Blogging Beirut

Scribbles of incendiary hate, from Israel to Lebanon:

Blogging the bloody aftermath, from Beirut to the world.

political/factual:

• http://www.lebanonupdates.blogspot.com/
• http://www.beirutlive.blogspot.com/
• http://frombeirutwithlove.blogspot.com/

art & literature:

• http://hopefulbeirut.blogspot.com/
• http://littlepaperboat.livejournal.com/
• http://mazenkerblog.blogspot.com/
• http://www.laureghorayeb.blogspot.com/
• http://rittabaddouraparmilesbombes.chezblog.com
• http://raytch.livejournal.com

Thanks to Beirut Update for putting the list together, and from whose blog the following inspiring comment is sourced:

Anonymous said...

(Charlie Chaplin's character): "Hope... I'm sorry but I don't want to be an Emperor - that's not my business - I don't want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone if possible, Jew, gentile, black man, white. We all want to help one another, human beings are like that.

We all want to live by each other's happiness, not by each other's misery. We don't want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone and the earth is rich and can provide for everyone.

The way of life can be free and beautiful.

But we have lost the way.

Greed has poisoned men's souls - has barricaded the world with hate; has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed.

We have developed speed but we have shut ourselves in: machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical, our cleverness hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little: More than machinery we need humanity; More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.

The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world, millions of despairing men, women and little children, victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me I say "Do not despair".

The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress: the hate of men will pass and dictators die and the power they took from the people, will return to the people and so long as men die [now] liberty will never perish...

Soldiers - don't give yourselves to brutes, men who despise you and enslave you - who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel, who drill you, diet you, treat you as cattle, as cannon fodder.

Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. You are not machines. You are not cattle. You are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don't hate - only the unloved hate. Only the unloved and the unnatural. Soldiers - don't fight for slavery, fight for liberty.

In the seventeenth chapter of Saint Luke it is written " the kingdom of God is within man " - not one man, nor a group of men - but in all men - in you, the people.

You the people have the power, the power to create machines, the power to create happiness. You the people have the power to make life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy let's use that power - let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give you the future and old age and security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie. They do not fulfil their promise, they never will. Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people. Now let us fight to fulfil that promise. Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men's happiness.

Soldiers - in the name of democracy, let us all unite!
Hannah, can you hear me? Wherever you are, look up, Hannah! look up! The clouds are lifting - the sun is breaking through. We are coming out of the darkness into the light. We are coming into a new world. A kind new world where men will rise above their hate and brutality.

The soul of man has been given wings - and at last he is beginning to fly. He is flying into the rainbow - into the light of hope - into the future, that glorious future that belongs to you, to me and to all of us. Look up Hannah look up."

My prayers are with you and all the people in Lebenon and Palestine as well as Iraq who are being terrorized by governments who are supposedly "fighting terror"

My heart is heavy and my stomach sickened by injustice that is being commited.

If I could give you my strength I would.

I've taken up to much room as it is.

*The above quote is from Charlie Chaplins "The Great Dictator"

Do whatever you can; whatever you must.

It's the holiday season, ant bully

Ant Fact No. 7: While humans have only one stomach, the ant has TWO stomachs. One stomach holds the ant's personal food supply and the second stomach holds food to be shared with other ants.

Ants certainly stomach a lot!

As the extended summer holiday season begins, pair-ants will no doubt be on the look-out for something to keep their pupa(e) entertained. For the worker ant classes, here's a holiday activity for which no passport is required:

10 year old Lucas is the new kid on the block and the local bullies make sure he knows it. Tired of being a punching bag, Lucas takes out his frustration on the ants living in his lawn. But when the ants strike back, shrinking Lucas down to their size with a magic potion and forcing him to live like an ant with the colony, an astonishing new world opens up to him. Lucas learns first hand the value of friendship and teamwork, ultimately leading the ants in an effort to save their colony from annihilation and in the process, obtains the things he wants the most: friends, companionship, acceptance and the courage to stand up for himself.

"Everything in the colony is a team effort!"

George Galloway's brief history of time

Courtesy of Davide Simonetti's The Nether World, here is a clip of Galloway's speech at the Stop The War march in London on the first anniversary of the extra-judicial, Mossad-style execution of Jean Charles de Menezes, which also just so happened to be the anniversary of more terrorism in a Zionist-stylee, some 60 years ago:

George Galloway gave a rousing speech. Love him or hate him he’s a great orator. I don’t agree with everything he said but he certainly illustrated the hypocrisy of the Israeli position by mentioning the glorifying of the bombing of the King David Hotel on its 60th anniversary by the current Israeli leadership.

Every action has an opposite and equal reaction and, as the true nature of the beast reveals itself, nobody can fail to see it for what it really is.

V meets 9/11 - The Vendetta Begins

7/7, our 9/11?

"Israel is a mistake"

How's that for a headline in the Washington Post? Via Rolled-Up Trousers, and how is the following for the opening paragraph, of the article that followed:

The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now.

Richard Cohen, Washington Post

Pretty controversial indeed.

An honest, well-intentioned mistake, for which nobody is culpable.

Lord Levy - Twisted Firestarter?

Follow the money and you'll find the perp. But the trouble with following the money is that money, like any other paper trail, burns.

Back in November 2005, well before police investigations began into New Labour treasurer, Lord Levy, his Marylebone offices were devastated by a mysterious fire.

On Wednesday of this week Lord Levy was arrested.

The same day two massive fires also broke out in London.

So remote are the chances of this occurring, the London Fire Brigade said it was "extraordinarily rare" to get two fires requiring 100 firefighters each, within the space of 24 hours.

One of the fires occurred at the Bow offices of Iron Mountain, the not-so-fine purveyors of 'Information Protection and Storage'. The building held "archived, inactive business records" but there was no mention of whose records. At the time it was reported that the building, in Twelvetrees Crescent, would be alight for two to three days.

This was the second of the two fires that occurred on the day Lord Levy was arrested.

The first happened much earlier at a building site in Colindale, North-West London, where two buildings blazed for hours. So large were the fires that roads were closed off and hundreds of local residents in the surrounding area were evacuated, including staff at the Hendon Police College.

Coincidentally enough, the other notable place that was evacuated as a result of the Colindale fire was the very police station to which Lord Levy had been taken for questioning by the plod after his arrest.

Levy was released on bail of £250,000, but who put up the cash? Who is the firestarter, the twisted firestarter? And how many coincidences does it take to constitute a conspiracy?

--
Update: Not only was this the second London fire in a day that required the attendance of over 100 fire-fighters, it was also the second fire to befall the Iron Mountain company in as many days, the previous one having occurred a day earlier in Ottawa, Canada. In his analysis of the two fires that hit Iron Mountain facilities, John Webster, writing for Computer World, wrote in summary:

However, there's another significant clue that points in a different direction. It turns out that the London facility contained the records of several prominent attorneys.

Here's my take: The two fires were in fact coincidental. One was an accident (Ottawa) and one was set (London). The London fire was set by a prominent socialite bent on destroying his recently late father's will -- one that did not include him.

Curiouser and curiouser.

July 7th Truth Campaign Guardian G2 Interview - UPDATED

''Where the state's own authorities are concerned we must be as sure as we can of the truth'' -- Prime Minister Tony Blair on the need for a full-scale judicial inquiry into the killing by the army of 13 civilians on ''Bloody Sunday'' in 1972

Since the events of July 7th 2005, The Antagonist has had precious little time for the dead-tree and airwave-occupier media but sometimes, just sometimes, they redeem themselves in some small part (see today's print edition for the G2 article in all its technicolour glory).

What is most curious about the Mark Honigsbaum article in today's Guardian, apart from the fact such an article questioning the official narrative actually appeared in any mainstream media journal, is perhaps the fact that a mainstream media organ has picked up on something that even the much vaunted vanguard of dissident bloggers hasn't yet picked up on to any great degree, save for one or two notable exceptions.

Of those that have highlighted the many questions raised by the campaigners demanding that the authorities RELEASE THE EVIDENCE that supports their narrative, the fall-back position is limited to a demand for a Public Inquiry under the much ignored Inquiries Act 2005, passed specifically to limit the scope, capabilities and independence of any such Public Inquiry.

The Hutton Inquiry, widely regarded as a whitewash of the highest order, set the precedent for all future inquiries and that was without recourse to the new legislation. Thus far, the government has stated there will be no Public Inquiry, even under the new legislation, into the events of July 7th, July 21st - the day the bombers had no bombs, or the extra-judicial killing of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell tube station.

Given the diversity of people and organisations from which calls for a Public Inquiry/Enquiry into July 7th are being repeatedly launched, or even the calls for an Independent Inquiry/Enquiry to which the public would not be privy, it should be of great concern to anyone with even a passing interest in truth and justice that there has been precious little discussion about the Inquiries Act 2005, the framework under which such an inquiry would be conducted, should such a thing ever be granted.

The Inquiries Act 2005 was, in part, brought about in response to the call for a full and Independent Public Inquiry into the brutal murder of Pat Finucane. He was shot dead by two masked men on 12 February 1989 in front of his wife and his three children at their home in Belfast, Northern Ireland. He was shot 14 times, including at close range. In the aftermath of his killing, evidence emerged that police and military intelligence agents had colluded with Loyalist paramilitaries in his murder, as well as allegations of an official cover-up of such collusion.

Amnesty International has called for the boycott of all inquiries under the Inquiries Act 2005, specifically with regard to the Finucane case and demanded that the act be repealed:

Amnesty International calls on all judges, whether in the United Kingdom (UK) or in other jurisdictions, to decline appointments as chairs or panel members to any inquiry established under the recently enacted Inquiries Act 2005, including an inquiry into allegations of state collusion in the murder of Patrick Finucane. The organization is also urging the Act's repeal.

Amnesty International supports the call of Geraldine Finucane, Patrick Finucane's widow, to all senior judges in England, Wales and Scotland not to serve on an inquiry into her husband's case held under the new legislation.

"By proposing to hold an inquiry into the Finucane case under the Inquiries Act 2005, the UK government is trying to eliminate independent scrutiny of the actions of its agents. Any judge sitting on such an inquiry would be presiding over a sham," Amnesty International said.

If The State will go to such great lengths to prevent an inquiry into one brutal killing 16 years ago, it may be sensible to consider to what lengths the state will go to prevent further inquiry into the brutal murders of 56 in London on July 7th 2005.

--

Update 01: The Guardian offered the July 7th Truth Campaign a right to reply to the Mark Honigsbaum J7 article, read it on Comment is Free.

Update 02: Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, admits that the Official Report of the London Bombings is wrong, before going on to rewrite history without missing a beat. Ananova runs with confirmation from Scotland Yard Polis HQ that the Home Office didn't get the wrong train time from them, or even any train time at all.

Sir Walter Scott said it best when he said:

“Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practice to deceive....”

State Fraud

Short and sweet, from the Beeb, what the cops get up to in the daylight hours (i.e. when they're not kicking-in your door and shooting up your family for no reason).

Detective jailed over $500m fraud
Wednesday, 14 June 2006, 09:54 GMT 10:54 UK

A detective who was an international expert on fraud has been jailed for two years after becoming involved in an $500m (£270m) attempted fraud.

Detective Sergeant William McKelvie, 44, from Esher, Surrey, was sentenced on Wednesday at Southwark Crown Court.

The court heard how McKelvie called contacts under the pretence of carrying out official police business.

He was acquitted of perverting the course of justice but convicted of three charges of misconduct.

Just one bent copper, eh? Put here to protect us, but who protects us from them?

State Terrorism

How deep does it go?

Assassination, bombing, burglary, illegal surveillance, agents provocateurs, false arrest, wrongful imprisonment, false media stories, psychological warfare, infiltration - or, how the FBI waged a terrorist war against the Left.

This audio is from a long time ago, via Leninology.

Now, it's all-out political warfare and it's all about 'perception management' of 'perceived injustices', also known as PSYOP. But what is a PSYOP?

Straight from a doctrine by 'the inheritors of Nazi science':

Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations planned to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.

PSYOP are a vital part of the broad range of US political, military, economic, and informational activities.

[U.S. Doctrine for Joint Psychological Operations, 1996]

Remember, in the U.S., the U.K. is a 'foreign audience'. And why would anyone need such a thing?

"One factor undermining efforts to have an effect on world opinion today is the proliferation of news sources. In particular, the increase in the number of satellite television news services and internet connections makes it ever more difficult to influence opinions and attitudes globally, or even regionally. The explosion in the number of news providers allows viewers to read or see the news that reinforces their own prejudices and fixed opinions. An Arab viewer who finds the reporting on CNN to be contrary to his own news bias can switch to al Jazeera, the Arabic satellite news channel, and see a perspective of the world perhaps more consistent with his own."

For which the obvious solution is, as vaunted in journals that are concerned with such issues:



Everything you see, everything you hear, everything you read all entered the realms of the PSYOP, the psychological operation, a long time ago. You may not have known it, you may not even have noticed it because that, of course, is the idea. Now, though, there's no excuse.

Strength through unity

These good people should team up with these slightly more eloquent people and pool their resources. All the rest of us should support their noble cause, or hang our heads in shame.

London Assembly 7 July Review Committee Reports Released

The London Assembly 7 July Review Committee final reports have been released which discuss communication and response to the incidents that day.

• Vol1: Report of the 7 July Review Committee [PDF]
• Vol 2: Views & information from organisations [PDF]
• Vol 3: Views & information from individuals [PDF]

Meanwhile, Peter Power from Visor Consultants, the man responsible for running a terror rehearsal drill rehearsing simultaneous bombs going off in precisely the stations they did on the morning of July 7th, when it actually happened right in the middle of his rehearsal (who would credit such a thing if they hadn't previously seen Panorama back in May 2004 when Mr Power was at it again), was interviewed by BBC News 24 following Richard Barnes' press conference and noted, rather interestingly:

"Terror doesn't rely on the bang,
it relies on the fear of the bang."

Overcome the fear.

Wednesday AM: Sightseeing in Parliament Square

The home of peaceful peace campaigner and long-term installation protester, Brian Haw, was invaded in the early hours of this morning by the cybermen enforcers of Parliament's maddest and baddest new laws.

The state heisted a large portion of Brian Haw's peace site during the raid because it's alright to invade and occupy Iraq on the basis of lies and fabrications, and it's alright to invade a one-man peace camp in the UK, but it's not alright for British subjects to camp peacefully outside the public face of Britain's Terrorist HQ and remind the public servants there-in that there are barbaric consequences with ever increasing half-lives to such choices, and that these choices still will not stand with the people of this country; that every action has an opposite and equal reaction.

Yet again the enforcers were once again busy masquerading behind the Serious Organised CRime And Policing Act (SOCRAP Act) that has, along with one or two other similar gems removed the right from everyone, barring Brian Haw for now, to appeal to the sense of reason that, really, we all know the Parliamentarians can't afford to have now, any more than they ever could in the past.

Mr Haw has been in the square since June 2001 and predates the non-retroactive legislation under which attempts have been repeatedly made to oust him.

As the removal of Mr Haw was one of the intended objectives of new legislation, and because Mr Haw is still there now, the government is having to resort to some of the subtler techniques that the dark ages of corporatism brings with it, namely the trusty old outnumber-'em-while-they-sleep dawn raid, complete with lots of state bootboys for the full terror effect.

The raid this morning was just one in a long line of Brian's encounters with state troopers. Luckily, there exists much photographic evidence of some of these encounters taken by people other than the Forward Intelligence Team so you can decide for yourself which of the characters in the photograph below looks like they're engaging in a heavy-handed Serious Organised CRime And Policing Act.... the man in the middle who possesses the conscience Tony Blair openly admitted he doesn't have, or the state maulers manhandling him?

Mr Haw's crime that led to this debacle? That heinous crime against humanity of being in possession of a bell.

Tim Ireland has enhanced the clarity of the photo a little.

The Antagonist is sure these lovely enforcers of the law are only doing it for the money and because that's what they've been told to do, but humanity has heard that excuse on one or two notable occasions in history prior to 2006. It didn't wash then and it certainly doesn't wash now, even under the new corporatism.

As the state commits ever greater crimes against humanity, both abroad and right here in the UK, the few defenders of our basic human rights and human freedoms who dare to stand against the increasing oppression of the dying beast are going to need all the popular support they can get.

Right now, it's Brian Haw that needs and deserves that support and Bloggerheads has issued an invitation to all to show solidarity with Brian Haw in a non-protest event in Parliament Square at 11am on Wednesday May 24th 2006 (tomorrow morning):

******* PLEASE REPEAT/BLOG THE FOLLOWING INVITATION ON YOUR WEBSITE *******

You are invited to attend Parliament Square in solidarity with Brian Haw tomorrow (Wednesday) morning at 11am ready for 11.30 (when Blair is due to drive past on his way to PMQs).

It is suggested that bells and whistles are used. Here's why. I am going to further suggest that, instead of being in Parliament Square (where police are sure to clamp down and round people up during this short period), you merely be in that general area with a *concealed* bell or whistle at the ready... and then let fly when Baby Blair's motorcade goes past.

And, if anybody gives you any stick, remind them that:

1. SOCPA forbids the use of loudspeakers - *not* noisemakers.
2. SOCPA also fails to define what constitutes a demonstration
3. So if they don't get out of your face, you'll be forced to have them arrested for demonstrating their ignorance.

You'll get to see Brian Haw's new state-designed minimalist pad and - who knows - you may even get to see that nice Mr Blair off the telly on his way in to 'work'.

Expect to encounter all the usual bodies of state, all endeavouring to peer yet deeper into the Goldfish bowl of UK terror suspects and serious organised criminals who oppose the government's lies and mass murder as much as they do the government's decimation of public services, civil liberties and the last remnants of society in the UK.

The Antagonist can't help but wonder what might occur if the 2-3 million who turned up for the Stop War march prior to the invasion of Iraq all arrived in Parliament Square to show their solidarity with Mr Haw armed only with tents, supplies and an equally resilient level of resolve to that of Mr Haw.

But maybe that's a notion that is yet to be born.

Apophenia for the masses

Everything is connected. Coincidences do not exist, only the illusion of coincidence:

"The thing is, er, well so much of this stuff is verging on the undeniable it’s kind of interesting to see how people react to it; some people blow it off as coincidence, others as interesting but of no real significance and most just blank it out in a dissonant kind of way."

This is the round up. Who will speak for you?

Hammer coming down fast
Flag is flying full mast
Shield your eyes from the blast
You know it won't be the last
It's a round-up, it's a round up

ADF - 'Round-up', Tank

It's a round-up:

Muslims most deprived minority

Muslims are more likely than other religious minorities to be unemployed and live in poor housing in the most deprived parts of England, research has found.

Source: The Guardian

Change the word Muslims for 'poor people' and remove religious affiliations and, suddenly, the sentence makes far more sense and is imbued with a touch less racism.

Rifle butts through the door
Then you're kicked to the floor
Headlines screaming for more
Now you're a prisoner of war in the round-up
It's a round up

ADF - 'Round-up', Tank

Rifle butts through the door:

The "dispersal" of these groups is likely to be limited by the desire of families to stay close together, the research said. And many Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus are likely to want to stay close to their places of worship.

Source: The Guardian

Dispersal.

It's a round-up. Chaos AD, tanks on the streets.

Dey come for Rasta, you say nothing
Dey come for Muslims, you say nothing
Dem come for y'anti-globalist, you say nothing
They come for liberals, you say nothing
Dem come for you, and who will speak for you?

Who will speak for you?

ADF - 'Round-up', Tank

Sicker yet.

Muslims were also particularly vulnerable to long-term illness and poor levels of education, said the researchers from the universities of Derby, Warwick, Birmingham and Oxford.

Source: The Guardian

Poor levels of health and education but apparently not unfit or stupid enough to allegedly outwit British Intelligence on July 7th. Yet again, change the word 'Muslims' for 'poor people' and the sentence becomes a bit closer to the truth.

This is a countdown to the crackdown
Time to take a little trip downtown

Get in the lineup, there ain't no let up
This is a bona-fide government stick up (in the round-up)

From the fit up straight to the lock up
Through the touch-up and the drug up to the rough up

It's just a start up, so watch it speed up
It ain't enough to just put-up and shut-up (this is a round-up)

ADF - 'Round-up', Tank

And when they come for you?

"At last week's cabinet meeting, Mr Blair likened Islamic extremism to the Trotskyist Militant Tendency that infiltrated Labour in the 80s, and argued it was only when the party recognised the depth of the infiltration that a tough counter-strategy was implemented." [More]

They dress it up in many ways. Wars on all fronts, all the time; terror, drugs, crime, the causes of crime, poverty, anti-social behaviour, benefit fraud. You name it, there's a war on it. But, really, it's the same old Class War it ever was, only now it's a bigger crime than ever before to know it.

July 7th Narrative Day

The July 7th 'narrative' that Charles Clarke offered the British People instead of a full Independent Public Inquiry has been released.

The BBC, Sky News and Channel 4 are all rolling CCTV footage of the accused from 28th June 2005 as if it were from July 7th (indeed the BBC even cropped out the time and date stamp for the full brainwashing effect) when, of course, no footage has ever been released of the four accused of perpetrating the atrocities on July 7th in over ten months since the incidents occurred.

Nor has any evidence been released that could convinct anyone in a court of law for what happened.

Here are some reports:

• The official Home Office 'narrative' of events.
• ISC Report into the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005.
  
• The government response to the ISC report.

The BBC, true to form, is still using Mr Peter Power of Visor Consultants as an independent security consultant with no special connection to the events of July 7th, even though on the morning of July 7th he was rehearsing bombs going off in precisely the stations that they did.


When you're done reading the official confusions you'll find a lot of useful information about the events of July 7th at the July Seventh Truth Campaign web site and on their associated July 7th People's Investigation Forum.


Update: Read and join the J7 forum discussion highlighting the inaccuracies, anomalies and inconsistencies in the narrative.

Global Pharmaceuticals - sicker and sicker

Via Bloggerheads, The Times touches on the millennia of pharmacratic inquisition and the fabrication of diseases by drug companies to keep you sick and them rich:

Pharmaceutical companies are systematically creating diseases in order to sell more of their products, turning healthy people into patients and placing many at risk of harm, a special edition of a leading medical journal claims today. The practice of "diseasemongering" by the drug industry is promoting non-existent illnesses or exaggerating minor ones for the sake of profits, according to a set of essays published by the open-access journal Public Library of Science Medicine.

Donald Rumsfeld has nothing to do with any of it.


Update: The Antagonist has been rather busy of late, hence the lack of blog updates, so this is now an open thread for discussion of whatever topic(s) defy YOUR sense of reason....

None of the Above: The Liars' Last Chance

There's a definite whiff in the air of something rather great and good for the residents of this country, all brewing hither and thither in various parts of the UK blog world. Slowly but surely bloggers are starting to piece together the various bits of the puzzle about which they have been vociferously and angrily writing for a good long time, finally beginning to get some semblance of idea about the full and true nature of the picture from which each one of the individual fragments were cut.

The fragments are many. Here are a selection of the finest:

• The Civil Contingencies Act (formerly an interestingly numbered Bill);
• Rolling 'anti-terrorist' legislation and all its associated propaganda;
• Twenty percent of the world's CCTV coverage that, 9 months after the start of Ian Blair's 'largest criminal inquiry in English history' has failed to produce a single image of the alleged perpetrators - the 'photoshop four' - actually in London (oh, and - surprise, surprise - the video is a crock too);
  
• 28 (ho ho ho and everyone was all excited about 90) days detention, without charge or trial, or 10 years and counting of the same if your name happens to be Harry Maurice Roberts;
• Nationwide Automatic Number Plate Recognition;
• Executing innocent members of the public.
  
• National Identification Cards, and
  
• Last but not least, the masterstroke - wait for it - the abolition of Parliament.

One might conclude that if the organs of State have themselves decided they no longer have any requirement for consort with Parliament, then it logically follows that neither do the other 60 million of us. In one fell swoop, by an Act of the State itself - even the illusion of Parliamentary Democracy, and its trappings, is finally removed. When this happens (even if it doesn't, the Civil Contingencies Act and various bits of 'anti-terrorist' legislation have all the bases covered anyway) the true nature of the beast is further exposed.

Meanwhile, life on Pirate Ship Britain continues, unbelievably in the face of all of the above, with some local elections scheduled for May 4th. As the date approaches various strategies are being discussed to ensure that the New Labour murder machine is stopped in its tracks.

Some of these discussions revolve around tactical voting to reduce the government's strangehold. Of course, tactical voting brings with it the danger that the other tired old nag in the country's two-horse (show-boat) race that masquerades as the 'democracy' brown people the world over should envy as The State bombs them into submission, is given greater power than it already has.

Historically, that's how it has always worked. For far too long. And, by definition, the Conservatives are more right-wing than New Labour, even though anyone living under the Blair/Brown Big-Brother Private Power and Profit tyranny - itself perfectly in keeping with Mussolini's notion that Fascism should more correctly be labelled 'Corporatism', being as it was is the seamless merging of State and Corporate Power - would perhaps find the concept of 'more right wing than New Labour' almost unimaginable without some apocalyptic vision of a future Britain where The State was so afear'd of the people that it passed laws to criminalise everyone and their every activity. But then that's the country in which UK residents already live.

As well as tactical voting there are other options available and some of these are being discussed too. One of these options is not voting at all, as espoused on Stumbling and Mumbling. The problem with this is that nobody counts those who don't submit a ballot paper and the lack of turnout at elections is generally smugly presupposed by the ruling classes to be some bizarre form of tacit mass-approval of their hideous actions.

Yet another option, justified rather well by Justin of Chicken Yoghurt, is the notion of spoiling your ballot and letting the powers that be know that not only are you not happy with any of them, but that you can actually be bothered to go down the road and deface one of their ballot papers to let them know it! Of the available voting options, this is by far the finest. As Justin says:

"Don’t vote Labour. Or anybody else. Tell them that until they listen to us, give us real democracy and reform their corrupt, evasive, unaccountable, money-grabbing, expense-exploiting, primus inter pares contempt for us, their paymasters and employers, we want none of them."

Source: Chicken Yoghurt

There's even talk of coordinating the ballot-spoiling efforts around the country, just to really let them know we're all onto their little scam once and for all, standing united against them, with a rubber stamp which declares, 'None of the above'.

In reality though, you don't need an eleven quid rubber stamp to spoil their ballot papers, you can spoil them with the implements provided at your local polling booth - a ballot paper and a pen. This is all rather good news as recent anti-terrorist legislation is as likely to deem a rubber stamp an offensive weapon as it is the slogan 'None of the above' as being 'information likely to be useful to a terrorist'. No, you don't need a rubber stamp, you can write, 'None of the above' on their ballot papers all by yourself or, alternatively, get a little inventive and let them have a unique message of your own. Or even both if you're feeling particularly enraged!

When it's all over, if the various combinations of tactical voting, not voting at all, and spoiling ballots doesn't have the desired effect, which it won't or this sort of thing wouldn't even be an option, the residents of Britain will know that they are left with just one solution, the only solution that is available to any inhabitants of any country when The State gets out of control.

Abraham Lincoln said what had to be said about America some time ago but his words seem to ring truer now, in and about Britain, right here and right now:

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." - Abraham Lincoln

Ian Blair - 'clear' (aka 'liar')

According to yesterday's Observer, Ian Blair's lies have been given support by another top Scotland Yard liar officer, Deputy Assistant Chief Commissioner Alan Given. Given confirmed Ian Blair's ad nauseam claims that he did not know until the morning after the murder that de Menezes was innocent and that an innocent man had been summarily executed by hitherto unknown marksmen.

Just prior to the renewed support for Ian Blair from Alan Given another related story was making the news, only this time with a slightly conflicting version of events to that of Ian Blair.

Last Thursday it was reported that a senior officer had told Independent Police Complaints Commission investigators that Sir Ian's private office team believed the wrong man had been targeted just six hours after the shooting. It appears the officer that made this claim about Blair's team was Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick who acted as the Met’s chief spokesman during the events of July. For some, Paddick is the one of the few senior policemen from whom the British People received anything close to the truth in relation to the events that occurred that month.

The latest round of lies in support of Ian Blair's claim that he was ignorant of the facts carries with it the suggestion that Brian Paddick was lying about who knew what when. Other reports state that the story as told by Paddick is corroborated by other witnesses who are understood to have told the IPCC that knowledge of de Menezes' innocence was quite widespread in the Met within hours of the shooting.

Unsurprisingly, Paddick is now having discussions with libel lawyers and very good luck to him with his efforts against the liars. Thus far in his career, Paddick has previously been in the firing line for the various crimes of daring to admit to being gay, for adopting a sensible approach to Cannabis use in Lambeth, and for openly admitting on the Urban 75 message boards that he found aspects of anarchy and anarchism appealing (with the proviso that law and order were necessary in some capacity). Now he's in the firing line for trying to tell the truth.

For anyone still a bit confused about who knew what and when, here's how to figure our the answer to the killer question: Is Sir Ian Blair (and anyone who supports his version of events) lying?

One need only look to the date of the letter Ian Blair sent to Sir John Gieve in the wake of the murder of an innocent man. The letter asked that the IPCC be given 'no access to the scene at the present time'. The result was that the IPCC investigation (Stockwell 1, which bizarrely didn't include Blair's own actions in its scope) was delayed for six days, thereby denying the IPCC access to crucial evidence.

Ian Blair's letter to John Gieve was dated 21 July 2005, a day before de Menezes was executed and two days before Ian Blair says that he knew an innocent man had been executed.

When the letter was published after a freedom of information request it was issued with a caveat that: 'The letter is incorrectly dated 21st July. It should have been dated 22nd July when it was delivered.' July 22nd is the same day that de Menezes was executed. So it would appear that Ian Blair knew exactly what happened on the day it happened and Brian Paddick is the only senior officer that appears to have any interest in telling the truth. Not only that, but the evidence to prove this exists in the public domain and has done since the publication of Ian Blair's rather carelessly dated letter delaying the IPCC inquiry.

As is the way with such matters, those who are deemed to be standing in the way of the official myths becoming 'facts' can expect the State's customary hatchet job and character assassination to be attempted.

When they came for me....

From the BBC, via Nosemonkey, the only blog that seems to have picked up the story so far:

Students charged under terror act

The men will appear in court on Thursday

Two teenage students have been charged in connection with an investigation into suspected terrorist activity abroad, police have said.

Irfan Raja, 18, from Ilford, Essex, was charged with making a record of information likely to be useful to a terrorist.

Awaab Iqbal, 18, from Bradford, was charged with possessing information likely to be useful to a terrorist.

Both men will appear before Bow Street Magistrates in London on Thursday.

Mr Raja was arrested on February 27 after attending a police station in London. Mr Iqbal was held at his home in Bradford last Thursday.

They are both charged under section 58 of the Terrorism Act.

Two other men arrested in Bradford last week are still in custody.

Source: BBC News

The shit hit the fan a long time ago, folks. Now they're playing for keeps, Israeli style.

Update: The Postman has more.

Update 2: For a fuller explanation of how these kids landed themselves in so much trouble, New World Odour tells it like it is and SpyBlog treats it with a little more gravitas.

Mills/Jowell - Several Strikes and Still Not Out

They say pride comes before a fall. International Lawyer and the subject of a lengthy International Italian investigation into money laundering, tax evasion and various other such corrupt concerns of the opulent few, David Mills, was immensely proud of many things.


Strike 1: Married to the Mob

One of the many things of which the husband of cabinet minister Tessa Jowell (PC) was immensely proud he outlined in a letter sent with an application to practise in the United Arab Emirates in November 2005. The application and letter were part of an attempt by Mills to reassure UAE financial authorities that there was no reason to worry about the lengthy and ongoing investigation into his dubious activities by Italian authorities:

"You will know that I'm married to a minister in the government of this country and that in itself has caused a great deal of unwelcome publicity about this case. But I also want you to know, I have a lot of support and sympathy from very many people in public life, from the prime minister down." - David Mills

The sympathy and support of Blair, who on Saturday admitted to Parky and the world that his mettle is as weak as his conscience by stating that God would pass final judgement on how great a terrorist he had been, not in the moment, or the years of moments that would follow his ongoing perpetration of terrorism, but rather some time after he had fully exploited the personal privilege, opportunity and decadence that comes with being one of the most accomplished terrorists the world has ever seen, racking up hundreds of thousands of deaths in just a few short years.

For a man of Mr Mill's constitution, the support and sympathy of someone like Blair and his band of merry folk is indeed an accolade and proof of the existence of honour amongst thieves, liars and murderers. It may be the type of honour that is an alien antithesis to any sort of honour that the 'decent, law abiding citizens' in Britain might recognise and for whom Tony Blair is the principal and most vocal propagandist so perhaps it should be of some concern that these are the same 'decent, law abiding citizens' whom Blair chooses not to surround himself with and whom he wouldn't recognise if they bit him on the nose. In light of this, one might then be inspired ask what sort of things Mr Mills was doing that would receive such support and sympathy from Blair.

In the absence of any specifics, we must assume the general ongoing support and sympathy for the activities of Mr Mills which would presumably apply to this sort of thing:

David Mills had helped put Silvio Berlusconi's Fininvest holding company, behind which lies a network of offshore companies 15 years earlier, Mills appointed Marcello Dell'Utri as a director for Publitalia International, a London-registered media advertising agency on the day of the company's incorporation in 1985.

The two men had roles in the company for a decade; Mr Mills was company secretary until 1997, and Mr Dell'Utri was a director until 1995. Mr Dell'Utri, known as Mr Berlusconi's braccio destra (right hand), was subsequently convicted of "mafia association", a crime which the court in Sicily ruled he had been committing throughout the time he was on the board, and for many years before.

Source: The Guardian

Perhaps, once, nobody would quite credit the PM with sympathy and support for the mafia-related dealings of the husband of one of his cabinet ministers at the time it was occuring, but there it is; husband of cabinet minister Tessa Jowell (PC, 'legalised gambling', alchohol and tobacco regulation, etc), tasked with obfuscating the nature and extent of the material interests and dealings of one Silvio Berlusconi, Italian PM, president of the Forza Italia 'centre-right' (read: neo-Fascist) party and the Italian Prime Minister who, at least as far back as 1985, was not far removed at all from the mafia. It goes on:

Italian prosecutors are reported to have discovered that Mr Mills was the administrator of a company registered in the Isle of Man that bought into the deal in the port of Salerno in 1992. The chief beneficiary, Diego Attanasio, was jailed for bribing officials to ensure the deal went through, and is now appealing against his sentence. This would mean, according to Mr Mills' current account of his affairs and according to Ms Jowell's statement last week to Sir Gus O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary, that their London home was paid for, in part, by a convicted criminal.

Source: The Guardian

But then maybe that's how you get to be Prime Minister in Italy, the birthplace of Fascism. Berlusconi's involvement with the upper-echelons of the British state and ruling classes seem to extend rather further than merely allowing a few of them use of the villa in Tuscany. Let's hope nobody spots or mentions P2 links in the midst of the Mills, Jowell, Blair and Berlusconi mix as that might really stir things up a bit.


Strike 2: Married to the Minister

Despite his recent forced and faux separation from Tessa Jowell now that the merest hint of the level of international corruption may force at least a resignation or two and at most a revolution the likes of which this country has never seen, we must assume that the blighted Ms Jowell also had sympathy and support for Mills, firstly as his loyal and devoted wife and then as a loyal and devoted Blairite who announced that she would happily throw herself under a bus for her leader.

The Cabinet Office ministerial code of conduct states:

5.3 On appointment to each new office, Ministers are advised to provide their Permanent Secretary with a full list in writing of all interests which might be thought to give rise to a conflict.

The list should cover not only the Minister’s personal interests but those of a spouse or partner, of children who are minors, of trusts of which the Minister or a spouse or partner is a trustee or beneficiary, or of closely associated persons. The list should cover all kinds of interest including financial instruments and partnerships, financial interests such as unincorporated businesses and real estate, as well as relevant non-financial private interests such as links with outside organisations, and previous relevant employment.

This means that whatever way you dice, spin and re-constitute the increasingly long and convoluted Mills/Jowell story of mortgages, re-mortgages, rapid repayments and a rather long list of miscellaneous other international crimes anomalies (to use Blair's parlance in relation to other heinous crimes conducted by the international ruling 'elites'), the onus was always on Jowell as the minister with a code of conduct to follow, to abide by the code.

Under new 'anti-terror laws' if an ordinary member of the public is discovered to have committed the crime of being in possession of one thousand pounds in cash, the burden of proof is on the holder of the funds to explain how they came to be in possession of such a 'large' sum of cash. Elsewhere, above the law, the place where the real criminals operate unchecked, the issue of a wayward £350,000 from a dubious source is regarded as a trifling matter that, if it had been better managed, would have passed almost unnoticed.

If the code is of any indication at all of the standards to which ministers are expected to adhere, then Blair's continued support for Jowell - re-affirmed again today - falls short of both the code by which he charged them both with operating, and his own aspirations outlined in the foreword to the same code of conduct that Ms Jowell (PC) seems to have breached:

MINISTERIAL CODE

A Code of Ethics and Procedural Guidance for Ministers

Foreword by
The Prime Minister

In issuing this Code, I should like to confirm my strong personal commitment to the bond of trust between the British people and their Government. We are all here to serve and we must serve honestly and in the interests of those who gave us our positions of trust.

I will expect all Ministers to work within the letter and spirit of the Code. For the first time, the Code is split into two parts: a Ministerial Code of Ethics, and Procedural Guidance for Ministers. This takes account of a recommendation made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life. Ministers will find it a useful source of guidance and reference as they undertake their official duties in a way that upholds the highest standards of propriety.

I believe we should be absolutely clear about how Ministers should account, and be held to account, by Parliament and the public. The first section of the Code of Ethics sets out these responsibilities clearly, including Ministers’ responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I commend the Ministerial Code to all of my Ministerial colleagues.

TONY BLAIR
July 2005

Somewhere in line with the principles outlined in these guidelines, somehow, further inexplicabilities must also be explained:

Questions were also asked about the single mother living on a council estate in London's East End who is recorded as a director or company secretary of 19 companies which Mr Mills established on behalf of his Italian clients.

Source: The Guardian

Those working-class single mothers living on council estates, you really do have to keep your eye on them. Give them an inch. Comparatively speaking, working class council estate scumbags make the Mills, Jowell and Blair combo look like paragons of virtue.


Strike 3: Aeroplanes to Iran

Daughter: Mummy, mummy, can you get pregnant through anal sex?

Mother: Of course, dear, that's how lawyers are made.

Ministers have a code of conduct to follow, or breach, depending on your point of view. Lawyers on the other hand are generally known to follow much the same code of conduct the world over and it is this code of conduct that has landed the Mills-Jowell tag team in much the same water, of not entirely dissimilar elevated temperatures, on many occasions.

Another such occasion was in July 2002, when Mills wrote to then Foreign Office minister Baroness Symons (PC), whose portfolio includes the Middle East and international security, asking for help in securing a £125 million aircraft deal that contravened US law. Mills wanted to see if there was a way to break the law avoid the US trade sanctions that prohibited the sale of planes to Iran, presumably because there was lots of money involved rather than the mere kudos he might receive for finding an exploitable loophole in the sanctions.

On 9 January 2005, under the heading of “Minister's 'Advice' on Iran Jet Deal”, The Observer published details of how Jowell's husband had lobbied Symons (PC) about the potentially lucrative deal to provide Iran with several British Aerospace jets after he sat next to her at a dinner party. Mills wrote to Symons (PC), asking for help to push the £125 million aircraft deal with Iran through. At the time Jack Straw (PC) and Symons (PC) were adamant that Mills, husband of Jowell (PC), did not receive any special treatment. However, the letter from Symons, written on headed government notepaper, was leaked and suggests that this was not the case. Symons wrote:

'Dear David

Given the obvious political sensitivities you will need to tread very carefully with this one. This is a difficult time to be raising Iran policy in Washington. The advice I have been given, with which I am inclined to agree, is that our official support for you with the administration would raise the profile of the case and, by so doing, increase the chance of eliciting a negative response.'

Her advice to Mills:

'So you will need to think very carefully about a lobbying strategy calibrated to achieve the right result. I am pleased that Allan Flood [the British Aerospace director] will be in Washington next week and that he will be calling on the Embassy to discuss this further. They are best placed to advise on next steps.'

Symons Concluded:

'If after that meeting, you need further advice or help from me, please let me know.

Yours sincerely,
Liz.'

On the face of it, it would appear that Mills was looking for a way to make a quick buck by finding a legal way of breaking international law and selling a few aeroplanes to one of Bush's 'axis of evil' countries before the imminent invasion that will reduce the place to the same piles of rubble and levels of barbarity as Afghanistan and Iraq before it.


Miscellaneous other offences for consideration

Remember Bernie Eccleston?

"Unfortunately, one of New Labour’s ‘promises’ had been to ban tobacco advertising, including sports sponsorship. With Blair in 10 Downing Street, Ecclestone asked to see him. Twenty-four hours later the Prime Minister had sent a memorandum to the Secretary of State for Health, exempting Formula One from the sponsorship ban. It was left to the Health Minister, Tessa Jowell, to tell the world what a good idea this was.

Alas, it was discovered that Jowell’s partner, David Mills, had been, until just after the election, a director of the Benetton Formula One racing company and remained its legal adviser. The minister derided suggestions of a conflict of interest. Then it was discovered that Ecclestone had given £1 million to New Labour. For his part, Blair claimed that he had already alerted Sir Patrick Neill, Chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, as to the ‘question of ethics’ of accepting such a donation, long before the press had disclosed it.

In fact, the letter to Neill was sent after the press published it. The government had not only acted in the interests of a powerful businessman and against the interests of the electorate, but had lied about it. Blair subsequently apologised, but his apology was really for a failure of public relations. If the public are to be fooled, they should be fooled efficiently. Of course, the only difference between New Labour’s and the Tories’ sleaze was that the New Labour variation involved more money."

Source: John Pilger, THE MEDIA AGE

How about a bit of insider trading thrown in for good measure:

Mills dogged by claims of £68,000 pub profit, and mentioning wife in tax inquiry
John Hooper in Rome and Ian Cobain
Monday March 6, 2006

Ms Jowell, then public health minister, had played a major role in the decision not to outlaw smoking in pubs and other public places. This decision, announced in December 1998, was condemned by the British Medical Association. There is no evidence that Ms Jowell was aware of this investment or was influenced by her husband's shareholdings.

Source: The Guardian

As the ministerial guidelines state, at all times it was and is the duty of Ms Jowell, or any other minister, to be aware of any of their familial financial dealings where a potential conflict of interest might be construed to exist. More than once there has been some doubt as to how well Jowell followed the ministerial guidelines.


Battening down the hatches

On what might appear to be an unrelated note, pages 9 (news) and 36 (comment) of the The Independent On Sunday carried the rather understated announcement by Geoff Hoon (PC) of his plans to 'ban Lords from challenging controversial bills' on the basis that the Lords are, to some degree at least, negatively impacting the ability of a dictatorial state to do whatever it likes.

Harping back to Tony Blair's opening statement in the minister's code of conduct for a moment:

"We are all here to serve and we must serve honestly and in the interests of those who gave us our positions of trust."

In any thinking human being, this sort of statement would then beg a question or two about whose interests those who observe the code must serve honestly and who gave them their positions of trust. Which brings us nicely to why the letters 'PC' appear in brackets after the names of politicians in this article.

Tony Blair, Tessa Jowell, Baroness Symons, Jack Straw and Geoff Hoon are all current members Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council. All of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Counsellors are administered the following oath before they take office:

You do swear by Almighty God to be a true and faithful Servant unto The Queen's Majesty as one of Her Majesty's Privy Council. You will not know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done or spoken against Her Majesty's Person, Honour, Crown or Dignity Royal, but you will lett and withstand the same to the uttermost of your power, and either cause it to be revealed to Her Majesty Herself, or to such of Her Privy Council as shall advertise Her Majesty of the same. You will in all things to be moved, treated and debated in Council, faithfully and truly declare your Mind and Opinion, according to your Heart and Conscience; and will keep secret all matters committed and revealed unto you, or that shall be treated of secretly in Council. And if any of the said Treaties or Counsels shall touch any of the Counsellors you will not reveal it unto him but will keep the same until such time as, by the consent of Her Majesty or of the Council, Publication shall be made thereof. You will to your uttermost bear Faith and Allegiance to the Queen's Majesty; and will assist and defend all Jurisdictions, Pre-eminences, and Authorities, granted to Her Majesty and annexed to the Crown by Acts of Parliament, or otherwise, against all Foreign Princes, Persons, Prelates, States, or Potentates. And generally in all things you will do as a faithful and true Servant ought to do to Her Majesty. So help you God.

Unsurprisingly, this archaic, anachronistic oath was a carefully guarded secret until recently. Indeed, one would think they could have hidden behind such nonsense only in the dark old days of King Egbert. But, no, it still continues to this very day.

Perhaps one of the reasons for not revealing the contents of such an oath might be that, if the 60 million or so residents of this country knew, realised and truly understood there is nothing more to the lives of state operatives than that of being a 'true and faithful Servant unto the Queen's Majesty', so help them god, then, perhaps, the material conditions of existence on pirate ship Britain would then exist for the mass consciousness shifts required to engender positive and progressive change in the public interests of many, over and above the private interests of the few.