A NATIONAL DISGRACE: We are no longer Bulldog Britain, we are Bullingdon Club slaves

The Slog.



David Cameron, George Osborne, Tim Yeo and Boris Johnson all have three things in common: they were all members of a rowdy and unpleasant Oxford University sect called the Bullingdon Club. They are all members of the Conservative Party. And they have all, on many occasions, defended indefensibly awful people. Cameron is the Prime Minister, Osborne is the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Boris Johnson is the Mayor of London’s capital city. Come what may, they stick together….a tiny but uniquely powerful clique. Now they are backing one of the most corrupt MPs in history, Tim Yeo. Almost seventy years after the first majority Labour Government set out to make Britain a country of equal opportunity for all, this is the extent to which we have regressed as a…

View original post 904 more words


Video Rebel's Blog

The following article by Arnold Leese is reprinted from Gothic Ripples, No. 49, dated 28th February, 1949. It shows that the seeds of Bolshevism were planted in China by Jews, who also tended and trained the growth that resulted. The corruption of the regime of Chiang Kai‑Shek caused many of the masses in China to turn to Communism for relief, since Chinese Communism is mixed with Nationalism and discourages the old Chinese curse of official corruption; but Communism in China has the same de­humanising effect on the people as it has elsewhere.


It was the Sassoon family which turned the normal Chinese dislike and distrust of foreigners into hatred. David Sassoon made the Opium Trade in China from 1832 until he died in 1864. His family carried on the Trade under our Flag and made huge fortunes. The British took the blame, and now the…

View original post 922 more words

Guardian of Free Speech?


Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian.

Meanwhile, the Guardian continues to be secretly Zionist.

David Cronin, at Electronic Intifada, has written: How The Guardian Told Me to Steer Clear of Palestine.

Cronin writes:

“Early that year, I submitted an exposé of how the pro-Israel lobby operates in Brussels.”

The Guardian did not want the story.

The Guardian did publish a diatribe by Daniel Taub, Israel’s ambassador to the UK.

Cronin writes:

“The Comment is Free section of The Guardian, where Taub’s nasty rant appears, is now overseen by Jonathan Freedland, a liberal Zionist…

“Taub’s article was the second one published by The Guardian in as many months from a senior Israeli political or diplomatic figure.

“In February, the paper gave Yair Lapid, until recently Israel’s finance minister, a platformto describe calls for a cultural boycott of Israel as ‘shallow and lacking in coherence’…

“While Israel was bombing Gaza last August, it ran a leader accusing London’s Tricycle Theatre of making a ‘bad error of judgment’ in refusing to host a film festival sponsored by Israel…

“Freedland has tried to justify how ‘400 Palestinian villages’ were ’emptied’ by Zionist forces in 1948 on the grounds that ‘the creation of a Jewish state was a moral necessity’…

“Freedland has been tipped as a contender for The Guardian’s editor-in-chief, a post that issoon to be vacant.”

Most of the top journalists are now either Jews or crypto-Jews or Friends of Israel.

And most of the leaders of the Moslem world seem to be part of the Kosher Nostra as well.

Gottlieb-Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur

The Manchester Guardian was founded in Manchester in 1821 by a group of non-conformist businessmen.

The Manchester Guardian used to be seen as a left-leaning, Liberal newspaper.

The Guardian, as it is now called, has a large number of Jewish folks on its staff.

Manchester has a large Jewish population.

According to an article from the Centre for Jewish Studies, University of Manchester:

“The work of the Zionists in Manchester was greatly aided by the support, advice and encouragement of the staff of the well regarded national newspaper, the Manchester Guardian.” (see below)
The Guardian appears to have become a vehicle for subtle pro-establishment propaganda.
“I write for the Guardian,” said Sir Max Hastings in 2005,[8] “because it is read by the new establishment.”

Let’s look at some of the contents of the the Guardian website on the morning of 26 August 2008.

Old Poster

1. The lead story on the Guardian website is Britain’s secret propaganda war against al-Qaida.

The writer, Alan Travis, tells us about a UK government unit called the Research, Information and Communication unit, or RICU.

Reportedly RICU is supplying propaganda to the BBC and other parts of the media.

This sounds like good, radical stuff.

But wait.

Reportedly, this RICU has the job of criticising al Qaeda and trying to make it look bad.

According to The Guardian, a RICU dossier says that al-Qaida has been definitively expelled from large areas of Iraq and has lost ground in Afghanistan.

Now, what is missing from this Guardian news story?

We are not told that al Qaeda has been linked to the CIA and its friends.

We are not told that, reportedly, the CIA has used al Qaeda to carry out its dirty work.

We are not told that the forces opposing the US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are mainly freedom-fighters; they are not al Qaeda.

So, the purpose of this Guardian story might appear to be disinformation.

2. Another lead story is entitled: Russian vote sets up clash with west

You may remember that Russia has allowed a large number of countries, such as Austria, Finland and the Czech Republic, to become independent.

Now Russian MPs have voted unanimously to back independence for Georgia’s two breakaway republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

However, the Guardian story appears to promote the NATO view that the Russians are the bad guys when it comes to South Ossetia.

According to The Guardian news story: “Russia was last night on another collision course with the west…

“The Duma passed the… motion by 447-0. Both houses are known for their slavish loyalty to the Kremlin…

“Russia is facing another chastening reprimand, this time from the financial markets.”

Photo of C P Scott, former editor of the Manchester Guardian and friend of the Zionists, from www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JscottCP.htm

3. The Guardian website gives prominence to a right-wing feature article by Tim Montgomerie entitled ‘The kind of cop we need.’

Montgomerie writes:

“During the Clinton years very little was done to combat the spread of militant Islam. Al-Qaida’s planning for the 9/11 attacks … began when the ever so reasonable Clinton was still in office.

“Europeans may want someone like themselves in the White House, but difficult times call for a president willing to eschew short-term popularity and pursue long-term respect.”

Montgomerie fails to tell us that it was the CIA, reportedly, which promoted militant Islam.

Montgomerie seems to want another tough right-wing leader to be appointed president.

4. The Guardian has a LOT of Jewish writers. Often they are writing about their Jewish friends

In the 26 August Guardian we read: “Israeli actor Igal Naor mesmerised critics and viewers as the Iraqi ruler in the BBC series House of Saddam. He tells Rachel Shabi why he came to ….”

‘I am Saddam and he is me’


5. From an article entitled CP Scott and the Manchester Guardian ( produced by the Centre for Jewish Studies, University of Manchester ) we learn:

“The work of the Zionists in Manchester was greatly aided by the support, advice and encouragement of the staff of the well regarded national newspaper, the Manchester Guardian.”

A. Harry Sacher worked at The Guardian from 1905.

Through Sacher, Chaim Weizmann, President of the World Zionist Organization, met the journalist Herbert Sidebotham, a non-Jewish Imperialist.

Sidebotham believed that ‘the interests of the Zionists coincided with those of the British Empire’.

B. C P Scott was the editor of the Manchester Guardian from 1872-1929.

Scott was won over by Weizmann.

Scott was able to introduce Weizmann to Lloyd George, Lord Balfour, Herbert Samuel, and other leading members of the government.

Scott leaked to Weizmann details of the Sykes-Picot agreement (secret Anglo-French negotiations on how to divide up the Ottoman Empire, including Palestine, after the War).

C. A later Guardian editor, WP Crozier, also supported Zionism.

D. The historian Lewis Namier ‘maintained the strong links between the Manchester Zionists and the Guardian’.

How The Guardian told me to steer clear of Palestine

Jonathan Freedland, the Guardian's opinion editor, is an apologist for ethnic cleansing. And note he is giving his speech at Chatham House: the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a globalist think tank. Click to enlarge

When I started out as a journalist in the 1980s, I asked an experienced Irish reporter for advice. “Read The Guardian,” he told me.

The message that there was no better newspaper had a lasting effect. For years, I wanted to write for The Guardian. Eventually, this desire was realized after I emailed the lateGeorgina Henry, then editor of its Comment is Free section, in 2007. Henry was immediately receptive to my idea of tackling the European Union from a critical, left-wing perspective.

I very much enjoyed contributing to The Guardian. Having previously worked for quite a stuffy publication, it felt liberating to be able to express opinions.

There was one issue, however, on which I felt my freedom curtailed: Palestine. AlthoughThe Guardian did publish a few of my articles denouncing Israeli atrocities, I began to encounter obstacles in 2009.


Early that year, I submitted an exposé of how the pro-Israel lobby operates inBrussels. While waiting to find out if the piece would be used, I phoned Matt Seaton,who had taken over as comment editor. We had a pleasant conversation but Seaton stressed that he regarded the subject as sensitive.

I, then, modified the piece to make its tone less polemical. Still, it was not published. (Seaton has subsequently moved to The New York Times.)

A few months later, I paid a visit to Gaza. From there, I contacted The Guardian to say that I had interviewed Sayed Abu Musameh, a founding member of Hamas.

Abu Musameh had expressed an interest in visiting Belfast to study how the Irish peace process worked. He had already held discussions with Gerry Adams, the Sinn Féinleader who had persuaded the Irish Republican Army to call a ceasefire.

Abu Musameh, I felt, was saying something that jarred with the official view of Hamas presented by Israel and its Western supporters. Far from being addicted to violence, he was eager to learn about what policy wonks call “conflict resolution.”

The Guardian was not keen to have me writing from Gaza. Brian Whitaker, a commissioning editor at the time, told me that its comment section received more submissions about Palestine than any other subject. Whitaker, ironically a Middle East specialist, effectively recommended that I stick to writing about the EU. (The recommendation was bizarre both because Palestine is a key issue for the EU and because I am one of the few journalists to examine the Union’s complicity in Israel’s crimes.)


I have decided to make my frustrating encounters with The Guardian public after reading the diatribe it published last week by Daniel Taub, Israel’s ambassador to the UK. Taub uses a quotation attributed to Golda Meir, Israel’s prime minister from 1969 to 1974, to hit back at aid agencies who accuse Israel of impeding Gaza’s reconstruction: “We will only have peace when our enemies love their children more than they hate ours.”

The inference that Palestinians hate Israelis more than they love their children is a racist caricature brilliantly demolished by Rafeef Ziadah in her poem “We teach life, Sir.” Yet, according to Taub, Meir’s words represent a “bitter truism.”

The Comment is Free section of The Guardian, where Taub’s nasty rant appears, is nowoverseen by Jonathan Freedland, a liberal Zionist. I contacted Freedland to enquire if he approved Taub’s article for publication.

Freedland referred my message to the paper’s “media enquiries” unit. A spokesperson, who did not give his or her name, replied by email that Comment is Free “hosts hundreds of discussions every month on a wide range of topics across the entire political and ideological spectrum.”

“We receive a huge amount of submissions for articles and aim to publish a plurality of voices from all over the world,” the spokesperson added. “Naturally, not all of these voices reflect The Guardian’s own editorial position.”

Apologist for ethnic cleansing

I am not in the least reassured by that response. Taub’s article was the second one published by The Guardian in as many months from a senior Israeli political or diplomatic figure. In February, the paper gave Yair Lapid, until recently Israel’s finance minister, a platform to describe calls for a cultural boycott of Israel as “shallow and lacking in coherence.”

Lapid’s view chimes with The Guardian’s “own editorial position,” to quote its anonymous spokesperson. While Israel was bombing Gaza last August, it ran a leader accusing London’s Tricycle Theatre of making a “bad error of judgment” in refusing to host a film festival sponsored by Israel.

As Ben White demonstrated in a trenchant 2014 analysis for Middle East Monitor, Jonathan Freedland is an apologist for ethnic cleansing. Freedland has tried to justify how “400 [Palestinian] villages” were “emptied” by Zionist forces in 1948 on the grounds that “the creation of a Jewish state was a moral necessity.”

If Freedland is prepared to defend Zionist war crimes, I guess it is not surprising that he is reserving space for naked Israeli propaganda in The Guardian’s comment section. While it is difficult to imagine that this bastion of liberalism would welcome openly racist submissions from far-right organizations like the British National Party or English Defence League, it is somehow acceptable for an Israeli diplomat to peddle bigotry against Palestinians.

Freedland has been tipped as a contender for The Guardian’s editor-in-chief, a post that is soon to be vacant.

In a perverse way, it might be a good thing if he gets the job. With Freedland at the helm, it would be easier to show how a supposedly progressive newspaper is in thrall to the toxic ideology of Zionism.

Sign the letter condemning the Guardian advert branding those opposing Israel in Gaza as ‘child killers’

Stop the War Coalition 10 August 2014.

On 11 August 2014, the Guardian will publish a wildly inaccurate and inflammatory advert from supporters of the state of Israel branding the Palestinian resistance as ‘child killers’.

Letter to Editor of the Guardian : Inflammatory advert

Guardian advert

Click graphic to see the Guardian advert that brands the Palestinian resistance as ‘child killers’ »

We write to condemn the Guardian’s decision to print a wildly inaccurate and inflammatory advert from supporters of the state of Israel branding the Palestinian resistance as ‘child killers’. This is especially sickening when Israel’s latest bombardment of Gaza has killed close to 400 Palestinian children. Amnesty International has condemned the deliberate targeting of schools and hospitals by Israel as a war crime.

Among the advert’s very many inaccuracies is the claim that those forces opposing Israel do not have the support of Palestinians when the current Israeli offensive is against a united Hamas-Fatah government which commands the support of the majority of Palestinians.

Sadly the decision to print this advert, rejected by The Times newspaper, is another sign of the increasingly pro-Israeli bias of the Guardian’s editorial policy, including the gross underestimate of the size of last Saturday’s Gaza protest demonstration. You are repeatedly running the slur that those who campaign in support of Palestine are anti-semitic when the very many Jews in the movement and the movement as a whole have repeatedly made it absolutely clear that this is not the case.

We call on the editor to redress the balance in future coverage.

John Rees Co-founder, Stop the War Coalition
Lindsey German Convenor, Stop the War Coalition
Kate Hudson General Secretary, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
David Hearst Middle East Eye
Tariq Ali
Barnaby Raine Organiser of the Jewish Bloc on demonstrations for Gaza

Add your name to the letter


Forget Those Shredded Children, Hadley Freeman is the Real Victim Here

by craig on August 8, 2014

Do not be deceived. The murdered innocents of Gaza are not those who are really suffering. It is the liberal Jews like Hadley Freeman, victims of the new anti-Semitism.

Israel is a state openly founded on racist and theocratic grounds, in which Jews have an absolute right to live in Israel, wherever in the world they were born and their families have been for centuries, and nobody else does. The unfortunate pre-1946 occupants of the land have been mostly driven out into refugee camps, including in Gaza, while religiously motivated settlers continue apace to grab the best Palestinian land and water. The state does this for them precisely and explicity because they are Jewish. Those non-Jews who remained in Israel proper are subject to a whole raft of apartheid style legislation, even governing whom they may marry, and the quantity of this legislation is increasing. 140 Israeli laws specify treatment by race.

Israel is as a state entirely based and run on a racist premise. Its very foundation is racist. But while the Israeli state may steal land specifically for Jews, make provision for Jews, and make life difficult for non-Jews, anybody else who mentions Jews in the context of Israeli behaviour is a vicious racist and anti-Semite. This warped and ludicrous logic is enforced by political orthodoxy and the mainstream media.

It is as though, in opposing apartheid, it was taboo to mention it had been invented for the benefit of white people.

Reading Freeman’s long self-pitying self-centred whinge I was waiting to find out what had actually happened to her to occasion some distress. Had she had a brick through her window? Had she been assaulted in the street? Has somebody hurled racial abuse at her?

Apparently none of the above. It appears that she feels under unfair pressure to denounce the actions of Israel. And- horror of horrors – the Tricycle Theatre has cancelled a Jewish Film Festival in Kilburn because it was financed by the Israeli Embassy. Oh no, the agony! How can a poor girl survive in a North London which is so rife with anti-Semitism! It reminded me forcefully of the very first diplomatic social engagement of my professional career, in 1985 when our Afrikaaner hostess held forth on how she thought people looked down on her in Harrods.

I deplore racism with every part of my being, all racism. Freeman makes what is intended to be a smart observation that the Tricycle’s act “reminds me how very far I am from the States”. It is very plain that she regrets that and believes that the US attitude to Israel is better than the British one.

This then morphs into the meme that the reaction to the Gaza massacre is part of a wave of the “new anti-Semitism”. There have indeed been several deplorable anti-Semitic incidents in Europe in the last few months. But they have killed absolutely nobody in the last two years, while Israel has killed 1,500 people. There have been three terrible examples of racial murders of Jews in the past eight years, and there needs to be continued and unremitting vigilance against all hate crime. The disruption of Hadley’s cinema treats and the daubing of paint on a synagogue are in themselves bad things. But do they really compare to the massive disproportionate force being used to destroy over 1,000 women and children in a month in Gaza, and the context of the entire seventy year programme of ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Palestinian people?

You are right, Hadley. Just because you are Jewish does not mean you should be under special pressure to condemn Israel’s actions. But if you take it upon yourself to write a long article on the subject, we are entitled to expect you – as a human being – to condemn the massacre. And as in the article you write about nothing but your own angst and the evils of anti-Semitism, and manage not a single word of sympathy or regret for the victims of the terrible massacre in Gaza, we are entitled to form our own opinion.

And my opinion is that you are a wholly self-centred and self-regarding little person with an abject lack of moral perspective, who seems to think the murder of 1500 people is about the impact on your feelings.

Hadley, you are not disgusting because you are Jewish: you are just a disgusting human being.

Rusbridger – Handmaiden to Power

by craig on August 11, 2014

Rusbridger’s Guardian has become an unrepentant unionist, zionist, and neo-con New Labour propaganda vehicle. Particularly deceitful is their attitude to the security services and the “war on terror”, where Rusbridger stands revealed as a handmaiden to power. He was, a very senior Guardian source told me, particularly upset when I described him as “Tony Blair’s catamite”. Let me say it again.

Let me give you a specific case to illustrate my point.

On 2 August the Guardian published a piece by Jamie Doward and Ian Cobain which, on the face of it, exposed the British Foreign Office for lobbying against the publication of the US Senate report on extraordinary rendition, lest details of British complicity become public.

On the face of it, a worthy piece of journalism exposing deeply shady government behaviour.

Except that I had published precisely the same story a full 15 weeks earlier, on April 14 2014, having been urgently contacted by a whistleblower.

What is more, immediately I heard from the whistleblower I made several urgent phone calls to Ian Cobain. He neither took nor returned my calls. I therefore left detailed messages, referring to the story which I had now published on my website.

In fact, the Guardian only published this story after William Hague had written to Reprieve to confirm that this lobbying had happened. In other words the Guardian published only after disclosure had been authorised by Government.

Furthermore, in publishing the government authorised story, the Guardian omitted the absolutely key point – that the purpose of the UK lobbying was to affect court cases under way and in prospect in the UK. Both in civil cases of compensation for victims, and in potential criminal cases for complicity in torture against Blair, Straw et al, British judges have (disgracefully) accepted the argument that evidence of the torture cannot be used because the American do not want it revealed, and may curtail future intelligence sharing. Obviously, if the Americans publish the material themselves, this defence falls.

As this defence is the major factor keeping Blair, Straw and numerous still senior civil servants out of the dock, this sparked the crucial British lobbying to suppress the Feinstein report – which has indeed succeeded in causing a huge amount of redaction by the White House.

My mole was absolutely adamant this was what was happening, and it is what I published. Yet Cobain in publishing the government authorised version does not refer to the impact on trials at all – despite the fact that this was 100% the subject of the letter from Reprieve to which Hague was replying, and that the letter from Reprieve mentioned me and my blog by name.

Instead of giving the true story, the government authorised version published by Cobain misdirects the entire subject towards Diego Garcia. The truth is that Diego Garcia is pretty incidental in the whole rendition story. On UK soil there was actually a great deal more done at Wick airport (yes, I do mean Wick, not Prestwick). That is something the government is still keeping tight closed, so don’t expect a mention from Cobain.

I was fooled by Cobain for a long time. What I now realise is that his role is to codify and render safe information which had already leaked. He packages it and sends it off in a useless direction – away from Blair and Straw in this instance. He rigorously excludes material which is too hot for the establishment to handle. The great trick is, that the Guardian persuades its loyal readers that it is keeping tabs on the security services when in fact it is sweeping up after them.

Which is a precise description of why the Guardian fell out with Assange and WikiLeaks.

I suppose I should expect no better of the newspaper which happily sent the extremely noble Sara Tisdall to prison, but we should have learnt a lot from Rusbridger’s agreement with the security services to smash the Snowden hard drives. The Guardian argues that other copies of the drives existed. That is scarcely the point. Would you participate in a book-burning because other copies of books exist? The Guardian never stands up to the security services or the establishment. It just wants you to believe that it does.





Not anymore, it isn’t. The readers’ comment censors at Guardian HQ are some of the strictest group-thinkers online. If your thoughts on their pet projects are not in line with the group, down the memory hole they go. Three key topics are especially sensitive: Climate Change (aka AGW until it wasn’t!); Israel’s unimpeachable right to wage war on it’s neighbours; the normalcy of homosexuality; and a few others.

A particular affront to the Guardian’s guardians is to mention that they have an agenda on any of their projects. So without insulting the subject matter (Israelis, climate worriers, or metrosexuals) you immediately fall foul of the Ggs.

In this post, I intend to document my comments and expose the paranoid over-sensitivity of the Ggs.

Guardians of Metrosexuality

I noticed today that the online Guardian’s front page has 4 promotions for gayness:





Why this obsession with people’s bedroom activity? And why isn’t there any balance with articles on heterosexuality? The Guardian has an agenda of promoting homosexual behaviour as perfectly normal, whereas in statistical or biological terms it is not the norm.

Another day dominated by the pro-gay agenda:

Sainsbury’s kiss-in held after lesbian couple told they were ‘disgusting’

Brighton kiss-in
The supermarket giant was taking a determinedly relaxed attitude to the event, insisting it was ‘happy to welcome’ the protesters. Photograph: Christopher Ison

As the crowd surged indoors shortly before 6.30pm, Luke Wassell and Lewis Jones found themselves in the vegetable aisle, wedged between the sweet potatoes and the bags of spinach. Though both are gay, they are friends rather than partners, and so “I guess I’ll have to kiss a vegetable,” said Wassell, glancing around him for a suitable candidate. “We’re definitely supposed to kiss something.”

The two students were among a gathering of hundreds who swamped a Sainsbury’s store in Brighton on Wednesday evening for a “big consensual kiss-in”, staged in protest at the treatment of two women who were threatened with ejection at the weekend after sharing a “very light, brief kiss” in the aisles.

People make their way into the store for the #BigKissIn

“It’s 2014, in Brighton,” said Jones when asked why he had wanted to come to the protest. This was maybe the sort of thing he might expect in his home town of Southampton, but in Britain’s most gay-friendly city, the incident was “ridiculous”.

He was not the only person who felt, in the words of one protester, that the store security guard had “picked the wrong town” when she told the couple that another customer found them “disgusting”, and asked them to leave if they continued to show affection.

The incident, said Fiona Spechter, had “made me realise how I can take it for granted that I can hold my girlfriend’s hand in public. I’ve lived in Brighton for a long time and it’s normal here, so when something like this happens, it’s really shocking.”

Still waiting for the kissing to begin …

Sainsbury’s has apologised for the incident, which it says “should not have happened”. The guard was not employed by the store directly but by a third party, it said, stressing that Sainsbury’s itself is committed to diversity.

The supermarket giant was taking a determinedly relaxed attitude to the event, insisting it was “happy to welcome” the protesters to the New England Street store. “We’re pleased everyone had fun and we were happy for the chance to remind everyone just how important being an inclusive business and employer is to us.”

Those few customers who had managed to squeeze inside past the crowds also appeared untroubled by the event, though most confessed they had no idea what was going on. “They’re all right, I’m working round them,” said one older woman, pushing a trolley laden with bacon, bread and a multipack of mineral water past the cheese counter. “Live and let live is what I say.”

Let the kissing commence!

“I’m more annoyed about the fact there aren’t any more large skimmed milks,” said another shopper, who gave his name as Sam.

But with the aisles packed with noisy couples and groups of friends, most waiting to be told to start snogging, a few breaking off excitable chats to kiss, the store manager, Enda Costelloe, confessed he was concerned about safety. A representative of Sussex University’s student union, which organised the event, was given access to the tannoy. “Right everyone, we’re going to do one big kiss and then can you all leave please?” he said, before counting down from 10.

Leaving the store minutes later, her shopping in hand, Sonja Turner said a member of staff had approached her to apologise for the disruption, but that she had told her there was no need. The store, she said, “don’t get it. It’s been the best shopping experience I’ve ever had.”

Gay people are not genetic aberrations

If you welcome research that says being gay results from genetic inheritance, don’t be surprised when they start offering a ‘cure’

‘I’m Michael Sam, I’m an American football player … and I’m gay’

The Missouri Tigers defender has come out but, unlike many gay sport stars, he took a chance by doing it at the start of his professional career

Actress Ellen Page comes out in speech to Human Rights Campaign event

• X-Men and Juno star speaks to audience of counsellors
• Says: ‘I’m here today because I’m gay’

This Is What Happens When Leaders Decide To Be Puppets For The Rothschild Central Bankers!

Tony, are you watching?

ADL blasts Economist magazine over ‘anti-Semitic’ cartoon

By Haaretz 


The Anti-Defamation League on Monday urged editors of The Economist magazine to issue a “full-throated apology” for publishing an editorial cartoon that observers have deemed anti-Semitic.


The renowned magazine “cannot repair the damage of publishing an anti-Semitic image with only half-measures,” the ADL said in a statement.


The cartoon depicts U.S. President Obama as “hindered in his efforts to reach an agreement with Iran by the machinations of a United States Congress under the control of a nefarious Jewish lobby,” according to the anti-racism watchdog group.


The Economist initially published the cartoon by Peter Schrank on Saturday, but removed the offending image from the article following a backlash from readers.


The website added an editor’s note to the article, about the Obama administration’s efforts to reach a final nuclear deal with Iran, which reads: “The print edition of this story had a cartoon which inadvertently caused offence to some readers, so we have replaced it with a photograph.”


The cartoon still remained the top image on the site’s Middle East & Africa section on Tuesday morning (Israel time), but was removed in the afternoon.


Meanwhile, Jewish groups said the editor’s note does little to reverse the damage.


“This was nothing less than a visual representation of the age-old anti-Semitic canard of Jewish control,” the ADL statement said. “And it conjures up yet another classic anti-Semitic myth – the accusation that Jews have ‘dual loyalty’ and will act only on behalf of Israel to the detriment of their own country. This is the stuff of the ‘Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,’ recycled for a modern-day audience.”


Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean at the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told the Algemeiner that “the cartoon fails to deliver anything but the classic ‘Israel controls Congress’ stereotype.”


“The cartoon’s effect is to reinforce anti-Israel stereotypes,” he was quoted as saying.


The Economist has been accused of anti-Israel bias in the past and of distorting matters related to Diaspora Jews and Israel.

Political Vel Craft

“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.”

Benito Mussolini

On 29 April 1945, the bodies of Mussolini, Petacci, and the other executed Fascists were loaded into a moving van and trucked south to Milan.

After being shot, kicked, and spat upon, the bodies were hung upside down on meathooks from the roof of a gas station. The bodies were then stoned by civilians from below. The corpse of Mussolini and other fascists became subject to ridicule and abuse.

View original post 1,475 more words

Striking Back Against Censorship

The WordPress.com Blog

The mission of WordPress.com is to democratize publishing. We’re inspired every day by the ways creators use our platform to bring their voices to the world. Unfortunately, we also see many cases of censorship aimed at WordPress.com authors and users.

One area where we’ve seen a number of problems is the censoring of criticism through abuse of copyright law. Two recentcases of abuse really caught our attention and made us think that we needed to take action to fight back on behalf of our users and everyone who believes in the internet’s promise for free expression.

Censorship by DMCA

A common form of censorship by copyright stems from improper use of legal creations called DMCA takedown notices. The DMCA stands for the “Digital Millennium Copyright Act,” which is a US federal law that created a system for protecting copyrights online. The DMCA system works pretty well, but has a…

View original post 663 more words

Gareth Williams: Was his death the ‘Perfect Crime’ ?


gareth cctv 9gareth cctv 6(Il elaborate on this post later with links and timeline, and motives… HINT… MI6 kept four memory sticks from London Police!)

gareth williams

-Gareth William (I believe) was poisoned by the CIA (A poison of the variety ‘amanita phalloides’ or a more potent high-tech equivalent from the ‘US Weaponisation of Micro-toxins’ program), whilst in the US meeting with NSA on 10th August.

-He was then, on his return to London, tailed 24/7 by their MI6 counterparts. Once the poison began to take effect, Gareth, spent £90 of medicine at Harrods.
gareth cctv 7gareth cctv 6gareth cctv 5gareth cctv 4gareth cctv 9gareth cctv 3

-On the night of 15th August, MI6 officers carefully entered his flat (MI6 safe house), knowing him to be either unconscious or dead, by carefully removing the door frame (as stated in the inquest).

The MI6 safehouse where the decomposing body of Mr Williams was found.
The MI6 safehouse where the decomposing body of Mr Williams was found.

-Mr Williams’ body (dead or unconscious) was then placed in a sports bag, padlocked from the outside, and placed in his bath, filled with a dilution of Sodium Hydroxide (rapidly increasing the decomposition process, and preventing a cause of death from being determined).

IT WAS A MESSAGE! (Mafia style)...
IT WAS A MESSAGE! (Mafia style)…

-The MI6 officers then placed misleading clues for police (women’s clothes etc), went through his computer, taking any vital information, and ‘dry cleaned’ the flat. Some speculate whether someone returned again to take a memory stick, and to whether they planned on returning at some stage to drain away the brown sludge that was then Gareth Williams.

The inside of MI6 Safe house, where the remains of Gareth Williams where found.
The inside of MI6 Safe house, where the remains of Gareth Williams where found.

-Superiors at Vauxhall House (SIS) did not inform the police for almost two weeks, although it is standard protocol to inform police of missing a employee after two days.

-London Met had already been briefed on the situation beforehand. Media where planted with ‘sex game’ stories, which is strangely very often the case in British Intel murders!

Exclusive: US blocks publication of Chilcot’s report on how Britain went to war with Iraq

No more evasion and prevarication – Britain’s elite must be held to account

The blocking of the Chilcot report underlines how the powerful shield their activities from the public
Tony Blair, Porter

Tony Blair giving evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry in January 2010. Photograph: PA

In The Gatekeepers, the documentary made about Israel’s internal intelligence, Shin Bet, one of the most striking interviews with six former leaders of the agency is with the charismatic Ami Ayalon, who later became a Labor member of the Knesset. Ayalon confessed that when he was small boy he thought of the state of Israel being guided by a kindly old man who lived in a room at the end of a corridor, dispensing wisdom and guidance to the country’s leaders.

When he grew up, he knew, of course, there was no such person, but as he rose to the top of the Israeli navy and later Shin Bet, he realised that there was no fount of wisdom or decency to be found at the top of the Israeli state either: just politicians and officials making questionable decisions on the hoof.

In Britain, you might say that at the end of the corridor we do have a little old lady, who has seen a thing or two in her 61-year reign and has much wisdom to offer prime ministers and senior politicians. Although her impact on policy and the standards of government is minuscule, she represents something or other that appears to be reassuring.

But what you realise when you approach Ayalon’s age and you have watched British politics for a long time is that life is mostly shoddy and discreditable at the top and that that characteristic is becoming more pronounced. There are decent people doing their level best, but there are also bad ones who erode the integrity and trust necessary for a democracy to work properly. One of those is Tony Blair, who took Britain to war on a lie and who is now believed by most to have misled parliament in order to help an American president who was bent on avenging 9/11 by invading the wrong country.

It is the greatest scandal of British public life in a generation, yet Blair and his allies, such as Jack Straw and Alastair Campbell, have never been properly held to account. More than a decade after we went to war, Sir John Chilcot’s report is stalled because Sir Jeremy Heywood, the current cabinet secretary, who was at Blair’s side as principle private secretary during the run-up to the invasion, is blocking crucial evidence to the inquiry.

It is an unbelievable state of affairs. As the former foreign secretary Lord Owen pointed out last week, you couldn’t have a more dubious arrangement. A man who was integral to the government that took us to war is now sitting on evidence of 200 relevant cabinet level discussions, 25 notes written by Blair to George Bush and records of 130 phone conversations between Blair, Bush and Gordon Brown. Heywood claims that he’s bound by the decision taken by his predecessor, Lord O’Donnell, to protect the confidentiality of Blair and Bush’s discussions. In effect, Heywood is claiming that he has no discretion and therefore his past as senior official in Blair’s Number 10 at the time has no relevance.

What is so dismal about this situation, quite apart from the naked self-interest that it represents, is that it underlines that while the British public is expected to put up with ever-increasing levels of intrusion by surveillance, in the name of transparency and security, those in power create for themselves an impregnable bunker where honour, accountability and public opinion count for nothing. They conceal their actions and shield themselves from entirely legitimate requests from an inquiry set up by the prime minister himself.

One wonders whether Chilcot was perhaps the ultimately cynical act? Could it be that Blair and the civil servants who oversaw the preparations for war always knew that the excuse of preserving the confidentiality of the prime minister’s conversations with Bush would stop Sir John’s committee getting at the truth of how we were taken to war on a handful of lies? Maybe they just hope to outlast Chilcot, prevaricating until the committee drop dead and everyone has forgotten the war.

Not only should Heywood be removed from anything to do with the decision of what Chilcot is allowed to see, but, as Lord Owen suggested on Newsnight, the conventions surrounding a prime minister’s dealings with a US president no longer apply: this is about the possibility that Tony Blair knowingly deceived parliament and dissembled to the nation in order to do George Bush’s bidding and preserve the special relationship. Allegations don’t come more serious than that. We should know what he said to Bush.

After Heywood’s behaviour in the Plebgate case, when he failed to investigate inconsistencies in the evidence that would have exonerated the former chief whip Andrew Mitchell, people could be forgiven for wondering about Number 10’s respect for the truth and simply what is right. Mitchell was very hard done by and Heywood was the man who could have prevented much of the shame that he endured. Maybe there are questions to be asked about the values of the cabinet secretary himself.

But in all this, there is a much bigger theme, which is seen in another sputtering inquiry into the behaviour of Blair-era politicians and officials – the Gibson inquiry into allegations that British intelligence agencies were complicit in the torture of terror suspects after 9/11 and that officials in the then foreign secretary Jack Straw’s office were aware. The inquiry’s investigations ended nearly two years ago and the report has been sat on by Number 10 for the past 14 months. After the NGOs and torture victims boycotted Sir Peter Gibson’s inquiry, because it lacked credibility, it probably won’t have the damning impact it should have when it is finally published this week.

As a result, Number 10 may get away without following up with examination of cases such as those of Abdel Hakim Belhaj, who was rendered with his wife for torture to Gaddafi’s Libya in an operation involving Sir Mark Allen of MI6 during Jack Straw’s time at the Foreign Office.

Scrape away at the interlocking scandals of the war on terror and the war in Iraq and you find a rot that has taken hold at the top of British state.

Whether the scandal is about the path to war, the torture of terror suspects or the exponential increase in surveillance, the common denominators are consistently the reverence for the special relationship and related issues about the powers and conduct of our intelligence services. These two have distorted the standards of public life for far too long. It is imperative that Sir John Chilcot is no longer obstructed and we get his full account of Blair’s war as soon as humanly possible.

Uprootedpalestinians's Blog


1 / 1
Tony Blair and George W. Bush at the former President’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, in 2002
Getty Images

Department of State’s objection to release of key evidence may prevent  inquiry’s conclusions from ever being published, except in heavily redacted form

Washington is playing the lead role in delaying the publication of the long-awaited report into how Britain went to  war with Iraq, The Independent has learnt.

Although the Cabinet Office has been under fire for stalling the progress of the four-year Iraq Inquiry by Sir John Chilcot, senior diplomatic sources in the US and Whitehall indicated that it is officials in the White House and the US Department of State who have refused to sanction any declassification of critical pre- and post-war communications between George W Bush and Tony Blair.

Without permission from the US government, David Cameron faces the politically embarrassing situation of having to…

View original post 913 more words

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Historical Tribune

The Factual Review

Desultory Heroics

A Chronicle of Dystopia and Resistance

Astute News

The Science Of News And Analysis


sharing news that matters to you

Taking Sides

Thinking Through and Against Received Opinion

The Last Refuge

Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits - Contact Info: TheLastRefuge@reagan.com

Citizen WElls

Obama eligibility, Obama news

Burst Updates

Burst Updates, an explosion of news, politics, and opinions.

tomfernandez28's Blog

A topnotch WordPress.com site

The Free

blog of the post capitalist transition.. Read or download the novel here + latest relevant posts

The Writing of John Laurits

Insurgent journalism. Poetry. Weaponized Mathematics.

Hwaairfan's Blog

"We are all pieces of the puzzle of Truth, one piece missing and our self image is incomplete...Tawhid! !..."


“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.”~ Ronald Reagan.


Web Investigator.KK. org... is one web investigative resource for searching thousands of online sources, and public databases. This blog will change your life!

Johnsono ne'Blog'as

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

Nwo Report

Nwo News, End Time, World News and Conspiracy News

Journal of People

Peasants and workers

Counter Information

Uncovering the mainstream media lies

pundit from another planet

the best news you can get without a security clearance

%d bloggers like this: