The coming crisis of climate science?

Aletho News

Figure 1.4 from Chapter 1 of a draft of the Fifth Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Initials represent the First Assessment Report (FAR) in 1990, the Second (SAR) in 1995. Shaded banks show range of predictions from each of the four climate models used for all four reports since 1990. The last report, AR4, was issued in 2007. The black squares, shown with uncertainty bars, measure the observed average surface temperatures over the same interval. The range of model runs is indicated by the vertical bars. The light grey area above and below is not part of the model prediction ranges.

By Reiner Grundmann | September 19, 2013

With the fifth assessment report soon to be released by the IPCC the pre-publication buzz is well underway. A while ago unauthorised drafts circulated in the blogosphere and now the official leaks have found their way into news…

View original post 1,225 more words


Bristol, strange deaths and the defence industry


Between 1985 and the early 1990s more than 30 scientists working on top secret British defence projects, mostly computer technicians, died in very strange and unexplained circumstances.
Several defence contractor companies such as Marconi, Plessey and British Aerospace, among others were involved in what can only be described as a bizarre series of events.In 1986, Vimal Dajibhai, who was working for Marconi Underwater Systems, drove from London to Bristol, a city with which he had no connection and threw himself off the famous Clifton Suspension Bridge located there.

A few months previously, Arshad Sharif, a computer programmer with Marconi Defence Systems, also drove from London to Bristol and strangled himself by tying a rope around his neck and then to a tree, sat behind the wheel of his car and stepped on the accelerator pedal with predictable results.

Why Bristol of all places?

Bristol is a former Knights Templar port and before that a Phoenician port. Its name has evolved from Barati, the Phoenician goddess.

It just so happens that an elite unit of British intelligence called the Committee of 26 is based there and they use the runway of the British Aerospace complex to clandestinely fly British and foreign agents in and out of the country.

In that period of the 1980s there was a multiplicity of strange deaths of people at the cutting edge of development in the defence industries.

What possesses a man to get into his car, drive more than two hours to the Clifton Suspension Bridge and jump off?

Possibly significantly, a CIA scientist once told a researcher that he was put through forms of mind control to prevent him from recalling his knowledge once a project was completed.

By way of another example; David Sands was a highly skilled scientist working on a very sensitive area of defence, but at 37 he was talking about leaving the industry and changing his lifestyle.

He was happily married with two small children, a son aged six and a three year old daughter.

Sands and his wife had just returned from an enjoyable holiday in Venice when he died in mysterious circumstances, although they are not so mysterious once mind-control is understood to be the cause.

He worked for Easams who were fulfilling contracts for the Ministry of Defence and it appears that whilst Sands and his wife were in Venice, the company was visited by members of the elite British police unit, the Special branch.

Then, on Saturday 28th March 1987, David Sands told his wife he was going out to refuel the car, but he didn’t return for six hours.

No one, least of all himself had any idea where he was.

His wife Anna called the police and Constable John Hiscock was at the house when Sands returned at 10.20pm.

When questioned about his whereabouts he said he had been ‘driving and thinking’.

His wife said it was out of character for him to be away for so long and she did not think he realised how long he had been out.

He seemed confused, but happy, she said.

Two days later, on Monday, 30th March, he climbed into his excellently maintained Austin Maestro car and began his regular journey from his home in Itchen Abbas, near Winchester, Hampshire to Easams at Camberley in Surrey.

His wife said there was nothing unusual about his demeanour or behaviour and driving conditions were good but about 30 minutes into his journey when he was driving along the A33 at Popham, near Basingstoke, he suddenly did a U-turn across the dual carriageway and headed at high speed in the opposite direction to his destination.

Turning onto a slip road at about 80 miles an hour, Sands then drove his car straight into a disused café building, killing himself in an explosion of flame.

There were no skid marks and he had not even tried to brake.

It is fairly obvious to anyone who has knowledge of the way mind controllers operate, that in the time he was missing, he had his mind programmed to act in a certain way with some kind of trigger, which could be a word by phone, a particular sign or symbol on the road, a particular sound, a light or some kind of action outside of his vehicle.

Whatever was programmed into his mind would be activated via one of these methods and at that point he would have switched from his normal self to a man focused only on driving into the café building being unaware of the consequences.

In effect the subconscious programming overpowers the conscious mind and the programme takes over to replace the consciousness of the victim.

This is exactly how the armed and Special Forces turn humans into ‘killing machines’.

And there are plenty more examples of this phenomenon… Roger Hill, a designer at Marconi Defence Systems, allegedly committed suicide with a shotgun in March 1985.

Jonathan Walsh, a digital communications expert employed by GEC, Marconi’s parent firm, ‘fell’ from his hotel room window in November 1985, shortly after expressing fear for his life.

In March 1988, Trevor Knight, also employed or contracted with Marconi, died of carbon monoxide poisoning in his car.

Peter Ferry, marketing director of GEC Marconi, was found electrocuted with electrical leads in his mouth in August 1988.

Also, ‘coincidentally’ in the same month, Alistair Beckham was also found electrocuted with electric leads attached to his body and his mouth stuffed with a handkerchief.

He was an engineer with the associated company Plessey Defence Systems.

And another defence contractor, Andrew Hall was found dead in September 1988 of carbon monoxide poisoning.

Altogether it is estimated that there were more than 30 similar deaths at British defence establishments between 1985 and 1992.

Researching these incidents stimulated eerie echoes in my own experiences, especially regarding the above-related death of David Sands.

In the early 1990s, around 1991/2, I worked in the computer industry for a medium-sized software company based in the north east of England and obviously worked alongside many programmers and software technicians who were often seconded to work at the computer installations of client companies on a temporary basis.

One of our clients was the defence contractor Vickers who just happened to build nuclear submarines and was located in the English north-western seaport of Barrow-in-Furness.

A colleague, whom I knew reasonably well, spent some considerable time there working on their top-secret computer installations until one day the news came through to the office where I was located that this person had been killed in a ‘tragic accident’.

The official, police explanation was that he had been working ‘long hours’ and the previous evening he had set-out on his journey home and at some point had inexplicably, nowhere near his home, left the motorway at an exit slip-road, rounded the roundabout at the top, proceeded back down the same slip-road from which he had exited and ended-up travelling south on the northbound lanes at great speed.

Of course he had not gone very far when he was inevitably involved in a high-speed, head-on collision with a car travelling in the opposite direction and both drivers were apparently killed instantly.

It was only upon researching the above, previous, similar examples to this that it stirred-up distant, dormant memories and then suddenly, realisation hit me like a brick.

Of course, at the time I thought it was nothing more than a tragic accident caused by over-tiredness, as portrayed by the official version of events, but thinking about this with the benefit of hindsight, why would tiredness make anyone exit the motorway early (less than halfway home) and then in effect make a ‘U-turn’ back down the same stretch of road just negotiated?

It does not really make any logical sense upon closer examination and as such constitutes a good example of how easy it is to make people believe anything with a few well-chosen ‘official’ words.

In October 2011, the British illusionist, hypnotist and entertainer Derren Brown devoted a whole one hour TV programme on British mainstream television to a demonstration of how relatively simple it is to ‘programme’ someone to kill using simple hypnosis and mind control techniques.

In this elaborate demonstration he selected a young man from an invited audience (who by the way had no idea why they were really there until after the event) and over the course of the next few days and weeks programmed him to ‘kill’ a British celebrity, Stephen Fry.

All throughout the programming, the man was told and believed that he was simply being used as a ‘guinea pig’ to prove that it was possible to improve someone’s marksmanship with a gun by the use of hypnosis, and not to be become a ‘mind-controlled’ assassin.

Sure enough, at the appropriate time and place, the man was given the subliminal signal (a woman in a polka dot dress walked by – significantly the exact same trigger used to activate Sirhan Sirhan’s assassination of Robert Kennedy).

He then simply took the gun from its case and coolly and clinically ‘shot’ Fry three times in the chest from a distance of about 30 feet before casually returning the gun to its case.

He had never even held a gun in his hands prior to his meeting with Brown.

Obviously for the purposes of the demonstration, the bullets were blanks, but the subject had no idea of this.

Indeed he had no idea at all of what he had even done until he was ‘released’ from his programming by Brown and was able to watch unbelievingly, with jaw-dropped, the TV footage of the event.

This is proof conclusive in my view, of the ability of our unseen masters to use such techniques for their own nefarious purposes and goes a long way towards explaining why many assassinations are undertaken by the ‘lone nut’ gunman.
This is an extremely convenient and believable expedient by which the Elite can dispose of people who stand in the way of their agenda without garnering the suspicions of the majority of sheeple, who continue to be unknowingly duped in this way.

The Slog.


jumperptnetOilman, Banker, Soldier, Spy: everything is connected

The interconnected worlds of hedge funds, energy, banking, defence, globalism and geopolitics have the ability at times to make the characters from a John Le Carre novel seem one-dimensional and honourable by comparison. The Slog delves further into the the double-dealing world of the élite, and concludes that perhaps at last its members fear they might have a fight on their hands.

Four funerals and an abduction

Like me and millions of others, you’ve probably been following the growing death-toll among financial persons of late. Following the demise of one Morgan pirate last Sunday week,  A Deutsche Bank executive followed last weekend.

Next came (or rather, went) Russell Investments’ Chief Economist and former Fed economist Mike Dueker, this week found devoid of life by a Washington State roadside. Of this last, police said it looked like suicide, which is all well and…

View original post 1,147 more words

THE PAEDOFILE: ELM HOUSE – Why Boris Johnson is a very happy man

Police blacked out talk of Jimmy Savile’s Princess pal


Jonathan Cook — Daily Star Feb 2, 2014

Saviles connections: Sir Angus Ogilvy and Princess Alexandra. Click to enlarge

Last January an internal police report revealed how the paedophile told them in 2009 that the “first time” he went to the school was “with Princess Alexandria (sic) for a garden party”.


But when the interview transcripts were released in October there was no mention of the royal.


Now, following an appeal by us to the Information Commissioner’s Office, Surrey Police have released fresh transcripts revealing at least four mentions.


They show how Savile considered Princess “Alex” a “friend” when he first visited an approved school where he abused girls.


According to the new scripts Savile, then 82, told the two female detectives: “…right I went there, with Princess Alexandra, and Alex was a friend of mine anyway, still is.”


He went on to say: “Now that was a great day we all had, the first time I ever went there.”


The ex-Top Of The Pops presenter went on to claim his visits to Duncroft school in Staines, Surrey, became what he called “an annual”.


In the heavily blacked out text he is shown to have made at least two further references to Alexandra – the youngest granddaughter of King George V and Queen Mary.


After the mentions, one of the two female detectives questioning Savile over three alleged sex assaults, two related to Duncroft, asked: “Do you remember what year that was?” The former radio DJ, who denied all the claims against him, later claimed “it would be the seventies”.


One of the detectives made reference to the now 77-year-old princess, the widow of Sir Angus Ogilvy, when checking what Savile had said.


However it seems that after the interview on October 1, 2009, police failed to cross-check the mentions against Savile’s autobiographies.


Documents show that in January 2009 a prosecutor requested that all Savile’s books be read “to see if there was any mention of an association with Duncroft”.s


An internal Surrey Police report on the force’s bungled “Operation Ornament” probe into Savile says: “This was duly done but there were no references identified that were of any connection to the investigation.”



Jimmy Savile photographed with a younger Tony Blair. Click to enlarge

But if, after Savile’s interview, police had re-read the books to look for mentions of the princess they would have found suggestions he had preyed on vulnerable girls.


In his 1974 life story Savile wrote: “Princess Alex is a patron of a hostel for girls in care. At this place I’m a cross between a term-time boyfriend and a fixer of special trips out.”


Buckingham Palace declined to comment last week.


Last night Surrey Police said: “Information relating to Surrey Police’s on-going investigation into Duncroft School and all personal details of victims or potential witnesses were redacted from the transcripts.


“Following a review by the Information Commissioner’s Office, some of the redactions have been shortened or revised.


“This included releasing the name of Princess Alexandra. Her name had been previously published by Surrey Police in a report in January last year and was therefore already in the public domain.


“Savile’s biographies were reviewed in 2009 as part of the investigation, as stated in our previous published report.”

The Slog.

bojocoppntIt’s another case for Bojocop

Fourth time around, no arrests, no charges, no progress, no credibility

It is now some four months since London Mayor Boris Johnson told the media he thought the Elm House paedophile investigation was proceeding “very satisfactorily”. He’s easily satisfied.

In November 2012, The Labour MP Tom Watson spoken at pmq’s of a “powerful paedophile ring” and its links to a previous prime minister’s “senior adviser”. He left David Cameron looking extremely uncomfortable. An investigation was promised.

The portents from the past weren’t good. Home Secretary at the time Leon Brittan “lost” papers given to him by MP Geoffrey Dickens, who claimed the dossier contained “compelling evidence” of child abuse. The very high likelihood of political figures being involved was highlighted by a sudden decision, in 1982, to get Special Branch involved. The place was raided, and owner Carol Kasir arrested. Her own child was taken…

View original post 968 more words

Guilty Men

Jack Straw: ‘I would have done a better job than Gordon Brown’

Veteran politician Jack Straw has announced his retirement after 40 years in parliament. He reflects on Labour’s record, immigration and Edward Snowden, in what can only be described as a rather irritable and unhappy encounter
Jack Straw

‘I don’t often think I’m really bad at anything’ … Jack Straw. Photograph: Graeme Robertson for the Guardian

When a veteran politician decides to retire, the period between the announcement and their departure from parliament can often be an interesting time. Not yet gone, but no longer yoked to the constraints of the party machine, many take it as an opportunity to reflect on their years in Westminster with a candour their career had never until then allowed. Free to ruminate on successes and failures, express regrets and draw lessons, they frequently turn out to be at their most likable during those final months. But not, alas, Jack Straw.

The funny thing is, I thought he would be. There’s nothing like a Tory-led government to make the memory of New Labour‘s faults fade, and I was feeling very benign towards him before we met this week. When Straw became home secretary in 1997, I was too young to remember the last time his party had been in power; he was the first Labour minister I ever met, and 17 years on, it was easy to feel sentimentally nostalgic about his time in office. Well, I won’t be making that mistake again. Lord knows why Straw agreed to give an interview, because he seems annoyed before I even sit down.

He greets me in his office with the sort of brusque, let’s-get-this-over-with expression you might wear for a policeman who has come to search your house. The 67-year-old first arrived in parliament 40 years ago as an assistant to Barbara Castle, and was elected to her old constituency of Blackburn when she retired in 1979. The decision to leave at next year’s general election was reached, he explains, by his “head rather than the heart”, because he couldn’t be sure that his health would sustain him through another parliament. “Other MPs are fine into their mid-70s,” he observes, “but the way I’ve been a constituency MP is to work very hard, and with a very high work rate as well. I just wasn’t certain I was going to be able to do that, so there we are.”

Looking back, would he say that Labour had achieved more or less than he had hoped when he first became a minister in 1997? He mutters something inaudible – then: “Sorry, I’m not being patronising – it’s an interesting question,” which, of course, makes me wonder what he said, but he is already off into a great long list of all the ways his constituency has improved: a new hospital, better GCSE pass rates, a refurbished town centre, upgraded rail services.

“And, the other absolutely critical thing, which you can’t measure by pointing at buildings, is that we treat each other now in our society in a different way. If you are black or Asian, gay or lesbian, there’s no question your life has been transformed by Labour, and I’m very proud to have been part of that.” Labour also, he adds, “managed to change the behaviour of a generation of young people, and that’s principally why we had much less crime.”

The last claim might puzzle some readers, I suspect, particularly in light of recent doubts about the reliability of crime figures, concerns about a lost generation of Neets, and ongoing anxiety about anti-social behaviour. He’s confident that standards of behaviour in young people have improved?

“Yes, they have, why do you think they haven’t? I mean, youth justice changes, which indeed I introduced 15 years ago, have been a success, which is why you never read about them. People’s behaviour on public transport, people’s behaviour at football games – brilliant.”

Britain's Prime Minister Blair and Foreign Secretary Straw wave in Downing StreetTony Blair and Jack Straw, then foreign secretary, in Downing Street in 2004. Photograph: Kieran Doherty/ReutersI wonder if he shares many Labour voters’ dismay at the speed with which what had felt, under Labour, like a progressive national shift to the left has already been reversed. Public attitudes towards benefits claimants, Europe and immigration, for example, have hardened dramatically since Labour left office – and not even under a Tory government, but a coalition. Some of the ugly outrage sparked byChannel 4’s Benefits Street, for example, would have been unimaginable just a few years ago.

No, he says, people were already worrying about “scroungers” back in the 70s – an anxiety “to which I was not unsympathetic” – and anyway, “I don’t think you could make 2010 a point where the benefit system started to be toughened up, because quite a lot of the changes happened under us. And I was in favour of the changes we were making.” As for Europe, if there’s a referendum in three years’ time he’s quite sure Britain will vote to stay in. But Labour are going to win the 2015 election, so it’s probably not going to happen anyway.

Had his party done a more robust job in opposition of defending its record, perhaps Straw would be open to a more nuanced or reflective appraisal of Labour’s legacy. Its failure to do so has frustrated him, which is understandable, and probably goes some way to explaining his brittleness. But when we come to the one criticism Straw himself volunteered last year, he doesn’t seem any more keen on having a conversation about it.

It was widely reported last November that Straw regretted the 2004 decision to allow Eastern Bloc EU nationals into the country without imposing transitional controls – a “spectacular mistake”, in his words. I ask why he hadn’t pointed out instead that those EU immigrants paid far more into our system than they took out. “Well, I did say that.” The quotes about his regrets were taken, he explains, from his weekly column in the East Lancashire Telegraph, in which he also cited a recent report confirming the net economic benefit those immigrants bought – but of course only his regrets were reported in the national press. “Dan will pull it off from my system,” he says, without even glancing up at his young aide, who hurries to the computer to print it off.

The point is, he says, that if they’d known the numbers were going to run into hundreds of thousands, Labour would not have allowed them all in. But if they were economically beneficial, I ask, why not? “We could have done, but I’m just telling you Decca, we wouldn’t have done, right?” he snaps. For what reason? “Because there was a short-term cost in terms of dislocation of people’s communities.” He agrees with Nigel Farage, then, that some things – “I’m not remotely saying that,” he interrupts.

Isn’t Straw simply saying that some things matter more than money? “No, I’m not.” But I thought he’d just said that although there was an economic benefit to the eastern Europeans’ arrival, this was outweighed by the social dislocation that – “No,” he interrupts again crossly, “I’m not remotely saying that. I’m astonished that you should suggest that.”

Now I’m confused. If he’s saying that the stability and feelings of the community were more important than economic benefits, surely that’s the same point Farage made when he argued earlier this year that some things matter more to the country than money.

“That’s not remotely what … Look, I’m resistant to the calumny that what I’ve been saying is anything remotely where Nigel Farage is.” But he still hasn’t explained the difference. “Well, I’m sure you’ll make that point in the piece,” he huffs. Then, “Well, some things do matter more than money. That’s a self-evident truth, I would have thought.” Yes, I agree, and I think Farage does, too. “Look, I haven’t got exactly what Farage says, but I’m not remotely, and neither is the Labour party, in the same position as Farage on this, all right?”

Jack Straw dancing with the Duchess of Kent at a Leeds university union dinner in 1968Jack Straw dancing with the Duchess of Kent at a Leeds university union dinner in 1968One of Blair’s former speech writers claimed a few years ago that the relaxing of immigration controls had been part of a deliberate agenda to create greater diversity, which the government concealed from the public. “Right, well, it’s not true. I mean, Dan’s been through all the papers, haven’t you?” Dan nods dutifully. “It’s not remotely true, and if you look in my book you’ll see that we got this home office … pass me the book, Dan.”

I’m beginning to feel rather sorry for Dan. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an assistant treated so imperiously, and every few minutes Straw issues another offhand instruction to Google this or look up that, and has him endlessly paging through the index of Straw’s weighty 2012 memoir, Last Man Standing. Rather than say what he thinks, Straw prefers to read out something he has already said in the past – but if I’d been after an anthology of things he once said I could have got that off my own computer. I wish poor old Dan could just sit down and do the crossword or something.

Last autumn Straw accused the Guardian of “arrogance” and “adolescent excitement” in publishing Edward Snowden‘s revelations about mass surveillance. To critics of Straw’s role in the Iraq war, this might sound like what therapists call projection – but I ask if he considers Snowden a traitor to his country. “Look, it’s a matter for the American courts to decide what offence he has committed.” Was Straw surprised by any of the revelations? “I do not comment on national security matters.” David Blunkett has said he was sometimes uneasy with the requests made by security agencies to ministers, so I wonder if Straw ever shared this disquiet. “Look,” he sighs, “I haven’t spoken to David about what he said. But our agencies operate within a strict legal regime, and it has been strengthened in the last 20 years.” I try a few more questions, and each time he sighs, half-laughs, and repeats, “I never comment on national security matters.” He does want to point out that the Snowden revelations have generated “little public concern on this side of the Atlantic,” but when I ask why he thinks it has been so much greater on that side he retorts: “I don’t profess expertise on the other side of the Atlantic.”

I’d almost forgotten what New Labour ministers used to be like. Most politicians approach an interview with a prudent degree of caution, but that’s not the same thing as communicating an internal commentary of contempt with impatient little private laughs, and beginning almost every sentence with “Look”. If Straw wants to make the current Labour regime’s style look like a tremendous improvement, then he certainly succeeds.

He’s scrupulously complimentary about Ed Miliband; the 50p tax rate is an excellent policy, and Straw would “probably” have proposed theenergy price freeze – “or something like it. I’m not absolutely certain I would have done, but probably.” On Gordon Brown‘s leadership he is less complimentary. “Well, I think I would have done a better job. I’m not sure I would have done a better job at managing the financial crisis – but in terms of running the government, yes, I would have done a better job.” And of running the country? “Yes, I meant running a country, you know, I’m not bad at that.” He can’t remember the last time he spoke to Brown. “I mean, that’s not because I cease to be social, because I’m a gregarious guy. But he’s just not around.”

Before I leave, I ask what he feels, looking back now, he was worst at during his career. “Worst at?” Yes, what does he look back at and wince? “Well, the worst day of my career was in October 1995 when I screwed up in a major debate about Derek Lewis. I was bad at that, but I got better.” He pauses. “I mean, what else do you have in mind? What’s available on this charge sheet?” That’s up to him to say. “Bad at?” he ponders. “I don’t know. I mean, I think there’s … I think … I don’t often think I’m really bad at anything.” He searches his mind.

“Doing the diary. Yes, I think it’s frustrating for people who are trying to get me to – well, I’m very good at decision-making, apart from some aspects of the diary. Is that right, Dan?”

“I think that’s fair,” murmurs Dan. “OK, then,” Straw nods.

How Tony Blair absolves himself of guilt by hiding his war crimes behind religion

If only Tony Blair could grasp the truth about Field Marshal Sisi

Robert Fisk — The Independent Jan 31, 2014

It was, of course, utterly inevitable that Tony Blair would back Egypt’s new authoritarian leaders.


After all, can you imagine Blair – our very own Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara – stepping forth to offer his courageous, unstinting support to a democratically elected President overthrown in a military coup d’état? Can you imagine him condemning a General – no, I forget, General Abdel Fatah al-Sisi has just been made a Field Marshal – whose men have gunned down 1,000 protesters since last summer and who has now put the elected President on trial for his life as a “terrorist”? Ye Gods, if such bravery burned within the heart of Lord Blair, we would all suffer immediate cardiac arrest.


So it was that the man who brought us victory in Afghanistan and glory in Iraq – and who has always fearlessly condemned the Israeli colonisation of the West Bank – yesterday threw his entire reputation and honour behind Field Marshal Sisi, Commander-in-Chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces, Deputy Prime Minister of the Egyptian Arab Republic and Minister of Defence. The Egyptian army had “intervened” and had done so “at the will of the people”. Thus quoth Lord Blair. And Field Marshal Sisi saw that it was good, and smiled upon him. But I have to admit – let’s be fair – that Field Marshal Sisi really doesn’t deserve this frivolous “peace envoy”. Unlike some of the dictators with whom Blair  frolics, al-Sisi is a personally uncorrupt man. He comes from a conservative, decent family. His uncle was himself a Muslim Brother. Field Marshal Sisi spent months serving poor old Mohamed Morsi as a loyal minister before chucking him out. He even warned Morsi, faithful servant of state that he was, that a coup was on the cards. Sure, Sisi’s comrades killed hundreds of Egyptian protesters – but the Field Marshal doesn’t have the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis on his hands. Besides, the Egyptian people love Sisi. Why else should Cairo be awash with Sisi chocolates and Sisi T-shirts and Sisi pyjamas? Do the British people love Blair? Do they eat Blair chocolates and wear Blair pyjamas?


Of course, for a man who said of Saddam that “he has used gas against his own people”, it must have been difficult for Lord Blair to resist the phrase – on arrival in Cairo to meet another military autocrat – that “he has used live bullets against his own people”. Neither did he mention the lads of Al Jazeera banged up in the Tora jail for “terrorism” (ho hum) – why, isn’t that just what Blair should have done with his own country’s treacherous journos when they failed to back his and George W’s crusade against World Evil?


Blair, a prosaic man, thus concentrated on the banal. Egypt had “an ancient civilisation”, he said. Egyptians were “a great people” with “great energy and determination” – this was positively colonial in approach – and we should support these people who wanted an “open-minded society”. And that, announced Lord Blair, “means we support the government here in Egypt”.


If he could have grasped a mere semblance of the truth, Blair would have understood the irony of the words he used of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood, he said, “tried to take the country away from its basic values of hope and progress”. But isn’t that exactly what Blair did to his own country? Didn’t Blair – with his mendacious wars – take Britain from its basic values of hope and progress? It almost makes you wish that Sisi could have brought his chaps over to London in early 2003 to do a spot of “intervention” with the support of millions of Britons.


But Blair waffled away, apparently unaware that armies have been “intervening” rather a lot in modern history. Let’s forget for a moment that the Soviets also said that their army had “intervened” in Central Asia in 1979. But I was thinking of someone else. Austria? Czechoslovakia? Small man. Moustache. Used to be a corporal. No matter. Just comfort yourself with the thought of Lord Blair taking off his Sisi T-shirt tonight, pulling on his Sisi pyjamas and sucking away at his Sisi chocolates.

Uprootedpalestinians's Blog

By making religious ideology culprit for the ‘war on terror’, Tony Blair aims to write out of history the horrific consequences of his actions which brought so much death, destruction and instability to Iraq.

Vicar Tony Blair

It  passes all understanding why the man who must take a large part of the  responsibility for two catastrophic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan should be  allowed to lecture the people of the world on how to avoid ‘wars and violent  confrontations’.

But, normally keen to stress his role in history, in a characteristically  shameless article  in the Observer , Tony Blair is keen to downplay the impact of  the ‘war on terror’ he championed.

His thesis that the main cause of conflict in an arc that  extends from Pakistan through Africa and to South East Asia is extremist  religon is presented as a call for tolerance. Some have suggested it represents  a ‘mea culpa…

View original post 804 more words

Syria peace talks breakthrough – both sides agree Blair can sod off

Syria peace talks breakthrough – both sides agree Blair can sod off

The fist of history biffs Blair in the face

The fist of history biffs Blair in the face

It seemed impossible but after only seven days of intensive talks at UN Geneva Headquarters there was unilateral agreement after both sides agreed that UN peace envoy, Tony Blair, should keep his nose out of the peace talks.

Waiting press were first alerted to the possibility of a surprise announcement when a UN aide hurried out the building, returning a few minutes later clutching a glasses and a magnum of champagne. This was enough to baffle seasoned observers, but when news leaked out that Tony Blair may have been at the centre of things, there was widespread disbelief that his involvement could have had such a positive effect.

UN mediator, Lakhdar Brahimi, explained how the historic breakthrough was achieved.

“Usually when there is an entrenchment of positions during talks, the facilitator tries to find some common ground, however trivial. But I couldn’t get the sides to agree to the most basic of issues. In fact the first three days was limited to a heated debate over the colour of the toilet paper in the bathrooms, and the next two over the brand of coffee being served.”

“Eventually during a long stand-off over the merits of custard creams over garibaldi biscuits, I suggested we should bring in a more experienced mediator, such as Tony Blair, as I was obviously getting nowhere.”

“The very mention of his name seemed to have a magical effect with both sides passionately agreeing that Mr Blair could, in the words of Syrian presidential adviser, Bouthaina Shaaban, ‘Sod off and die’. For the first time this week we had a mutual understanding and consensus. Ever since then we have made real progress, with the first example being the release of civilians from the city of Homs.”

Meanwhile, a smug Tony Blair, told reporters “I’m delighted to have had some influence in bringing both sides together. As you all know, I’m not one for sound bites but I can truly say that I felt the hand of history shove me in the face.”

How Chilcot Could ‘Slap The Cuffs’ On Tony Blair

The bitter irony of Tony Blair’s response to my citizen’s arrest

Blair told me to be ‘more concerned with Syria’ – but the mess he made in Iraq has deterred people even from justifiable intervention
Tony Blair and Nouri al-Maliki
Tony Blair, left, with and Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad in 2006. Photograph: Pool/Reuters

My name is Twiggy Garcia and I was one of more than a million peoplewho protested against the Iraq war in London in February 2003.

On Friday 17 January I got the opportunity to perform a citizen’s arrest on Tony Blair for crimes against peace, namely his unprovoked war against Iraq. The purpose of this citizen’s arrest was to bring the subject back into the mainstream media and to remind people that Blair is a war criminal. I understood that he would not take me up on the offer to accompany me to a police station; it would be naive of me to believe that he would come voluntarily. My attempt has been widely reported across the world, with many supporting my decision.

To quote Desmond Tutu: “The then leaders of the United States and Great Britain fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies.” Tutu pointed out that different standards appear to be set for prosecuting African leaders and western ones – the death toll during and after the Iraq conflict is sufficient on its own for Blair and George W Bush to be tried at the international criminal court. I am inclined to agree that Blair is partly responsible for the deaths of between 100,000 and one million people since 2003, depending on which estimates you believe. The United Nations estimates that in the last year alone at least 7,818 civilians and 1,050 members of the security forces were killed in violent attacks across Iraq – the highest death toll in five years.

Analysis of the war from a legal standpoint is not something anyone should be confused about. The then UN secretary general Kofi Annan said in September 2004: “From our point of view and the UN charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal.” The violations of the UN charter are a serious matter. It was created to promote international co-operation and to achieve peace and security. Blair’s actions flew in the face of this agreement, unleashing a hellish wave of violence that is still ongoing. The war in Iraq may well have helped to boost al-Qaida recruitment, according to a 2004 report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, which stated: “It is probable that recruitment generally has accelerated on account of Iraq.” Yet it seems all of this has been forgotten.

The soon-to-be-published Chilcot report is expected to contain damning evidence surrounding how Blair and Bush jointly engaged in a rush to war to topple Saddam Hussein in the face of warnings of the risks of triggering sectarian divisions across the region. Blair lied to this country and the international community in 2003, and he is still perpetuating these same mistruths. There has been some backlash against Blair’s Observer article this weekend, calling him out on inaccuracies. As Jonathan Eyal, of the Royal United Services Institute, puts it: “It was not the lack of sufficient knowledge about history and religion which led to the Iraqi debacle, but the lack of restraint among politicians who had all the relevant information at their fingertips.”

When I confronted Blair he told me I should be “more concerned with Syria”. Yet if he had come clean about his decisions to go to war, if he had not mislead the international community on his motives, we would not be seeing a unanimous dragging of heels when it comes to intervention in Syria. The international community is scared to intervene in Syria because of the mess Blair and Bush made of Iraq.

In 2004, in a statement to the Butler inquiry, Blair said: “I have to accept, as the months have passed, it seems increasingly clear that at the time of invasion, Saddam did not have stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons ready to deploy.” We have more detailed and reliable intelligence about Syria than we were ever presented on Iraq, yet because of the haste and ongoing lies from Blair, politicians and the public are not supporting fighting for human rights and peace in the Middle East.

Let’s hope that Blair faces justice soon, then the mess he made will no longer cloud difficult decisions like choosing real humanitarian intervention when it is so needed.

Uprootedpalestinians's Blog

Evidence from mandarins suggests that Tony Blair’s entourage deceived the Cabinet on Iraq

Chilcott Inquiry

(L-R) Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Alastair Campbell all giving evidence to the Chilcott Inquiry in 2010 Photo: PA

Twiggy Garcia was working in a restaurant in Shoreditch, east London, last week when he learnt that Tony Blair was in the building.

“My heart rate increased,” he said. “There was an eerie presence … I went over to him, put my hand on his shoulder, and said, ‘Mr Blair, this is a citizen’s arrest for a crime against peace, namely your decision to launch an unprovoked war against Iraq.’”

Sadly, Mr Garcia couldn’t quite see it through. “One of [Mr Blair’s] sons went to get the plain-clothes security from downstairs,” he said. “I decided to get out of there sharpish. I’ve had a few run-ins with the police in the past and it never ends well.”

View original post 1,169 more words

Video: Translating Dieudonne, The Quenelle And Up Yours To The Jewish 1%.

Video Rebel's Blog

I want the French comedian Dieudonne to become famous in the English speaking world. He is noted for inventing the Quenelle. The Jews of France and their politicians have taken to calling the Quenelle a Nazi salute. It is not. The Quenelle is best learned by watching the video below. Once you see it, you will understand that it is just a gesture for what New York cab drivers would say, ‘Up Yours!’

We need to overcome the stumbling block of pronouncing Dieudonne’s name. Americans should think of it as a compound of Dieu (God) and donné (give as in Je donné or I give.) The English word donation and the French word donne both come from the same Indo-Aryan word Do or give. In American English his name literally means God gives. I think that Dieudonne is a gift to all mankind in our hour of peril.

The Quenelle…

View original post 622 more words

A topnotch site


ARTICLES IN THE NEWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMMENTS, FEEDBACK, IDEAS

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:

Citizen WElls

Obama eligibility, Obama news

Burst Updates

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

tomfernandez28's Blog

A topnotch site

The Free

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

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! !..."

“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."~ Thomas Paine

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

%d bloggers like this: