecuted when witnesses are brave enough to come forward.

 

ARTICLE: Iraq Inquiry: why Sir Jeremy Heywood should be stripped of his role immediately

As the Telegraph reports today, Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary, is blocking the publication of correspondence between George W Bush and Tony Blair ahead of the Iraq War, together with later correspondence between Gordon Brown and Mr Bush – thus effectively stalling the already heavily delayed Iraq Inquiry.

No security issues are at stake. The blocking of the correspondence between Downing Street and the White House is an affront to democracy and prevents us from forming a judgment about the most disastrous war in recent British history. Sir Jeremy Heywood should now be removed from all decisions relating to the Iraq Inquiry, because he was himself deeply involved in the flawed government process in the run-up to and after the invasion of Iraq.

Sir Jeremy was appointed Tony Blair’s principal private secretary in 1999. Within a short space of time (as his senior colleagues have told me in detail) he became an intrinsic part of the collapse of the process of government which took place after 1997.

As Sir Robin Butler graphically described, the principles of sound, accountable administration were abandoned and replaced by “sofa government”. Decisions were made informally by a small coterie including Blair, Alastair Campbell, Jonathan Powell and Anji Hunter. Sir Jeremy was the only civil servant who was granted full access to the sofa.

The sloppiness of this new Downing Street machinery became manifest in the summer of 2003 when the Hutton Inquiry into the death of David Kelly tried to reconstruct the process which led to the release of the name of the MOD scientist in national newspapers. Lord Hutton learnt that four meetings, all involving senior officials and cabinet ministers, each chaired by the prime minister, took place in Downing Street to discuss Dr Kelly in the 48 hours before his name was released. In an amazing breach of normal Whitehall procedures, not one of these meetings was minuted at the time.

In the normal course of events it should have been the job of the principal private secretary to the prime minister – ie Jeremy Heywood – to draw up these minutes. Yet he did not do so.

This episode shows that Sir Jeremy Heywood is much too implicated in these matters to be permitted to make decisions of deep sensitivity concerning the White House/Downing Street correspondence.

David Cameron must now urgently intervene to strip Sir Jeremy of his role, and take control of the decision himself. If he fails to do this, the Prime Minister himself risks becoming complicit in what now looks more and more like a giant cover-up involving elements of the British establishment and political class to prevent the truth becoming known about how we became involved in the Iraq War.

Hat tip: Peter Oborne http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100244895/iraq-inquiry-why-sir-jeremy-heywood-should-be-stripped-of-his-role-immediately/

ARTICLE: The Queen’s Speech and 12 words that insult every British voter

Buff the trumpets, polish the footmen, and marvel at all the pomp involved in pretending to be a democracy.

As the heralds pootle out a tune and the ladies-in-waiting hold Brenda’s ermine cloak, consider the fact that everything in her speech is politics.

As Phil the Greek tries to stay awake and glares at the plebs, consider the fact that Parliament has just been closed for 19 days because the government ran out of ideas.

And when the Queen peers through her thick plastic specs to announce her great reforming government will bring in a law to sack misbehaving MPs, try not to put a fist through the wall.

The Queen will say: “My ministers will introduce legislation on the recall of members of Parliament.”

At precisely the same moment, Nick Clegg’s carefully-scrubbed face will beam with self-righteousness and unimpeachable morality.

Because this is something every single party leader said they would support after the expenses scandal of 2009.

This plan was in the Coalition agreement in 2010, which said: “We will bring forward early legislation to introduce a power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election where an MP is found to have engaged in serious wrong-doing and having had a petition calling for a by-election signed by 10% of his or her constituents.”

And here we are, after four years of government in which it has conspicuously not become law and we’ve been plagued by the likes of Patrick Mercer (disgraced, resigned, golden handshake), Eric Joyce (disgraced, resigned, still in a job) and Mike Hancock (suspended after “prima facie evidence” of “unwanted sexual advances”, still in a job).

And all of whom, if we had that power of recall, might well be down the Job Centre some time ago signing on for £70 a week rather than £67,000 a year with access to subsidised beer.

We’ve also got catastrophically low voter engagement with the political process, with a 15% turnout for the Police and Crime Commissioner elections, 36% for the Euros and just 65% for the last general election where everyone was so unpopular we ended up with “whoever isn’t Gordon”.

The man who runs the country today wasn’t voted into the job. He took it. A mere 36% of voters backed him and that doesn’t put him within screaming distance of a democratic mandate to, for example, hack about the welfare state.

So we need some Parliamentary reform. We need some of the turkeys in the House of Commons to tell one another that Christmas can be a time of fun and feasting.

The time is ripe, and the tide of public disdain is high. People want change.

So perhaps that’s why on February 13 the recall bill was unceremoniously dumped.

It had, as promised, given voters the right to recall a MP with a petition backed by 10% of voters to trigger a by-election.

The trouble with this is it would change stuff.

It would, specifically, switch the loyalty of MPs from their party to mainly their voters, who could yank them off the gravy train with little notice.

This would mean the party machinery – the concept of leader loyalty, voting with the whip, staying on-message to get promoted – would sail out of the window quicker than a potty full of yesterday’s crap.

And that would mean party leaders would find it harder to push through unpopular ideas like the bedroom tax, war, or increased taxes.

And in Coalition government, loyalty is in much shorter supply than rebellion.

Cabinet jobs that buy support have to go around more people, constituency associations put pressure on MPs over issues like gay marriage, and in the first three years of this Parliament Tory and Lib Dem MPs rebelled in 39% of votes.

So Dave and Nick looked at the recall bill and said to themselves: “Shit, no.”

Then they looked at their last year of government, a total lack of any ideas, and a desperate need for something they could say had cleaned up politics.

And then they reintroduced the recall bill for the Queen’s Speech, with the slight tweak that if 10% of local voters signed a petition it would trigger a meeting of MPs to consider whether to sack an MP.

You might want to read that bit again.

The new bill, so proudly announced with all the trumpets and gold twiddly bits, is going to give MPs the right to discipline MPs.

Which is something MPs already have, via the Standards and Privileges Committee, and which did such a marvellous job with Maria Miller’s expenses.

And this new bill, which will cost us taxpayers money in terms of Parliamentary time, food, heating, light, wages and clerical costs, will give them this right they already have while pretending it’s giving us that right.

This is not recall.

This is not democracy.

This is not on.

It’s like trying to stop child abduction by putting the Childcatcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang in charge of it.

You might as well go to London, stand at the gates of Downing Street, and laugh hysterically at every passer-by.

With this great reform, an MP will be able to take the money and never turn up at work for five years. They will be able to leave the party their voters chose, become a Communist, abandon their pledges, and commit any crime attracting a jail sentence of less than one year’s custody and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.

(And FYI, less than a year’s sentence would include assaults, £12,900 of expenses fraud, getting your wife to take your speeding points, and possession of child porn.)

Ask yourself this question: If your MP found in possession of child porn, admitted it and was sentenced to six month’s imprisonment, would you want to sack them?

WELL, YOU CAN’T.

In those parts of the world where recall takes place, it does not lead to politicians being wrongly removed from office by vexatious campaigns.

They have voters who feel empowered, and politicians who have a good reason to keep their noses clean.

We do not have recall.

We do not have voters who feel empowered.

We do not have politicians who are forced to behave themselves.

We just have Nick Clegg, who has this morning used the Queen to deliver the British voter a shattering insult.

You blow trumpets about that if you can. All I can hear is a giant raspberry, and the cynical cackling of people who know they’re safe.

* Contact your MP to demand proper recall here and sign Zac Goldsmith’s petition for the same here.

PARASITES: cast-off ministers given golden goodbyes of almost £90,000 including payment to richest MP in Commons

553210_3675287878960_551982437_nTories and Liberal Democrats axed in the reshuffle will receive a total of £88,687 on ‘Money Monday’ in Whitehall.

Taxpayers face forking out almost £90,000 in “golden goodbyes” to reject ministers today.

Tories and Liberal Democrats axed in the recent reshuffle can pocket up to £17,000 apiece tax free on what has been dubbed Money Monday in Whitehall.

Conservative Richard Benyon – the richest MP in the Commons, who stands to inherit £110million – is in line for more than £5,000 of public money.

Officials say that the severance pay is a legal entitlement but Ireland is changing the law to end the cash for cast-offs scheme there as part of austerity measures.

Campaigning MP John Mann said that the UK should follow suit.

Labour’s Mr Mann said: “There is no basis whatsoever for paying this in Britain. We should follow their lead.

“These people are still getting generous MPs’ pay. It is an insult to people struggling across the country that they get a golden handshake.”

All departing ministers are entitled to three months pay if they do not get another job within three weeks.

That means that those dumped in the last reshuffle can claim the cash from today.

Former Cabinet minister Michael Moore is set to pocket £17,042 after he was sacked as Scotland Secretary.

Fellow Lib Dem Jeremy Browne is among five ex-Ministers of State who are in line for £8,086 after being axed.

Conservative Simon Burns can also pocket the huge sum even though he quit to stand unsuccessfully for Deputy Commons Speaker.

Benyon is one of three junior ministers who are entitled to £5,760 each. Three of his fellow Tories get £4,646 after leaving the whips office. Two of them, John Randall and Greg Knight, have also received knighthoods.

In all, taxpayers face paying out £88,687 to ex-ministers.

A Cabinet Office spokesman said: “Severance pay is widely used across both private and public sectors. Ministerial severance pay has been required under legislation since 1991.”

But low tax pressure group the TaxPayers’ Alliance echoed John Mann’s call for the payments to be axed.

Spokesman Jonathan Isaby said: “When money is so tight and David Cameron talks about wanting to reduce the cost of politics, it beggars belief that these golden goodbyes are still being doled out to ex-ministers.

“After all, having left these posts, they will all still get the MPs’ annual salary of more than £66,000.

“MPs taking on a ministerial role know full well that it’s no job for life and ought to be planning their finances accordingly.

“Taxpayers will be especially baffled that even those who resigned of their own accord still get these tax-free payments worth thousands: which of their constituents working in the private sector would get a bumper payday for quitting their job?”

(2014) Conservative M.P. Mark Menzies -resigns amid claims he paid male escort for sex and drugs

Mark Menzies, 42, quit his post as Parliamentary Private Secretary after a Sunday Mirror investigation by Matthew Drake in Sao Paulo

A top Tory MP resigned as a Ministerial aide tonight after a Sunday Mirror investigation into claims he paid a teenage rent boy for sex and drugs.

Mark Menzies, 42, quit his post as a Parliamentary Private Secretary (PPS) over allegations made by a Brazilian male escort.

Rogerio Santos claimed Mr Menzies, 42, paid for his services 18 months ago, before showing him around Parliament.

The 19-year-old then claims the MP asked him to supply him with illegal methedrone.

His allegations led to Mr Menzies ­dramatically quitting last night as a ­Parliamentary Private Secretary with the Department for International ­Development.

He said: “I have decided to resign as a PPS after a series of allegations were made against me in a Sunday newspaper.”

We were contacted by Santos in a series of emails last week in which he openly admitted being a rent boy.

He told us: “I have been having sex with a Conservative MP for money.

“Mark also asked me to buy methedrone.

“I have personal messages of him talking to me about drugs.”

ARTICLE: Britain’s Richest MP Wants to Gag Press and Prevent Stories Which Might Embarrass Politicians

For background information on “press regulation”/State control of media, see The Common Purpose – State Control of the Press by Appointment from the free press.

A Tory MP and landlord making a fortune from housing benefit payments to the poor has called for changes to the Freedom of Information laws used by the Mirror to expose him .

Richard Benyon, the richest MP in a Commons packed with millionaires, wants the rules altered to prevent stories which might embarrass ­politicians being dug up by journalists.

He made nearly £120,000 in housing benefit from just one council last year through his inherited £110m family estate, we revealed last week.

But Mr Benyon has now called for changes to FOI laws stating “we need to make sure that the Act is there for what it is designed to do” rather than “raking up political ammunition”.

He also complained in a blog post for the rightwing website conservativehome.com that this newspaper used a “picture of me looking as posh as possible”.

The Mirror’s investigation with the GMB union revealed a string of politicians and political donors raking in housing benefit along with the Crown Estates, which supports the Queen, and Prince Charles’s Duchy of Cornwall.

(2014) Tory M.P. Maria Miller -SYPHONS £1MILLION FROM SUFFERING TAXPAYER IN FRAUDULENT CLAIM

An investigation by The Daily Telegraph in 2012 found Mrs Miller claimed more than £90,000 over four years for a second home where her parents lived in South London

“PARASITE: A creature which obtains food and physical protection from a host which never benefits from its presence.” (Chambers English Dictionary)

 

Fraud is fraud but only to the public. If you are an M.P. the criminal, corrupt and decadent System allows you to claim that you “made a mistake” and thus avoid prison. Clearly, people, there is a two-tier justice system –but still the fools keep voting for it. It just never ends, does it Expenses Scandal 2009. By any objective measures this regime is riddled with criminals and parasites.

Culture Secretary to be censured for abusing parliamentary expenses system after overclaiming for her mortgage and making £1m profit on sale.

The Culture Secretary abused the Parliamentary expenses system by over-claiming for her mortgage and then failing to fully co-operate with an investigation into her conduct, The Telegraph can disclose.

Maria Miller, the Culture secretary, is set to have to repay up to £5,000 and be censured for her claims – following an official Parliamentary inquiry which is expected to report as soon as this week.

It can also be disclosed that Mrs Miller has recently sold the south London house at the centre of the scandal for a profit of more than £1million.

The Cabinet minister, who has previously been supported by David Cameron, is expected to come under intense pressure to resign when the results of the official inquiry are made public.

The Prime Minister will be loathed to lose the state-school educated female member of his Government but any minister found to have abused the Parliamentary expenses system is likely to be seen as a major electoral liability.

One Conservative source said: “We simply cannot have a member of the Cabinet found to have abused the expenses system in any way this close to vital elections.”

Parliamentary authorities first launched an inquiry into Mrs Miller’s claims more than a year ago following an investigation by The Telegraph.

She was exposed after claiming more than £90,000 over four years for a second home where her parents lived in South London – rather than submitting claims for cottages she rented in her Basingstoke constituency.

The Parliamentary Commissioner is understood to have concluded that the arrangement did not lead to Mrs Miller benefiting financially. However, the Commissioner is unlikely to have been aware of the seven-figure profit made in recent weeks by the minister.

Mr and Mrs Miller sold the large house in Wimbledon for £1.47 million on Valentine’s Day of this year. They originally bought the house for £234,000 – which means the house value increased by £1,236,000.

Between 2005 and 2009, she claimed £90,718, which was only £115 less than the total amount she could have claimed. Although the house only cost £234,000 in 1995, the Millers took out a large mortgage against the house – and claimed the interest on the mortgage from the taxpayer.

In November 2007, they increased the mortgage from £525,000 to £575,000. The rules state that MPs could only increase their mortgages to pay the costs of necessary improvements – and that these should be signed off with the parliamentary authorities.

The Parliamentary inquiry discovered that Mrs Miller over-claimed for her mortgage and so should repay around £5,000 to the expenses watchdog.

The over-payment is understood to have occurred because Mrs Miller did not adjust her claims downward claims for mortgage as interest rates fell during the period under investigation.

The Telegraph also understands that the MPs want Mrs Miller to apologise to Parliament for not co-operating in a “timely manner” with the Commissioner.

MPs who sit on the standards committee are thought to be waiting for more financial information to consider at their next meeting on Tuesday before finalising the penalty to be imposed on Mrs Miller.

The MPs are frustrated that they have had to wait for months for basic financial details about the amount of money she over-claimed.

The Parliamentary report is understood to contain a memorandum which details the various attempts made by investigators seeking Mrs Miller’s mortgage details.

One source said: “If she had just said sorry she would be in a much stronger position. It will be a question of embarrassment and if she showed the best judgment.

Read on:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/10729984/Maria-Miller-to-have-to-repay-thousands-of-pounds-and-apologise-over-expenses-claims.html

(2014) Conservative Council to Ban Feeding the Homeless

david_cameron_minimum_wage

THEY spent much of the run-up to the election trying shake off their image as the nasty party.

But a heartless group of Tories have ­revealed their true colours by banning charities from running soup kitchens for the ­homeless.

Conservative Westminster council in Central London also wants to make it an offence to sleep rough – while slashing £5million of funding to hostels.

Astonishingly, town hall chiefs claimed soup kitchens only “encourage” people to sleep on the streets.

Westminster council, one of the richest in the land, wants to bring in a bylaw making it an offence to “give out food for free”, punishable by fines. The twisted move blows apart David Cameron’s Big Society boast that an army of ­volunteers will flock to help those worse off.

And it sparked a storm of ­criticism. Reverend Alison Tomlin of the Methodist church in ­Westminster said: “The proposals are nothing short of disgusting. This bylaw punishes people solely for their misfortune and belongs in a ­Victorian statute book, not the 21st century.”

Labour’s London mayoral ­candidate Ken Livingstone added: “Only the Conservatives would try to make it illegal to give food to the homeless.

“With Tory mayor Boris Johnson cutting affordable housing to a trickle, the number of people sleeping on the streets is rising and cuts to housing benefit threaten ­thousands more with eviction and homelessness.”

Councillor Paul Dimoldenberg, leader of the Labour Group, said: “Nothing illustrates the cold-hearted and callous approach of the Conservatives than this attempt to criminalise those offering help to ­homeless people.

“I thought this was what the Big Society was supposed to be all about, generous-hearted people giving their time to those less fortunate, at no cost to the public purse. This is a nasty, mean move from a nasty, mean party.”

A consultation paper says rough sleeping and soup runs would be banned in the Westminster Cathedral Piazza and surrounding area. Labour said the cruel move comes as the council ­withdraws funding for three hostels in the borough and housing trust.

But Westminster’s Daniel Astaire risked provoking further fury by declaring free food “keeps people on the street longer”. He added: “Soup runs have no place in the 21st century. It is undignified that people are being fed on the streets. They actually encourage people to sleep rough with all the dangers that entails. Our priority is to get people off the streets altogether. We have a range of services that can help do that.”

A council spokesman said soup runs attract up to 100 people at a time, “making it a no-go area for residents, with issues around litter, urination, violence and disorder”.

3Tory councillor John Fareham has apologised after calling opponents of Hull council’s £65million cuts “retards” on Twitter. He said: “I got it wrong.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433#ixzz2xMikI0oV

VIDEO: How the Lib-Lab-Con is Destroying Britain

A five-minute synopsis of the threat you and your family face from the criminal, corrupt and decadent regime that the fools keep voting for. (See first 6 minutes.):

 

(2014) S.N.P. Leader Alec Salmond -”BULLY” WHO FACES BAN FROM ABERDEEN COUNCIL

       

THE First Minister could prevented from carrying out any formal business in areas such as parks and offices for six-months, if the plan is approved by the council on Wednesday.

 

FIRST Minister Alex Salmond is facing a six-month ban from all council premises in Aberdeen for behaving “like a bully”.

The leader and his team of Scottish Government ministers would be prevented from carrying out any formal business in areas such as parks and offices, under the plan being put to the full city council on Wednesday.

Labour councillor Willie Young, who proposed the unusual move, said relations are at an all-time low with the Government.

It follows complaints from the city about the level of financial support from central government. Mr Salmond recently suggested the city administration is “incompetent” for its handling of a decision which he says could cost Aberdeen £7.3 million.

Mr Young said: “Mr Salmond has acted like a bully and spoken unacceptably about the city council.

“The only way to tackle a bully is to stand up to him.

“We’d obviously want to get the Scottish Government round the table and see if we can come to a better understanding, but I fully expect support for this action.”

The ban, if backed, would only extend to official business.

“If he wants to go for a walk with his wife in one of our lovely parks, no one will stop him,” Mr Young added.

A spokesman for Derek Mackay, the local government minister, said: “Willie Young is the £7.3 million man. His actions in voting against plans which would have seen a £7.3 million increase in funding for Aberdeen were bizarre as well as against the interests of the people of Aberdeen.

“The Scottish Government has good relations with all of Scotland’s other 31 councils – despite those councils being of many different political colours. In that context it is the increasingly bizarre comments from the Labour-Tory alliance at Aberdeen City Council which stand out.”

Read on: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/alex-salmond-faces-ban-aberdeen-3204235

(2014) S.N.P. M.S.P Bill Walker -WIFE BEATER

DISGRACED former MSP Bill Walker is to be released from jail this week after serving only half of his 12-month sentence.

Last night the news was greeted with dismay by anti-domestic violence campaigners.

The wife-beating former SNP politician was jailed in September for violent assaults on three ex-wives and a stepdaughter over a 30-year period.

The 71-year-old, from Alloa, had denied 23 charges of assault and one breach of the peace but was found guilty of all charges at Edinburgh Sheriff Court. After serving six months, the former Dunfermline MSP is due for release from Dumfries Prison this week.

Opponents of the law, which sees prisoners serving under four years freed after half their term, said Walker’s release “exposes the nonsense” of the system.

At his trial, Sheriff Kathrine Mackie heard how Walker gave his first wife, Maureen Traquair, a black eye days before their wedding in 1967. His second wife, Anne Gruber, said Walker kicked and punched her and knocked her to the ground. And his third wife, Diana, testified that the politician repeatedly struck her.

Walker plans to appeal against his conviction and has a court hearing scheduled for April 17.

Tory MSP Murdo Fraser said: “This just exposes the nonsense of automatic early release.”

Graeme Pearson, a former senior police officer and now Scottish Labour’s Justice spokesman, said: “Many people will be disappointed Bill Walker has only served six months of a 12-month sentence.”

Read on:  http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/465264/Wife-beater-MSP-Bill-Walker-gets-early-release-from-prison

 

 

 

 

 

(2014) New Labour Leader Willie Smith -ANOTHER LABOUR PAEDO CAUGHT MAKING CHILD RAPE IMAGES

A Labour Party Leader for the Corby Council of England has been caught downloading images of children being raped by paedophiles on the internet. Willie Smith was arrested by police after his Child Pornography ‘Stash’ was discovered which was so large it took up the space of Two computers.

Parents in the Kingswood area of Corby are said to be horrified, One parent claimed that she had voted for Labour Councillor Willie Smith and was horrified that she had voted for a man who enjoyed watching and making images of children being sexualy abused by pedophiles.

Police applied for a search warrant for Willie Smith’s home address on the Lloyds Estate where many families live with children. Parents Against paedophiles (PAP) representative for Northampton Angela Clarke commented, ”This takes the Labour paedophile list to 45 now. We aim to push the issue with every school and nursery about Labour party paedophile activities (PIE) by more than Ten previous Labour school governors, to keep them off school councils, organisations and other governing bodies. We informed schools in One area, of paedophile boy scout leader and child rapist Timothy Edmeades upon his release,  within Three months, he was arrested for filming boys under Ten years old in the same area as before.”

Hat tip: Labour25: http://labour25.com/2014/01/23/labour-leader-willie-smith-caught-making-child-rape-images/

ARTICLE: Eric Joyce M.P., Patrick Mercer M.P., and Mike Hancock M.P. -”PERFECT EXAMPLES OF PARLIAMENT’S LOW STANDARDS”

In any other profession, the three errant MPs would have been shown the door.

A few weeks ago, James Arbuthnot, after a long and almost pointless career, announced that he was standing down as a Conservative MP. Mr Arbuthnot, whose final position was as chairman of the backbench defence committee, gave an interview which seemed to suggest that he was now hoping to find jobs in the defence business. He could not resist one final, parting bleat: “The constant assumption that everybody in politics is in it for their own good, or is a crook, gets very debilitating after a bit.”

Mr Arbuthnot, whose expenses claim as revealed in the Telegraph included a bill for work on the family swimming pool, money he later repaid, was voicing a characteristic complaint among members of the political class. They are convinced that they are underpaid, under-appreciated and asked to uphold standards that would never be expected from an ordinary person.

This view needs challenging as urgently as ever. Five years after the expenses investigation revealed evidence of criminality, fraud, cheating and greed among a substantial minority of MPs, there is still a problem. I only have space here to look at three examples, one from each main political party, each exposing the way that Parliament tolerates disgraceful conduct that would not be allowed in any other walk of life.

The first involves Eric Joyce, Labour MP for Falkirk, who head-butted a Conservative MP and caused damage and mayhem in the Strangers Bar of the House of Commons. At a later date he wrestled two policemen to the ground during a karaoke night at the Sports and Social Bar. There was another episode in an airport, but that is a complicated story and need not detain us here.

The second concerns the Conservative Patrick Mercer, who was exposed by BBC Panorama and the Telegraph for accepting £4,000 (by a reporter pretending to represent the Fiji government) to ask parliamentary questions.

The third case is the most topical: the Lib Dem Mike Hancock, who has been accused of making a series of inappropriate advances towards a female constituent suffering from mental health problems.

According to an internal Lib Dem report carried out by a QC, and leaked to the Guido Fawkes website, the alleged victim provided “compelling prima facie evidence of serious and unwelcome sexual behaviour by Mr Hancock”.

There are grounds for sympathy for all three MPs. Colonel Mercer will always merit great respect as a soldier who carried out nine tours of duty in Northern Ireland, ending up as commanding officer of his regiment, the Sherwood Foresters. Eric Joyce, an admirable politician in his lucid moments, clearly suffers from a serious drink problem. There but for the grace of God go many of us. The allegations against Mr Hancock are very disturbing, but he denies them, and they have not been proved. I have been told that he is a conscientious local MP.

Nevertheless it is extraordinary that any of them remain in their jobs. MPs often demand more money and expenses with the insistence that they occupy a serious and responsible position in society comparable to senior civil servants, headmasters, GPs or high-ranking members of the Armed Forces.

Yet it is quite inconceivable that Joyce, Hancock or Mercer would have survived for a single second had they occupied a position in a serious profession. A drink-drive conviction is career death in the Army, let alone the kind of drunken brawl that is Mr Joyce’s speciality. A doctor with charges of the gravity being levelled against Mr Hancock, particularly when given credibility by an internal investigation, would surely not be allowed to carry on holding surgeries. Parliament, however, has very low standards.

Messrs Joyce, Hancock and Mercer carry on collecting their salaries of approximately £66,000 a year, not to mention expenses that, according to one estimate, will total, collectively, around £500,000 (enough to pay the annual salary for more than 20 nurses) by the time they finally quit at the next election. The evidence suggests that, in return, they don’t carry out much work.

Eric Joyce has voted 97 times in 489 divisions (19.8 per cent) since being stripped of the Labour whip just under two years ago. Patrick Mercer has voted on 24 occasions out of 184 divisions (13.6 per cent) since he resigned from the Tory Whip. Mike Hancock has much the best record of the three errant MPs, with a voting record of just under 45 per cent since he lost the Lib Dem whip in May 2013, but this is nevertheless a very low total for a backbencher.

It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that three constituencies have gone at least partially unrepresented in recent months, and Parliament is relaxed that this should remain the case. Portsmouth, where Hancock is MP, has cause to feel especially neglected. His neighbouring MP, the Conservative Penny Mordaunt, recently participated in an exhausting televised diving competition, though she claims she scheduled all her training out of parliamentary hours.

One would not expect that Speaker John Bercow, a notorious expense “flipper”, to be much bothered by this kind of conduct, and he hasn’t been. However, it is surprising that neither the Prime Minister nor either of the other two main party leaders tolerate the situation. Their supporters point to the fact that the three MPs have been stripped of the whip; but this argument does not stand up to scrutiny.

Before the 2010 election, the Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour each pledged that they would legislate to allow voters the power of “recall”, thus giving ordinary people the chance to force a by-election. The proposal was so uncontroversial that it slipped easily into the Coalition Agreement: “We will bring forward early legislation to introduce a power of recall, allowing the voters to force a by-election where an MP is found to have engaged in serious wrong-doing.”

The Coalition government finally published a Bill in draft form last December, but it comes too late and – worst of all – puts a parliamentary committee in charge. As the Tory dissident Zac Goldsmith told the Guardian last week: Recall it is “about empowering voters not parliamentary committees. The Government’s proposals are the opposite of what was intended and promised.”

Why have David Cameron and Nick Clegg broken their promise? It is impertinent to speculate about motive, but my guess is that both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are terrified of a by-election. Hancock’s Portsmouth South constituency and Patrick Mercer’s Newark are classically vulnerable to the Ukip electoral insurgency.

Meanwhile, up in Falkirk Ed Miliband and Labour have serious problems of their own. With Labour discredited, the Scottish National Party could easily win. So all three party machines seem to have concluded that it is better to allow Hancock, Joyce and Mercer to wander round Parliament like a foul smell than to allow voters their say.

It is a decision that shows the habitual contempt in which the British political class holds voters. By an interesting paradox, that contempt is the reason for the rise of Ukip in the first place. To answer James Arbuthnot’s complaint, it is no wonder that so many people believe that “everybody in politics is in it for their own good, or is a crook”.

Hat tip: Peter Oborne at The Daily Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10604812/Joyce-Hancock-and-Mercer-are-perfect-examples-of-Parliaments-low-standards.html

(2014) VIDEO: New Labour Mayor John Murray -ANOTHER NEW LABOUR PAEDOPHILE JAILED FOR RAPING A CHILD

Paedophilia is widespread in the Establishment: Judges, police, and especially politicians are involved. See here for evidence.   Those who are courageous and honourable in defending our children are silenced by political persecution. One would think that whistleblowers would be celebrated instead of harassed and imprisoned without charge or trial. But no, not in this sick society headed by a criminal “elite” who are kept in power by fools and their votes.

Free Robert Green -NOW!     http://www.freerobertgreen.co.uk/

Video: Former Lord Mayor of Cork John Murray is jailed

A Labour lord mayor has been remanded in custody for sentence after a jury today convicted him of raping a child two years after he served as the city’s first citizen. John Murray (83) had pleaded not guilty in Court to sexually assaulting the child at four locations in the city on various dates between March 1996 and October 1998. Following six hours of deliberations spread over two days, the jury of seven men and five women found John Murray, guilty of raping the child after hearing evidence from 17 witnesses. A longstanding member of the Labour Party, Murray was first elected to the City Council in the 1985 local elections and re-elected in 1991. Two years later he was elected Labour lord mayor. There were emotional scenes outside Court after the verdicts as the complainant and her parents and other family members hugged each other before thanking the investigating police for all they had done. The woman told the court that the reason she didn’t come forward until adulthood was that she was afraid that she wouldn’t be believed. “He intimidated me – he was a very high profile man, he had been the Labour lord mayor.”

Hat tip:   http://labour25.com/2014/02/20/the-chain-the-mayor-forged/

ARTICLE: Ex-Top Cop Calls on CURRENT Labour Party Paedophile Monsters to Apologise

Are you the fool still going to vote for these monsters? Think it is only the Labour Party? Wrong. Paedophilia is widespread in the whole System –Tory, Labour, Lib-Dem. EVIDENCE: http://eotp.org/tag/paedophilia/
Do not encourage the Enemies of the People. Withhold your vote at the next election.
They are laughing at YOU and YOUR family and are a danger to YOUR children.
  • The left-wing human rights organisation built extraordinary links with the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange
  • The trio refuse to comment on the NCCL’s activities or apologise for them
  • Mike Hames, former head of Scotland Yard’s Paedophile Squad, said they made a huge mistake

Three senior Labour figures were under mounting pressure last night to apologise for supporting a vile group campaigning to legalise child sex.

Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman, her husband, home affairs spokesman Jack Dromey, and former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt all held key roles in the National Council for Civil Liberties.

The left-wing human rights organisation built extraordinary links with the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange during the 1970s and 80s, yet the trio refuse to comment on the NCCL’s activities or apologise for them.

Harriet HarmanJack DromeyPatricia Hewitt

But Mike Hames, the former head of Scotland Yard’s Paedophile Squad, said: ‘They made a huge mistake. At the very least they should acknowledge, publicly, that they got it wrong. 

‘That would be a great help to victims of child sex abuse.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2563377/Now-say-sorry-Ex-Yard-chief-calls-Labour-trio-admit-backing-paedophilia-

Article: Vote Labour -Get a Paedo for a Neighbour

Why now? Why after all this time –after patriots, nationalists, and the alternative media have been exposing this for years– does the Daily Mail suddenly cover the outrage?

Enemies of the People posted this story over 4 (FOUR) years ago:  (2009) LABOUR FIGURES’ BIZARRE LINK TO PAEDOPHILE GROUPS:

Will there be a public enquiry or a national cover-up? Will Harriet Harperson and her husband, Jack Dromey, be resigning as an M.P.s in disgrace?  

How three of the party’s most senior figures campaigned for a vile paedophile group now being probed by police for ‘abusing children on an industrial scale’

  • Documents found by Mail show link between Left-wing and paedophiles
  • Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt held senior positions at National Council for Civil Liberties before rising to top of the Labour party
  • The NCCL was an ‘affiliate’ of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), whose members may have abused children on an ‘industrial scale’
  • Paperwork reveals NCCL helped lobby Parliament for the age of sexual consent to be cut to as low as ten and called for incest to be legalised

ABOVE: “We’re all in this together.”

Appearing in the pages of a Left-wing magazine called Rights, it was, by any account, an extraordinary letter.

Written by one Mike Morten, who lived in London and described himself as ‘both a paedophile and gay’, the letter complained that laws forbidding him from having sex with children ‘interfere with my life and civil liberties’.

‘Consensual sex between adults and children is simply people of different age groups being nice to each other,’ it argued.

Morten then criticised recent newspaper articles which had described perpetrators of child sex offences as ‘molesters’.

‘This is a loaded and pejorative term,’ he declared. ‘It’s a totally inaccurate description of us, and a put-down, in much the same way that “pansy” is a put-down of gays and “n*****” a put-down of blacks.’

The letter was dated October 1982, and today his words seem so bizarre, so appalling, that a casual reader could be forgiven for wondering if they are a grotesque spoof.

No magazine, of any political persuasion, would dare to carry material that attempted to portray paedophiles as some sort of oppressed minority.

Neither would the oxygen of publicity be given to a self-confessed sexual predator who, like Morten, wanted to convince readers that small children might somehow ‘enjoy’ being abused by adults.

The publisher of a printed title which advanced such morally repugnant views, apparently in the name of political correctness, would surely be committing career suicide.

Yet Rights was no knockabout spoof. And the people behind its publication certainly didn’t sink without trace.

Quite the reverse, in fact.

The now dog-eared 1982 magazine, which I have unearthed in archives, was the quarterly journal of the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL), the well-known lobby group which is now called Liberty.

Known as a radical campaigning organisation, the NCCL was that year being run by three tub-thumping young Left-wingers who would rise to extremely senior positions in the Labour Party.

One was Patricia Hewitt, who as general secretary of the NCCL from 1974 to 1983 was at the helm of the organisation. She went on to become Tony Blair’s Health Secretary, and nowadays has a lucrative seat as a non-executive director on the board of BT earning £160,000 a year for a part-time job.

Another was Harriet Harman, the current Labour Deputy Leader. She served as its legal officer from 1978 until October 28, 1982, when she won a by-election and entered Parliament as the MP for Camberwell and Peckham.

A third was Jack Dromey, Harman’s husband, who sat on the NCCL’s executive committee for more than a decade.

(1950-1966) Then-Labour Cllr. Cyril Smith -HOMOSEXUAL PAEDOPHILE

Homosexual Paedophile Cyril Smith molested and tortured children during his 16 years as a school teacher and Labour Councillor.

 

Cyril Smith Labour PartyAlthough we have heard Constantly by the Labour affiliated media that Cyril Smith was aligned to the liberal Democrats, hidden evidence has shown his dirty deeds attacking boarding school children go way back into the 1960′s.

 

Cambridge HouseOne of the Seven children who were attacked at the ‘Cambridge Boys Hostel’ which was funded by Freemasons, said that Cyril Smith who was employed by the hostel, pulled him into a secluded Cyril Smith Confirmed Paedophileroom and told the child he was to be punished. The child was made to pull down his pants and was made to bend over Cyril Smith’s knee while he had his bottom spanked and fondled. Another child was subjected to the homosexual paedophile’s torture because he had taken money from another boy. Labour councillor Cyril Smith made the second child remove his pants so he could fondle and squeeze the boys testicles.

 

Cyril Smith with fellow homosexual jeremy ThorpeLabour Councillor Cyril Smith attacked and raped at least 7 male children while at the Cambridge Boys Hostel. Cyril Smith was the local Labour councillor from 1950 to 1966. The  Cambridge Boys Hostel was closed down in 1965.

Hat tip:  http://labour25.com/2013/03/21/a-glutton-for-boys/

 

(2013) New Labour Mayor Graham Pearson – arrested for possessing child rape photographs

Graham Pearson 1

A Labour Party mayor and primary school teacher has been arrested for possessing child rape photographs.

Graham Pearson, 54, was arrested at his Cherry Crescent home in Balladen, Rawtenstall, for having a stash of violent rape photographs of very young children.

He was bailed to return to Rawtenstall police station while officers considered whether charges should be brought against him.

But Mr Pearson, who is a Labour party council leader, was formally cautioned when he attended one of his council appointments.

A Lancashire Police spokesman said: “Lancashire Constabulary have given an adult caution to a 54-year-old man from the Rossendale area for possession of indecent photographs of children.

“We arrested Mr Pearson at his home address.”

When asked about the caution, Mr Pearson said: “I have no comment to make.”

Mr Pearson went missing from his home, and police issued an appeal for his return. His silver Chevrolet car was also said to be missing. But he was later discovered hiding in the Cumbria area.

He was a Hareholme ward councillor and also served as Mayor of Rossendale.

Hat tip:  http://labour25.com/2013/01/16/mayor-on-the-run/

VIDEO: Labour’s Cyril Smith -PAEDOPHILIA BEFORE HIS TIME IN THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS WITH THE FULL BACKING OF THE ESTABLISHMENT

In the video Chris Marshall, one of many victims of Cyril Smith, makes the following uncomfortable points and asks some serious questions of the Establishment that is directly involved with your children.

…people knew about what he was doing, people that worked close to him. Why didn’t they come forward…why didn’t they open their mouths? They knew what he was doing. They were quite happy to go and watch him get knighted; they were quite happy for him to be an MP, a mayor or something… People knew what he was doing; why didn’t anyone say anything.

The answer is obvious and simple: because the Establishment is riddled with paedophiles, degenerates, criminals, traitors… who look after each other and who are a direct threat to you and your family.

(2006) New Labour’s Lord Janner –HIS AID IS MYSTERIOUSLY MURDERED

Well, it seems that the plot thickens. Please join the dots. Look at the mysterious murder of Liberal Democrat Cllr. Frank Beck It is plausible that Lord Janner knew each him (the Establishment is extremely incestuous). How intimate their relationship one can only guess, but perhaps Beck was ready to cut a deal with the authorities to lessen his sentence by implicating Janner -hence the mysterious murder.

Unfortunately, this case is just the tip of the iceberg. Hundreds of paedophiles and persons related to it in the Establishment can be found here, documented in several pages http://eotp.org/tag/paedophilia/ This is in addition to the rapists http://eotp.org/tag/rapists/ and other sex criminals http://eotp.org/tag/sex-criminals/ .

Paedophilia is rife in the Establishment. No wonder the MET have refused to investigate Cyril Smith -heaven knows what what would be uncovered. And MI5 didn’t know about Jimmy Savile -even though he regularly associated with royalty! PMSL! What a risible insult to our intelligence.

STILL GOING TO VOTE FOR THE MACHINE NEXT YEAR, FOOL?

89 Years For Killing Alan

The one-time aide to Lord Janner was stabbed to death in July 2006, just a month after moving to Washington DC to take up a prestigious internship on the potential presidential campaign of Virginia Governor Mark Warner.

On Friday, Christopher Piper, 26, and Jeffrey Rice, 23 were sentenced to a combined 89 years for robbing and murdering the 27-year-old, described as one of Anglo-Jewry’s rising stars.

Both men pleaded guilty to the charges of second degree murder and burglary at the District of Columbia Superior Court in May. Rice was sentenced to 52 years in prison and Piper to 37 years.

Speaking to TJ yesterday, Senitt’s sister, Emma said: “Although I didn’t think the sentence was long enough, I don’t think any thing would be long enough. The last year has been like a movie and you wait for the credits to roll, but they won’t.”

The family said in a statement that they would have liked the sentences to be longer but were happy with the outcome. “We were all dealt a life sentence on 9 July 2006. We have to live with the constant nightmares; they must live with his blood on their hands. Although the sentences dealt to his attackers were not as long as we would have liked we do feel that some justice has been delivered.”

Handing down the sentence, the judge, Neal Kravitz, described the attack as “a savage murder” adding that it was his responsibility to ensure the perpetrators “never again pray on innocent people”.

Senitt, originally from Pinner, was walking a female friend home in the affluent neighbourhood of Georgetown when they were attacked by a gang demanding their cash and possessions. Piper used a pellet gun disguised as a handgun to steal the woman’s purse and also tried to sexually assault her, the prosecution said.

Senitt was stabbed in the chest and had his throat slit by Rice while trying to protect his friend. He died from his injuries.

The family expressed disappointment that an unnamed 15-year-old was only given juvenile detention until the age of 21 after admitting charges of felony murder, conspiracy, armed robbery and theft.

The case of a fourth suspect, Olivia Miles, accused of driving the getaway car has been kept confidential.

A statement was also read out during Friday’s hearing from the female friend Sennitt was trying to protect. A lawyer for the woman, who has remained anonymous, said the pair were confronted by the men outside the mansion where Senitt was staying. They were separated and Piper forced her to the ground and fondled her, the statement said. She screamed she was being raped. She said Senitt’s last words were: “They’ve cut me.”

Her statement added: “No one deserved to spend their final moments like this, especially Alan.”

Lord Janner, who worked closely with Senitt on interfaith charity, the Co-Existence Trust, told TJ: “It’s an eternal tragedy which haunts me every day. He was a great young man and we worked together very happily. His loss was a disaster for his family, friends and the whole community.”

89 Years For Killing Alan by Marc Shoffman

2013 New Labour Lord Janner -HIS HOME RAIDED BY POLICE REGARDING SEX ABUSE

Police officers spent two days raiding the London home of Lord Greville Janner as part of an on-going probe into historic sex abuse claims

  • Officers raided the home of Lord Greville Janner of Braunstone, Leicester
  • Leicestershire Police spent two days searching his flat in Barnet
  • The force refused to comment on what was seized at the property
  • Spokesman said no arrests have been made in connection with the raid
  • Neighbour describes seeing police ‘coming and going’ for days
  • Lawyers for the peer say he is helping police with their inquiries

Police officers have raided the London home of Labour Lord Greville Janner, as part of an ‘on-going criminal investigation’ in to historic sex abuse allegations, it has emerged.

Officers from Leicestershire Police spent two days searching the peer’s £600,000 apartment in Barnet, north London.

The force refused to give details of what was seized at the 85-year-old’s home but confirmed it is part of an on-going probe.

It is understood the investigation is into allegations of historic sex abuse.

A police spokesman said: ‘Leicestershire Police can confirm its officers executed a search warrant of a property in Barnet, London as part of an ongoing criminal inquiry.

‘No arrests have been made at this stage.’

The former barrister was named Baron Janner of Braunstone, Leicester in 1997.

The peer’s lawyers WilmerHale said in a statement, that Lord Janner is helping police officers with their inquiries.

The statement said: ‘Lord Janner has not been arrested but has been assisting the police with their inquiries. We are not able to make any further comment at this time.’

Builders working on a renovation next door to Janner’s home saw a number of police cars and officers at the address on Monday and Tuesday.

One said: ‘There were loads of police cars here on Monday and Tuesday. They were coming and going all day.

‘I don’t know what happened, but they’ve been back quite often ever since.

‘I think the old man that lived there was arrested, but I’m not sure.

‘They were here on Tuesday and came back on Wednesday.’

The huge white-fronted property in posh West Hampstead contains six luxury flats.

Janner was at home on Thursday afternoon but refused to answer the door.

A young man, who identified himself as ‘Jameson’, claimed he was the Lord’s personal spiritual healer.

He said: ‘The Lord won’t come to the door. He is exhausted with all the stress of dealing with the police.

‘He’s old and needs his rest. I don’t want to say any more.’

ARTICLE: Greville Janner, VIP child abuse and the mysterious death of Frank Beck

Hat tip: The Coleman Experience: http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/the-mysterious-death-of-frank-beck-2/

whitemoor_prisonjannerJanner Geller JacksonBlairCharie Blair and JannerFreinds ReunitedJanner Book Tony BlairJanner EnquiryJanner and GellerMagic Circle

In 1994, Frank Beck died in Whitemoor prison whilst serving a staggering 5 life sentences for alleged child abuse.

Frank Beck had been implicated in the abuse of boys in Leicestershire care homes.

Frank Beck had always maintained his innocence and claimed he was imprisoned because he’d exposed alleged abuse by a high-profile politician.

Frank Beck was appealing against his conviction and sentence.

Leave to appeal and legal aid were granted in January 1993 and Anthony Scrivener QC, one of Britain’s most eminent lawyers and former chairman of the Bar, agreed to take the case.

Frank Beck’s solicitor said at the time of his death

‘He was very impatient for the appeal to go ahead. His death came out of the blue. Normally the case would lapse and die with him but his family and close friends are discussing the possibility of carrying on with the appeal. This would not be unprecedented.’

Beck was convinced there was enough new evidence and material that was not put before the original court due to non-disclosure by the prosecution which would have made the original conviction unsafe and proved his innocence.’

In 2011 the following anonymous comments were left on a blog which was discussing his death:

In 1991, after accusing Janner of paedophilic behaviour with a teenager, Frank Beck was arrested and charged with the sexual and physical abuse of children in his care over a thirteen-year period.

At his trial Beck stated that: – “One child has been buggered and abused for two solid years by Greville Janner“.

Immediately after this, Janner who just happens to be, ironically, a long time member of the boy scouts association, and Sir David Napley, his solicitor, went to Police headquarters in Leicester.

Whereupon, the following statement was issued:

“We have advised Mr. Janner that he is prevented from making any statement at this stage”.

Shortly afterwards, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alan Green, let it be known that “for lack of evidence”, Janner would not be prosecuted, even though Paul Winston, who was just thirteen when he and Janner first met, was able to describe Janner‘s home, the hotel rooms they had shared, and Janner’s habits and person in detail.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, himself, was arrested for kerb-crawling in Kings Cross a little while later.

Green had come to the attention of the police previously for this same misdemeanour and was quietly given a formal warning.

The scandal prompted his resignation from public office and the suicide of his wife.

In court, Paul Winston, who was, at the time of Beck’s trial, a married man with children, stood up for him, as did several other witnesses, paying credit to his achievements and behaviour and confirming his anti-Janner testimony.

He said Beck had counselled him over his relationship with the MP, and had brought the affair to an end.

He also stated that he had had a beneficial effect on his life. According to Winston’s evidence, he was invited to Janner’s home near Golders Green, whilst Janner‘s wife was away, and this led to his sharing Janner’s bed where they “cuddled and fondled each other”.

Thereafter Winston testified that, over the next two years, he was regularly sodomised by Janner.

Beck discovered what had been going on after Winston was put into his care, at which point, he informed his superiors at Leicester Social Services.

At one point, Janner visited the care home with a new bicycle for Paul but Beck denied him entry and would not allow the gift to be passed on. This was confirmed by another witness at the trial.

Nevertheless, Beck was found guilty and sentenced to twenty-four years in prison, with five life sentences to run concurrently for his “crimes”.

Janner was never brought to court, nor was he ever called upon to testify.

Frank Beck died suddenly of a “heart attack”, shortly before his appeal was due to begin.

He was, by all accounts, a fit man at the time of his death.

He never stopped protesting his innocence and Janner’s guilt.

His two main solicitors, who admitted to being sceptical in the first instance, believed him at the time that he was found guilty.

One of these solicitors has since been killed in a road accident, and the other has been subjected to police harassment on a major scale.

Frank Beck was a resident of Braunstone in Leicester when the events described above were taking place.

When Janner was ennobled in 1997, he took the title, Lord Janner of Braunstone.

The man responsible for ennobling Greville Janner was Tony Blair.

The following very interesting comments were left :

I was in the courtroom when beck gave his evidence in full :his death by food poisoning in custody was very convenient for all those he said he had supplied the boys to in the local area .”

Blair had a macabre sense of humour as Braunstone is the area Frank Beck used to live in. Beck was guilty. But he almost nailed Greville Janner.”

Isn’t it about bloody time the police looked again at the mysterious death of Frank Beck?

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/the-mysterious-death-of-frank-beck/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/the-mysterious-community-security-trust/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/the-magic-of-greville-janner/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/who-is-uri-geller/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/the-black-magic-of-peter-mandelson/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/tony-blair-bp-elton-john-rentboy-barbados-magic-circle-lockerbie/

http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/category/leicestershire-frank-beck/page/2/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/06/10/cliff-richard-cherie-blair-melvyn-bragg-operation-fernbridge-friends-in-high-places-and-the-barbados-connection/

(2013) New Labour Cllr. Balbir Sandhu -POLICE RAID HIS PREMISES LOOKING FOR ILLEGALS

BORDER police raided a clothing factory owned by a leading city politician yesterday, leading to the arrest of five illegal immigrants.

The officers were acting on a tip-off when they targeted the A Star clothing factory belonging to Normanton ward councillor Balbir Sandhu.

All 40 staff were questioned while the UK Border Agency officers checked their immigration status with fingerprint scanners.

Labour councillor Mr Sandhu said he was “shocked” when the officers burst into his factory in Stanhope Street at about 10.30am.

ARTICLE: Crystal Methodist and New Labour/Co-operative Party Luvvie Paul Flowers investigated 8 years ago

Disgraced former bank boss was investigated for sending an email with alleged ‘sexual connotations’ to colleagues in 2005.

A disgraced banker caught on camera apparently buying drugs was investigated   about his conduct eight years ago, it has emerged.

Paul Flowers, the former Co-op Bank chairman, Methodist minister and local   councillor, was forced to refer himself to the Standards Board for England   for sending a “joke” message that is alleged to have “sexual connotations”   to council colleagues in 2005.

Although councillors who had been sent the message raised their concerns with   the council at the time, five years later Mr Flowers was selected by Ed   Miliband, the Labour leader, for his Business and Industry Advisory Group.

Mr Flowers, 63, has now been suspended from the Party and his church after   film footage apparently showed him discussing the purchase of class A drugs.

He is being investigated by police after being caught on camera apparently   trying to buy crystal meth, cocaine and ketamine. He has now said his   actions were “stupid” and “wrong”.

He was reported to have bought drugs days after giving evidence to the Commons   Treasury committee on how the bank lost £700 million. When Mr Flowers   appeared before the committee he was criticised for apparently lacking a   grasp of the basic facts about the bank or the issues surrounding it. He is   not expected to be recalled, but the scandal has put more pressure on   regulators to increase checks on people appointed to senior banking roles.

Following the drug investigations it has since emerged that in 2011 Mr Flowers   was forced to resign from Bradford council after adult content was found on   his computer when he handed it in for repairs. At the time he cited   “personal reasons” and increased responsibilities at the Co-operative   Banking Group for leaving the council.

Following the latest disclosures, Grant Shapps, the Conservative party   chairman, has written to Ed Miliband telling him the behaviour and actions   of Mr Flowers have “shocked and appalled the public”.

“They have also raised serious questions about the Labour Party to which you   have not yet adequately responded,” he wrote. Mr Shapps added that people   asking “honest” questions about how much the Labour party knew about Mr   Flowers’ past were met with a “wall of silence”.

Shadow chancellor Ed Balls’ office has said that he will not give back a   donation from the Co-operative Group of £50,000, made in March 2012 when Mr   Flowers was chairman of the bank and a director of the group.

Len Wardle, the Co-op Group chairman, yesterday resigned, citing “serious   questions” raised by the scandal surrounding former banking chairman.

Mr Wardle had earlier announced his decision to retire next year, but the   Co-op Group said he has now resigned “with immediate effect”.

A spokesman for Bradford Council said: “A conviction more than 20 years   previously does not prevent anyone from standing for election as, or serving   as, a local councillor.

“The Standards Board for England concluded that the ‘e-mail’ incident was not   serious enough to require an investigation. That was a decision for the   Standards Board for England, not Bradford Council.”

Read on:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/10461306/Paul-Flowers-investigated-eight-years-ago.html

ARTICLE: Ed Miliband held a private meeting with drug shame bank chairman

  • Methodist minister Paul Flowers, 63, caught on camera buying drugs
  • It was just days after he was grilled by MPs over his bank’s performance
  • Flowers boasted of using ketamine along with cannabis and club drug GHB
  • Ed Miliband held private talks in Commons office with disgraced bank boss
Miliband and Harman in front of hammber and sickle

Ed Miliband held private talks in his Commons office with the  disgraced Co-op Bank boss embroiled in a drugs scandal, it emerged last night.

The revelation left the Labour leader facing potentially damaging questions about his relationship with the Reverend Paul Flowers.

Flowers is being investigated by the police after being caught on film apparently buying hard drugs, including crack cocaine and crystal meth.

But last night it emerged that Flowers had enjoyed astonishing access and influence at the top of the Labour establishment for years.

Labour sources confirmed that Mr Miliband had personally appointed Flowers to his elite Business and Industry Advisory Group in 2010 — and even invited him for private talks in his Commons office last year.

It also emerged that Flowers described Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls as a ‘political friend’ and boasted of helping to arrange a £50,000 donation for him from the Co-op last year.

Both Mr Miliband and Mr Balls deny being close to Flowers, who was suspended by Labour last night for ‘bringing the party into disrepute.’

A spokesman for Mr Balls, one of 32 Labour MPs sponsored by the Co-op, said he had never held a meeting with Flowers and never discussed the donation with him.

The near-collapse of the Co-op Bank is embarrassing for Labour, which has long ties with the organisation.

Last year Mr Miliband hailed the firm as the future of banking in a speech at the its headquarters.

And many MPs receive financial support from the Co-op, including shadow Treasury chief secretary Chris Leslie, shadow Europe minister Gareth Thomas and shadow constitutional reform minister Stephen Twigg.

Labour’s Business and Industry Advisory Group was set up by Mr Miliband to provide him with personal advice on business policy.

(2013) Conservative Cllr. Cencizham Cerit -GUILTY OF VOTE-RIGGING

A landlord who stood as a Conservative councillor in a local election has been found guilty of electoral fraud.

Cencizham Cerit, 47, of Primrose Drive, Ashford, stood for election to Ashford Borough Council in November 2011.

Canterbury Crown Court heard Cerit delivered 200 postal vote applications to the council containing false or forged signatures.

The postal applications were not accepted and Cerit lost the election by 87 votes.

The landlord, who owns 60 properties in the Ashford area, was also found guilty of submitting his nomination paper knowing it contained false
signatures.

Read on:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-21342599

ARTICLE AND AUDIO: The Revd Paul Flowers ticked all the right ‘progressive’ boxes — that’s why he could get away with anything

Sustainability. Tick! Inclusivity. Tick! Fairtrade. Tick! All that mattered to Labour was the Crystal Methodist’s show of liberal piety.

Adams-icon_SE

Yet again, one particular question has formed on lips up and down the land. How in heaven’s name could so many people have failed to spot such a spectacular abuse of a public position?

We heard it first in the Jimmy Savile scandal, when the posthumous discovery of half a century of predation left people incredulous that so many had known about but done nothing to stop his serial depravities. Now a similar question needs to be asked about the Revd Paul Flowers, the disgraced Methodist minister and former chairman of the Co-op Bank who was filmed apparently handing over £300 to buy a stash of cocaine and crystal meth and also boasted of using ketamine, cannabis and a club drug, GHB.

The real scandal, though, is not just that he was a staggeringly incompetent bank chief who knew next to nothing about banking and presided over a bank that somehow fell into a £1.5 billion black hole. It is not even his predilection for cocaine, crystal meth and the occasional ‘two-day, drug-fuelled gay orgy’ (to use his words). The scandal is that no one spotted that he was spectacularly unsuited to the jobs he was given — or if they did, they chose to do nothing about it. Yet again, a public figure with his ethics pinned to his sleeve somehow existed beyond proper scrutiny.

In the frame alongside the deeply un-fragrant Flowers are various institutions which now have questions to answer. The Co-op Bank, which elected him chairman. The Labour party, which banked his donations. Ed Miliband, who dined with him and appointed him to Labour’s financial and industrial advisory board. And the Methodist Church, which appointed him a ‘superintendent’ minister and designated him a trustee for its investment funds and property — even though he had next to no expertise in business.

Oh — and he has also been a member of the Advertising Standards Authority, vice-chairman of the National Association of Citizens’ Advice Bureaux and chairman of Manchester Camerata, the city’s chamber orchestra, not to mention chairman of the drug abuse charity Lifeline and the Terrence Higgins Trust. He is an icon of our time.

So how come none of these bodies ever spotted his spectacular unsuitability to be a member of the Great and the Good?

His striking unfitness to advise anyone on economic matters was demonstrated at the Treasury select committee earlier this month. Asked to state the Co-op Bank’s total assets, he guessed £3 billion; it was actually £47 billion. His performance may well have caused onlookers to scratch their heads and ask themselves: just what exotic substances is he on?

Read on and listen to the audio:  http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9082571/an-icon-of-our-time/

ARTICLE: United Nations Finally Admits to Purposefully Killing off European Native Peoples

Peter Sutherland

The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.

Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.

He also suggested the UK government’s immigration policy had no basis in international law.

He was being quizzed by the Lords EU home affairs sub-committee which is investigating global migration.

Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development, which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas.

He told the House of Lords committee migration was a “crucial dynamic for economic growth” in some EU nations “however difficult it may be to explain this to the citizens of those states”.

‘More open’

An ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states was the “key argument and, I hesitate to the use word because people have attacked it, for the development of multicultural states”, he added.

“It’s impossible to consider that the degree of homogeneity which is implied by the other argument can survive because states have to become more open states, in terms of the people who inhabit them. Just as the United Kingdom has demonstrated.”

Read on:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18519395

ARTICLE: Conservative M.P. Brian Binley -FINALLY ADMITS THAT M.P.s ARE PARASITES

Brian Binley MP: ‘We have to be careful, politicians scrounge all the time.’

MPs enjoy lavish hospitality at the expense of the British taxpayer and a Maltese bank.

pigBrian Binley

On a taxpayer-funded trip to Malta, as he enjoyed the hospitality of a bank and prepared to attend a complimentary open-air concert that evening, Brian Binley MP was alerted to the presence of a local politician wandering nearby.

“You see, we are totally corrupt,” he said to one of his hosts.

ARTICLE AND VIDEO: Liberal Democrat M.P. Nick Harvey -TOLD HE IS A DISGRACE FOR CLAIMING TRAVEL TO REMEMBRANCE DAY

Former Royal navy engineer Fiona Laing embarrasses Sir Nick Harvey after Remembrance Day service.

A Royal British Legion worker approached a former Armed Forces minister following a Remembrance Day service and ‘reimbursed’ him for £7.20 in expenses he claimed after attending a previous ceremony.

Fiona Laing, 45, marched up to Sir Nick Harvey, 52, in front of other dignitaries, officials and members of the public, and gave him an envelope containing the money.

Read on an watch the video: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10441802/Former-Wren-to-ex-minister-You-Sir-are-a-disgrace.html

(2013) New Labour Cllr. Josie Channer -STEPS DOWN IN DISGRACE OVER £2,000 PARKING FINES

Josie Channer

LABOUR’S parliamentary candidate for the seat of Kingswood has stepped down over parking fines, the BBC reports.

 

Josie Channer owes more than £2,000 in parking and late payment fees to the Borough of Barking and Dagenham, where she also sits as a councillor.

 

She also chairs the local authority committee which scrutinises parking.

Read on: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Labour-parliamentary-candidate-Kingswood-steps/story-19887684-detail/story.html

VIDEOS: ‘Beheadings-R-Us’ by Cameron and Hague-backed Syrian “Rebels” (WARNING: Graphic Images)

syrias-bullshit

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/07/18/syria-beheadings-r-us-by-obama-backed-and-armed-fsa-jihadist-rebels-warning-graphic-images/

ARTICLE: WARNING! John Cruddas MP -WANTS TO FORCE PARENTS TO DRUG THEIR KIDS OR LOSE THEIR BENEFITS

 

Cruddas’s previous rap sheet:

(2012) New Labour M.P. John Cruddas -BANNED FROM DRIVING AND FINED £300 FOR HAVING NO M.O.T. OR INSURANCE

Expenses Scandal Mark 2? New Labour Parasites Margaret Hodge and John Cruddas Suck Even More from the Taxpayer

Take a look at what they want to drug your kids with and its effects:

Vaccine Truth: Your Child, Your Choice

Hundreds of Articles Exposing the Lies of Vaccines by Dr Christina England

Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more

Fatal Auto-Immune Disorder Caused By Hepatitis B Vaccine

UK Drug Safety Agency Falsified Vaccine Safety Data For 6 Million – Millions of Children At Serious Risk

Premature ovarian failure 3 years after menarche in a 16-year-old girl following human papillomavirus vaccination

 

  • Family would have to prove vaccination before handouts, says Cruddas
  • Part of drive to link public goods to changing the behaviour of citizens
  • But Labour quickly distanced itself from the idea of linking jabs to benefits
Parents should lose their child benefit if they refuse to immunise their children with the MMR jab, a senior Labour MP has suggested.

Families will have to prove their child’s vaccination records are up to date to qualify for handouts, said Jon Cruddas, who is leading the party’s policy review.

The MP for Dagenham & Rainham suggested the measure, which is already in place in Australia, could be a way to link behaviour with state benefits and services.

However, Labour rushed to dissociate itself from the idea last night, saying ‘it is not part of the policy review’.

Shadow chancellor Ed Balls said: ‘There is no question of a Labour government ever taking child benefit away or punishing parents for choices they make on vaccinations.

‘I don’t know where that came from. It is not our policy. It is on the front of the newspapers but it is not true.

‘We would never say child benefit is conditional on taking a jab,’ he told ITV’s Daybreak.

The idea emerged after the uptake of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine has dropped to dangerously low levels in some areas.

The risks were underlined earlier this year when more than 1,000 people caught measles in Swansea. One victim, a man aged 25, died.

A senior party source said: ‘This is an example of the sort of measure which we want to see that ties public goods to how people behave as citizens.’

When he was still in power this summer, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced that people who did not immunise their children would be denied some benefits to boost vaccination rates for diseases such as whooping cough and measles.

Exemptions would only be made on religious or medical grounds, he said.

ARTICLE: As Cameron attacks ‘Bongo Bongo’ MEP… How £1billion of your cash is being used to help Nigeria join the space race

As Britain hands Nigeria more than £1billion in foreign aid, here at home ATOS force the disabled onto the dole and Bedroom Tax steals people’s home –all because the UK is in debt. Had enough? Or are you still going to vote for this monstrosity, Fools?

liblabcon

  • Oil-rich country has accepted £300million in aid this year alone
  • Plans for Nigerian astronauts to join missions within next two years
  • But 70 per cent of the country live below the poverty line of £1.29 a day
  • Row ignited by UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom’s ‘Bongo Bongo land’ comments

Nigeria is spending millions to put a man into space – as Britain hands it more than £1billion in foreign aid.

The oil-rich country, which has accepted £300million this year alone, has set in train ambitious plans to launch its own rockets.

And the first Nigerian astronauts are being trained to join Russian, Chinese or American missions within the next two years.

Last night critics asked why Britain was, in effect, subsidising a space programme for a nation where 70 per cent of people live below the poverty line.

This latest controversy came just two days after Ukip MEP Godfrey Bloom ignited a fierce debate by saying it was folly to give billions in aid to ‘Bongo Bongo land’. Yesterday David Cameron said the remarks were offensive and accused Mr Bloom of being guilty of a ‘stop the world I want to get off’ approach to foreign aid. The £1.14billion Nigeria will receive over the five years of the Coalition is double the £500million set aside to prop up struggling accident and emergency departments at our own hospitals.
Backbench Tory MP Philip Davies said it was ‘totally unjustifiable and unaffordable’ for Britain to give this money to Nigeria, given the scale of its ‘grandiose’ space programme.

‘We cannot go around the world saying “don’t worry, we will feed your public for you while you waste your money on all sorts of other projects”,’ he said.

‘We have got to say to these countries “you have got to spend that money on your people where it’s most needed not on some grandiose space programme”. We are against welfare dependency at home but at the same time we are encouraging welfare dependency abroad.’

The row surrounding Mr Bloom flared when he insisted that sending aid to Africa was tantamount to treason.

He added: ‘How we can possibly be giving a billion pounds a month, when we’re in this sort of debt, to Bongo Bongo land is completely beyond me.’

He claimed foreign leaders frittered the money away on ‘Ray-Ban sunglasses, apartments in Paris and Ferraris’.

ARTICLE: U.K. “Government” Refuses to Allow a Petition against White Genocide

This was recently emailed in to the site and I found it interesting so I re-publish it here:

I recently attempted to set up a white genocide petition on the UK Government’s website. Normally when a petition is rejected, they list the rejected petition and the reasons why it was rejected. However my petition was not listed as rejected and i never received any explanation as to why. So I decided to contact the Petition site for an explanation.

Here the email exchange I had with a House of Commons Assistant Secretary.

to me
Moderation decisions are taken in individual Government departments, and I was not involved in this decision. Having viewed the petition, I agree with the views of the moderators. We do not display e-petitions which are moderated as offensive, as made clear in the terms and conditions of the site.
Yours sincerely
Ben Sneddon
Assistant Private Secretary
Office of the Leader of the House of Commons
——————————————————–
to petitions
could you please explain to me how protesting the genocide of my people is OFFENSIVE?
——————————————————–
to me
We do not allow petitions which make accusations of criminality. As your petition accuses unspecified ‘anti-racists’ as genocide, this falls as a matter for the courts.
—————————-
to petitions
I see that this petition was accepted
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/44089
if i take out the accusation of unspecified individuals and replace it with the wording in the numbered list, that will be acceptable correct?
——————————————————-
to me
Moderators consider e-petitions based on the action the petition is calling for. In your rejected e-petition, the action you are calling for is for the Government to stop ‘non-white immigration’ and ‘forced assimilation’. Should you wish to resubmit your e-petition, the wording should be focused around this, rather than the accusations of genocide which are presented without evidence in the original petition.
——————————————————-
to petitions
This petition is making accusations of ongoing genocide, how is mine any different?
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/44355
——————————————————
to me
As I have said, I do not take the moderation decisions, these are taken in individual Government departments and so there is a degree of freedom in terms of what is accepted.

However, the focus is on the outcome of the petition. The use of terms such as genocide are emotive and controversial – if you wish to start a petition on the recognition of a genocide, you would be advised to state this as the purpose of the petition and provide evidence (we discourage the use of external links, but departments may choose to accept these). We would otherwise advise against making such claims

You may wish to contact the department to which you are submitting the petition for further advice, as my information is hypothetical. You can find departmental contact details either via their website or http://www.gov.uk

(2013) David Cameron, Nick Clegg, William Hague -ORDER DESTRUCTION OF HARD DRIVE TO HIDE DIRT SECRETS FROM PUBLIC

 

  • PM asked Sir Jeremy Heywood to warn paper against publishing material
  • GCHQ later went to Guardian’s office and helped staff smash hard drives
  • White House say it is ‘difficult to imagine’ U.S. government taking that action
  • It also emerged Mr Cameron knew in advance David Miranda would be held
  • Home Secretary Theresa May said police acting in national security interests
  • Rifkind says Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger on ‘weak ground’
  • ‘He did not dispute that he had no legal right to possess the files,’ he said
  • David Miranda, who was carrying secret CIA files, was held for nine hours 
  • Brazilian has said he is launching legal action against the Home Office
  • Lord Falconer, who helped bring in Terrorism Act 2000, slams decision
  • ‘I’m very clear that this does not apply to Mr Miranda,’ Labour peer said

(2013) New Labour Party: GUILTY OF TAX EVASION

Ed Miliband

Watch the videos:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10102190/Donor-John-Millss-gift-to-Labour-avoided-tax-bill-of-1.5m.html

Tax evasion is a crime that if committed by me or you would result in imprisonment for several years. But there are two laws in the country: one law for us –the mere mortals, the innocent funding our enemies– and one for them –the “elite”, the Enemies of the People, those who live in luxury due to the exploitation of the People. In light of this reality, why give your permission to this criminal, corrupt system by voting for it? It is illegitimate –do not afford it any notion of legitimacy by giving it your vote.   

The Labour Party has helped its biggest financial backer avoid tax worth up to £1.5 million on its largest donation so far this year.

John Mills gave the party shares in his shopping channel company, JML, valued at £1.65 million in January. In an interview with The Telegraph, Mr Mills said that the donation was made in shares rather than cash so the tax on the deal would be significantly reduced.

Describing the donation as “tax efficient”, he said the form of the donation was agreed with figures in Labour’s fund-raising team.

Mr Mills said that if he had given £1.65 million from his own income he would have had to pay nearly half of that sum to the taxman.

Asked why he made the donations in shares, Mr Mills said: “To be honest with you, it is the most tax efficient way of doing this.

“Because, otherwise, you get no tax relief on donations to political parties for understandable reasons.

“If you donate to a political party out of a tax paid income, up until April it was 50 per cent and now it is 45 [per cent].

“That means if it is £100,000, the Labour party gets £55,000 and the Government gets £45,000.”

Labour donor John Mills (JULIAN SIMMONDS)

Mr Mills, a former councillor in Camden, suggested that the idea of donating in shares came following discussions with the Labour Party.

He said: “It emerged … came out of a discussion I had with them about the best way of doing it.

“It is quite a good model [of donating]. Labour has got people who deal with compliance and the legal side of all this. They are very sensitive nowadays.”

Mr Mills’s donation, the biggest from an individual so far this year, is the only gift to a major political party to have been made in shares. Accountants said Mr Mills is likely to have avoided up to £1.5 million in tax on the value of the stock he gave to the party.

The news will embarrass Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, who has repeatedly criticised tax avoidance. He said only last month that it was “wrong” that Google had gone “to extraordinary lengths to avoid paying its taxes”.

ARTICLE: Tony Blair: Libya, Lockerbie, Arms and Betrayals

 

blair quaddafi

The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men.” (Samuel Adams, 1722-1803, letter 1775.)

This will surely have you falling down with surprise. According to documents released under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained by the (UK) Sunday Telegraph, the August 2009 release from Scotland’s Barlinnie jail of Libyan Abdelbaset al- Megrahi, accused of the bombing of  Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988, hinged on an oil and arms deal, allegedly brokered by roving war monger (sorry, roving “Peace Ambassador”) Tony Blair.

At this point it should be said that anyone who has read John Ashton and Ian Ferguson’s meticulous “Cover up of Convenience” (i) on the Lockerbie tragedy could only regard Mr al-Meghrahi’s conviction as between very unsafe and very questionable.

The British Labour Party, which Blair headed for ten years, until 27th June 2007, have always insisted that the release had no connection with commercial deals. After leaving Downing Street, Blair visited Libya some six times.

On 8th June 2008, the then British Ambassador to Libya, Sir Vincent Fean, sent Tony Blair’s private office a thirteen hundred word briefing on the UK’s eagerness to do business with Libya, according to the Telegraph. (ii) Blair flew to Tripoli to meet Colonel Quaddafi, just two days later, June 10th. Quaddafi paid: Blair, always lavish with other’s money had requested, and was granted, the Colonel’s private jet for the journey.

Sir Vincent’s “key objective” was for: “Libya to invest its £80 billion sovereign wealth through the City of London”, according to the Telegraph, which also cites the Ambassador writing of the UK being : “privately critical of then President George Bush for ‘shooting the US in the foot’ by continuing to put a block on Libyan assets in America, in the process scuppering business deals.” Britain however, was voraciously scrambling to fill the fiscal gap.

Unlike the US and UK who abandon or drone to death their own citizens who are in trouble, or even accused of it, Libya’s Administration had stood by their man and seemed to be prepared to do even unpalatable deals to free him and had long been pressuring the UK to release al-Megrahi.

In May 2007, a month before he left Downing Street, Blair had made his second visit to Libya, meeting Colonel Quaddafi and his Prime Minister Al Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi in then beautiful and now near ruined city of Sirte.

Surely coincidentally, on this trip, a deal was seemingly thrashed out, including prisoner transfer, just before British Petrolium (BP) announced their approximate £454 million investment to prospect for £13billion worth of oil in Libya.

Also, states the Telegraph report: “At that meeting, according to Sir Vincent’s email, Mr Blair and Mr Al Baghdadi agreed that Libya would buy a missile defence system from MBDA – a weapons manufacturer part-owned by Britains’s  BAE Systems.” This seemed to (also) hinge on a Memorandum of Understanding for a Prisoner Transfer Agreement: “which the Libyans believed would pave the way for al-Megrahi’s release.” Various sources state that the arms deal was worth £400 million, and up to two thousand jobs in the UK. Sir Vincent referred to the arms deal as a “legacy issue.” Blair’s “legacy”, as ever, synonymous with destruction.

Ironically, it was Blair who credited himself with persuading Colonel Quaddafi to abandon and destroy his weapons programmes  after his visit to the country in March 2004 (placing that Judas kiss  the Colonel’s cheek) as a step to Libya returning to the fold of the duplicitous “international community.” With friends like Blair, enemies are a redundancy.

When Blair returned to Libya in June 2008, the Telegraph contends that the British Government, then under Gordon Brown, Blair’s former Chancellor of the Exchequer (who left the national coffers near empty) used the opportunity: “ to press the case for the arms deal to be sealed. At the time, Britain was on the brink of an economic and banking crisis – and Libya, though the Libyan Investment Authority – had billions of pounds in reserves.”

Saif al-Islam, Quaddafi’s son, expressed the concern over the arms deal being voiced from within the Libyan military, given their close ties to the “Russian defence equipment camp.”

An earlier discovery by the Sunday Telegraph shows, in letters and emails, that Blair held hitherto undisclosed talks with the Colonel in April 2009, four months before al-Megrahi’s release. (iii)

Again he was flown at the expense of the Colonel, in his private jet: “In both 2008 and 2009, documents show Mr Blair negotiated to fly to the Libyan capitol … in a jet provided by Quaddafi.” Blair’s Office denies the claims, saying they were transported in a Libyan government ‘plane.

By the time of the 2009 visit: “Libya was threatening to cut all business links if al-Megrahi stayed in a British jail.” Blair seemingly attempted to pour oil on troubled waters by bringing American billionaire, Tim Collins to that meeting to advise Quaddafi on building the beach resorts he was planning, on the Libyan coast.

Further adding to the murk, a spokesperson for Collins stated:“Tim was asked to go by Tony Blair in his position as a trustee of Mr Blair’s US faith foundation. Tim had no intention of doing any business with Quaddafi.”

However: “Sources in Libya said Quaddafi had discussed with Mr Collins opening beach resorts along the Libyan coast, but that Mr Collins had dismissed the idea because the Libyans would not sanction the sale of alcohol or gambling at the resorts.

Blair’s spokesperson said of the visit: “ … Tony Blair has never had any role, either formal or informal, paid or unpaid, with the Libyan Investment Authority or the Government of Libya and he has no commercial relationship with any Libyan company or entity.” A Blair first, seemingly, given the impression that he never touches down anywhere without emerging with a lucrative contract or a large cheque.

However, Oliver Miles, a former British ambassador to Libya, is quoted as saying : “Mr Blair is clearly using his Downing Street contacts to further his business interests.”

In a further coincidence, the Prisoner Transfer agreement for Mr al-Megrahi was signed the day before Blair’s 2009 visit.

When al-Megrahi, who had been diagnosed with terminal cancer, was released in August 2009, the British media and politicians were outraged. Scotland had done a deal and was benefiting financially from Libya. The latest revelations prove Scotland did no financial deals. When Mr al-Megrahi failed to die, politicians and media were even more outraged. They were a shaming spectacle.

Mental mind set can be a huge force in prolonging life in even the most serious cancer patients. No doubt in al-Megrahi’s case, being back in a home and with a family he loved contributed to his extra time. He survived long enough to see his country destroyed by the devious forces the West embodies – and at which Blair excels.  Megrahi died in September 2012.

Incidentally, Ambassador Fean reportedly “expressed relief” at al-Megrahi’s release: “He noted that a refusal of Megrahi’s request could have had disastrous implications for British interests in Libya. ‘They could have cut us off at the knees.”

Quaddafi, however, never signed the arms deal.

Footnote: The 2004 visit by Blair was arranged by Saif al Islam, who Blair seemingly knew well and had allegedly even offered suggestions on his PhD thesis when Saif was studying at the London School of Economics.

In September last year Saif al-Islam’s lady friend of six years, appealed, passionately, to Blair to intervene to save the life of his now captured, maimed and death penalty-facing friend: “The two are old friends – it is time that Mr Blair returned some loyalty. Mr Blair is a man of God – as a Christian he has a moral duty to help a friend in need”, she has commented. (v)

Seemingly there has been no response from Blair’s office. Further, an extensive search for a comment on the appalling death of Colonel Quaddafi – his former host and private ‘plane provider – and the demise of  much of his family from this “Peace Envoy” and “man of God”, has come up with absolutely nothing.

To mangle a quote: Beware of British offering deals.

Read on:  http://www.globalresearch.ca/tony-blair-libya-lockerbie-arms-and-betrayals/5344774

ATICLE: Former head of MI6 threatens to expose Tony Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier’

tony_blair_war_criminal

The truth will always out -eventually. Seems the regime (“government”) doesn’t have the control it would like on the secret services. Perhaps MI5 might like to start to question to whom its loyalties really lie (the innocent people or their aggressor, corrupt, plutocratic “government”).

A former head of MI6 has threatened to expose the secrets of the ‘dodgy dossier’ if he disagrees with the long-awaited findings of the Chilcot Inquiry into the UK’s role in the Iraq War.

Sir Richard Dearlove, 68, has spent the last year writing a detailed account of events leading up to the war, and had intended to only make his work available to historians after his death.

But now Sir Richard, who provided intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) that was apparently ‘sexed up’ by Tony Blair’s government, has revealed that he could go public after the Chilcot Inquiry publishes its findings.

Sir Richard is expected to be criticised by the inquiry’s chairman, Sir John Chilcot, over the accuracy of intelligence provided by MI6 agents inside Iraq, which was used in the so-called ‘dodgy dossier’.

Now the ex-MI6 boss, who is Master at Pembroke College, Cambridge University, has said: “What I have written (am writing) is a record of events surrounding the invasion of Iraq from my then professional perspective.

“My intention is that this should be a resource available to scholars, but after my decease (may be sooner depending on what Chilcot publishes)

“I have no intention, however, of violating my vows of official secrecy by publishing any memoir.”

Sources close to Sir Richard said that he insists Chilcot should recognise the role played by Tony Blair and the Prime Minister’s chief spokesman Alastair Campbell in informing media reports which suggested Saddam could use chemical weapons to target British troops based in Cyprus, a claim which led to Britain entering the war in Iraq.

Sir Richard is said to remain extremely unhappy that this piece of intelligence, which his agents stressed only referred to battlefield munitions which had a much shorter range, led to media reports that UK bases were under threat.

However, he accepts that some of MI6′s information on the WMDs was inaccurate, the Mail on Sunday reported.

Mr Blair and Mr Campbell have repeatedly denied making misleading statements about WMD.

Last week it was revealed that Sir John had written to Prime Minister David Cameron informing him of his intention to write personally to those individuals he intends to criticise, with Tony Blair reported to be among those on Sir John’s list.

Sir Richard has taken a sabbatical from his duties at Cambridge University to research and write his record of events, and is expected to resume his Master’s role at the start of the new academic year.

A security source told The Mail on Sunday: “This is Sir Richard’s time-bomb. He wants to set the record straight and defend the integrity of MI6. And Sir Richard has taken a lot of personal criticism over MI6′s performance and his supposedly too-cosy relationship with Mr Blair.

“No Chief of MI6 has done anything like this before, but the events in question were unprecedented.

“If Chilcot doesn’t put the record straight, Sir Richard will strike back.”

Last night the committee’s chairman, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who was appointed in 2010, offered Sir Richard his support, saying: “I have never heard of a former MI6 chief putting something out there in these terms but I would be interested in what Sir Richard has to say in response to the Chilcot Inquiry which is clearly going to have some meat in it.

“I know Sir Richard and worked with him in the Foreign Office many years ago. He is a very able man of the highest character and a man of his own opinions. We shall have to wait to see what he says.”

Last night, Alastair Campbell and the office for Tony Blair declined to comment on Sir Richard’s account.

ARTICLE: MoD accused of risking soldiers’ lives by silencing generals

untitled

Historian expresses fears after chapters by serving generals excised from book criticising operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

A leading military historian has accused the Ministry of Defence of putting the lives of British soldiers at risk by stifling debate and preventing serving generals from publicly expressing their views on the conduct of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sir Hew Strachan, Chichele professor of the history of war at Oxford University, blames the decision to suppress their views on “official paranoia”. His outspoken comments appear in a series of essays, British Generals in Blair’s Wars, which contains devastating criticism from senior officers who have recently retired, but none from those still serving.

Debate and potential reform are therefore stifled at source “for fear of reputational damage and political controversy”, writes Strachan.

The book has fallen victim to “official paranoia”, he says referring to six chapters written by serving officers that were withdrawn on the orders of the MoD.

Strachan, an adviser to the chief of the defence staff, General Sir Nick Houghton, adds: “These fears put at risk lives in theatre. Like many armies in the past, the British army struggles to foster effective debate within a hierarchical command chain.”

The editors, including Strachan, make clear in their book – published by Ashgate more than a year late because of the need to find replacement authors – that the final decision to ban serving officers from contributing to it was taken by the defence secretary, Philip Hammond.

Generals prevented from publishing their views include Houghton, who took over as chief of the defence staff from Sir David Richards on Thursday, and Lt Gen Sir Richard Shirreff, Nato’s deputy supreme commander. Shirreff, a former commander of British troops in Basra, told the Chilcot inquiry that more than three years after the invasion of Iraq, the MoD was still incapable of delivering equipment badly needed by UK troops there.

The failure to provide troops with the resources they needed “beggars belief”, he said.

The opening salvo in British Generals in Blair’s Wars castigates the former Labour prime minister for not providing sufficient resources to those he sent to war. Jonathan Bailey, formerly responsible in the MoD for developing military doctrine, says Blair “does not appear to have thought through the consequences of his policies, committing the UK to prolonged conflicts intended to reorder other countries’ underlying cultures”.

The book exposes sharp disagreement between British commanders on the root causes of attacks on British troops in Basra. Jonathan Shaw, commander of British forces in south-east Iraq in 2007, came under fierce criticism for doing a deal with the Jaysh al-Mahdi, the militia led by the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, and for taking the view that violence was more criminal than ideologically or politically inspired. “I judged Basra to be more like Palermo than Beirut,” he writes.

Richard Iron, an adviser to Iraqi army commanders in Basra, writes: “Nothing could be further from the truth: Jaysh al-Mahdi was an extremist movement that controlled Basra by force.” British intelligence analysts failed to appreciate the depths of “malign Iranian influence”, says Iron.

An underlying theme in the essays by former generals and senior British staff officers is the almost complete lack of preparedness and failure to provide enough resources, in terms of both money and men, in Iraq. The failures, the authors write, were not learned and were repeated in Afghanistan.

Iron says that five years after the invasion of Iraq, “there was still arrogance and hubris among the British. A sense of ‘we’re here to teach you so you’d better listen’”.

Britain’s failures led to bitter disputes behind the scene with US commanders, whose marines took over from the British in Basra, and, later, in Afghanistan’s Helmand province. Alexander Alderson, former special adviser to the head of the Afghan armed forces, says that in Iraq the different tactics and attitudes of the two countries came to the point “where the UK’s military credibility was in question”.

The book describes the growing frustration among military commanders about inter-departmental rows within Whitehall and inadequate co-operation with the Foreign Office and Department for International Development. The much-mooted “comprehensive” approach – co-operation on conflict prevention, peacemaking, and peacekeeping – has not materialised. Tim Cross, the senior British officer in the US-led post-invasion reconstruction office in Iraq, writes: “We do need to have a fairly radical shakeup, both in the [defence] ministry but also pan-government.”

Strachan told the Guardian: “The MoD has got to get real … Differences and debates need to be properly gone over. Otherwise we are none the wiser”.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk-news/2013/jul/19/mod-risking-soldiers-iraq-afghanistan-generals

Russia Accuses West Of Arming Mali “Al-Qaeda” Rebels

syrias-bullshit

Western imperialism knows no bounds. The “British” government is a direct threat to your safety. The people that have, are, and will suffer because of the “British” government’s gun running and regime change will naturally seek revenge on the aggressor nation. The guilty politicians will not, of course, suffer the consequences. They never do. Only the British people will suffer as they did on 7/7.  Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Revenge will one day be upon us.

Define irony? Here is one, or rather two, tries.

Back in the 1970s, it was none other than the US that armed the Taliban “freedom fighters” fighting against the USSR in the Soviet-Afghanistan war, only to see these same freedom fighters eventually and furiously turn against the same US that provided them with arms and money, with what ended up being very catastrophic consequences, culminating with September 11.

Fast forward some 30 or more years and it is again the US which, under the guise of dreams and hopes of democracy and the end of a “dictatorial reign of terror”, armed local insurgents in the Libyan war of “liberation” to overthrow the existing regime (and in the process liberate just a bit of Libya’s oil) – the same Libya where shortly thereafter these same insurgents rose against their former sponsor, and killed the US ambassador in what has now become an epic foreign policy Snafu.

But it doesn’t end there as according to Russia, it is the same US weapons that were provided to these Libyan “freedom fighters” that are now being used in what is rapidly becoming a war in Mali, involving not only assorted French regiments, but extensive US flip flops and boots on the ground.

Via Al Jazeera,

Russia said on Wednesday the rebels fighting French and African troops in Mali are the same fighters the West armed in the revolt that ousted Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

“Those whom the French and Africans are fighting now in Mali are the [same] people who overthrew the Gaddafi regime, those that our Western partners armed so that they would overthrow the Gaddafi regime,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told a news conference.

“It’s important to lift one’s head a bit and look over the horizon, look at all those processes more widely, they are interconnected and carry very many threats,” Lavrov said, speaking of unrest across the Middle East that could play into the hands of militants.

“This will be a time bomb for decades ahead,” he said.

That is our definition of irony.

Hat tip:  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-23/russia-accuses-west-arming-mali-al-qaeda-rebels

Article: The Tony Blair Scandal


Tony Blair was born in Edinburgh Scotland on 6 May 1953, to Leo Blair and Hazel Corscadden. His paternal ancestors were the English actors Charles Parsons and Mary Augusta Ridgway Bridson, the latter of whom had some degree of aristocratic descent.

Blair’s father was illegitimate however and he was adopted as a baby by Glasgow shipyard worker James Blair and his wife. His mother Hazel Corscadden was of the daughter of George Corscadden, an Ulster-Scots butcher and Orangeman who moved to Glasgow in 1916 but returned to (and later died in) Ballyshannon in 1923.

Sarah Margaret Lipsett according to Edward MacLysaght, the origin of the name Lipsett in County Donegal derived from Ashkenazi Jewish settlers in the 18th century as an Anglicization of Lipsitz. This would make Tony Blair himself a Jew accord to the Halacha.

Tony was fined £50 for trying to solicit men in public toilets, something he had done since his cross dressing days at college, and he was later to steal Cherie from Derry Irving with whom he shared a flat.

Tony’s rise on the British political ladder was masterminded by Lord Levy, while Rothschild’s British representative Peter Mandelson was directly over him and masterminded the creation of the Zionist front org, “New labour” which really had just one purpose, to Bring the British army into war with Iraq for Israel’s benefit.

Tony Blair, voted the worst Prime Minister in living memory, worse than Thatcher who destroyed British Industry, worse that pedophile Edward Heath who took us into the EU after we fought W W II to stay out, worse than gay Gordon Brown who sold our gold reserves to Rothschild on the day the gold price was at its lowest ever, and even worse than Winston Churchill of whom his pal Aleister Crowley said was one criminal lunatic.

In 1999 an international investigation into child porn by Britain’s National Criminal Intelligence Service codenamed Operation Ore, resulted in 7,250 suspects being identified in the United Kingdom alone. Some 1850 people were criminally charged in the case and there were 1451 convictions. Almost 500 people were interviewed “under caution” by police, meaning they were suspects. Some 900 individuals remain under investigation.

In early 2003, British police began to close in on some top suspects in the Operation Ore investigation, including senior members of Blair’s government, allegedly Chris Smith, Peter Mandelson and Gay Gordon.

Carol Caplin was said to be the Mossad watcher inside number 10 and Rupert Murdoch and David Murphy-Fawks competed with GCHQ to tape his phone calls and his late night rows with Cherie.

Israel and New labour sabotaged efforts to pursue the Goldstone report on Israeli war crimes in Gaza, through the UN.

Blair also brokered another major deal with Israel for British Gas to secure contracts to exploit natural gas fields worth up to 6 billion dollars in the territorial waters of the Gaza Strip, in effect stolen from the Palestinians, Blair negotiated the deal directly with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu In 2007, the United Nations Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People spent over $400,000 on three armoured cars for Blair against their will.

Blair has contrived to constantly undermine the British people by making almost one law change a day in the almost 10 years he was in office, making large sums for his wife’s Matrix Chambers law practise, he also sold out the poverty stricken besieged starving Palestinians and his paymasters in Tel Aviv rewarded him by making him Middle East envoy, Tony has been raking it in with his 30 pieces of silver like the true Judas he is.

Figures show that under the embargo to Iraq half a million children died, and now he wants to do the same to Iran, we won’t be fighting this war for you Tony, get your paymasters in Tel Aviv to fight their own wars, is it too much to ask that if you are British prime minister you put the British people first ?

Tony recently voted asshole of the year by the student’s mag ‘Rsouls’ and is currently being chased to appear at the international war crimes court in the Hague, Saddham Hussein was hung for things he had not done, fingers crossed Tony Blair hangs as well.

T Stokes London

Hat tip: http://thetruthnews.info/Tony_Blair_Scandal.html

VIDEO: detailed expose of Tory “murdering paedophile” Ted Heath

Make of this interview what you will, but what Shrimpton claims about former British PM and Savile pal, Ted Heath, is given in graphic detail, and clearly implicates more than one top ranking government official in murdering children – which was covered-up.

Hat tip: http://21stcenturywire.com/2013/01/19/shrimpton-ted-heath-murdering-pedo-david-kelly-robin-cook-and-diana-assasinated/

ARTICLE: Kazakhstan Dictator Admires “British” Dictator Chairman Cameron

For a closer analysis of Chairman Cameron in relation to this issue see the video below (18 minutes in):

President Nazarbayev said he had been watching Cameron and praised him for ‘the way he protects the interests of the British people all over the world’

he final day of David Cameron’s visit to central Asia was overshadowed by political embarrassment today after Kazakhstan’s hardline ruler said he would vote for the Prime Minister if he had the chance.

President Nursultan Nazarbayev said he had been watching Mr Cameron and publicly praised him for “the way he protects the interests of the British people all over the world”.

The controversial Kazakh leader, who recorded 95.5 per cent of the popular vote at his last election, added: “Personally, I would vote for him.” A visibly squirming Mr Cameron, who had spent much of the previous 24 hours with the President, replied: “That’s one [vote]; I just need another 20 million and I’m in business.”

The Prime Minister, who had proclaimed that the relationship between the two countries was moving “to the next level”, was also forced to apologise after it emerged that a Kazakh artist with no hands had been denied a UK visa because he had not provided fingerprints.

The unwelcome interventions dominated a press conference held in the presidential palace in Astana, to rubber-stamp a series of agreements on trade and a “strategic partnership” between the two countries. Mr Cameron, who had travelled to the oil-rich state with a delegation of British firms including BP, Shell and Rolls-Royce, said Kazakhstan was “a dynamic country that is poised to become a high income country by the end of this decade”.

The Prime Minister spent much of the previous 24 hours with the President, travelling in his private jet and drinking with him in an “Irish Bar” where Guinness sells for £11 a pint. He confirmed that he had raised the issue of human rights in Kazakhstan, including “credible allegations” that the Nazarbayev regime was guilty of torture and curbs on religious and press freedoms.

Read on:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/kazakhstan-dictator-heaps-praise-on-david-cameron-and-says-he-would-vote-for-him-8681102.html

(2011) New Labour’s Tony Blair -fined £500 for indecent conduct with a male in public toilets

ARTICLE: Assassinating a Prime Minister's Reputation: Ten Ways to Blackmail Tony Blair

This information is scattered all over the internet. War criminal Tony Blair has thus far not denied it. 

Anthony Charles Lynton Blair (Tony Blair, former PM of the UK)

He was charged and appeared in court at Bow Street magistrates court for importunity in a public toilet with another male. He tried to get sexual favour from the other man, little did he know that the toilet was being watched by police. Blair was fined £500, and walked away with nobody knowing who he really was as he used his middle names to cover who he was. Charles Lynton is the name used, and his friends in court got him off with a fine, because he is one of them.

http://operationorethegambleconnection.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/anthony-charles-lynton-blairtony.html