Saturday, 31 October 2009

Blog Power!

In a victory for a small time blogger from Somerton in the UK. Muck&Brass blogger Niall Connolly managed to get 11 out of the 15 town councillors to resign after highlighting their shortcomings and lack of transparency. It made the national news headlines, I'll leave you to read his story.

BBC News

Muck&Brass Blog

Sunday, 25 October 2009

Lockerbie



So, the Lockerbie bombing and the release of Al-Megrahi is hitting the news again. As there are many who visit these pages that are not from the UK, I will be writing this from an international view point.

And quite rightly too. This is one of worst outcomes of British justice. The British public like to think of themselves as having a sense of fair play and being honest. The conviction of Al-Megrahi goes against this.
Personally I'm not one for conspiracy theories but with the bombing of Pan Am 103 and the subsequent trial and conviction of an innocent person, I'm somewhat unhappy with what my government has done and my view point has changed.

For the rest of you who still don't government lie or are economical with the truth, consider these documents. The British government said that the release of Al-Megrahi was down to Scotland, not the UK government. Well, read these letters from the British government to the Scottish government and then the requests from the Scottish government. It is quite clear that the Scottish government was asking the British government to exempt Al-Megrahi from the prisoner extradition treaty and the British government wasn't interested.

In 1988 (July) Iran Air flight 655 was shot down, (it was an A300 Airbus passenger plane) by the US Vincennes Aegis missile cruiser. The weapons officer mistook it for an F14 Tomcat. All crew and passengers were killed, 290 in total. The Iranian government insisted that it was a deliberate act, and I kind of tend to agree with them, I struggle to see how you can confuse a (relatively) slow moving large A300 with a (relatively) small fast moving (over 1,500mph) jet fighter. The US never admitted liability or apologised to Iran for it and no one was reprimanded for the incident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Vincennes_(CG-49)#Iran_Air_Flight_655_Tragedy

That's your 'why' answered. With the Iranians severely p1ssed off, they wanted revenge and the best revenge was to bring a US airliner down. Obviously they didn't have the military capability and secondly they didn't want an all out war with the US. So, they looked towards a terrorist activity, a bomb. Still keen to distance themselves from it, they contacted their friends the Syrians and asked them for they help. $10 million dollars were paid to a Syrian businessman (again the Syrian government didn't want to be directly involved for fear of retaliation) who had contacts with terrorist organisations operating in Lebanon and Palestine. The group was the PFLP-GC and led by Ahmad Jibril.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/unanswered-questions-lockerbies-legacy-270-dead-no-one-behind-bars-1775216.html

There's a bit of a side story that the CIA were running an operation out of Cyprus (it's a not a million miles from Lebanon/Palestine) which also involved drug running for black ops. The money drugs were channelled through Frankfurt airport where they had immunity from customs (diplomatic immunity for luggage).

The terrorists inflitrated Frankfurt airport and got the CIA diplomatic black bag switched at the last minute for the bomb, which is how it got past security. The bomb itself had both a timer and a mecury pressure switch. This had the affect of stopping the bomb going off too early, but if the plane got delayed, the mercury pressure switch would stop it going off on the ground. The idea was that the plane exploded somewhere over the Atlantic, which would make it almost impossible to find any evidence. Unfortunately the flight was delayed at Heathrow for the best part of an hour and for some reason the pilot was anxious to make up time and increased altitude earlier in the flight than he would normally have done.

Which is why the plane exploded over Lockerbie. The time line is now Dec 1988. In March 1989, Paul Channon the Transport Minister (covering Aviation) announces to a group of trusted journalists that the governments knows who the bombers were. Read the second paragraph in this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Channon,_Baron_Kelvedon#Transport_Secretary

Why was Reagan on the phone to Thatcher (in March 1989) asking her to 'cool it'? Because at that time the US already knew that it was going to war with Iraq in the first Gulf War, which started in Jan 1990, nine months later. The US needed allies in the Middle East, to side against Saddam and to help protect Saudi from invasion. It wasn't the time to get heavy with Iran and Syria, we needed them on side. Of course someone still needed to be blamed for the bombing because of the public outrage and Libya was the fall guy.

So, on to the trial and why did Libya send their guys. Gaddafi sent his guys because he knew they were innocent and thought they would get a fair trial and be released. Then Libya would have the sanctions lifted and they could sell oil again. Libya has a fair amount of oil, but uses virtually none of it herself. Gaddafi's son is on record saying that they (Libya) never admitted liability and only agreed to hit because they had lost out on $40 bn of oil sales. The agreement was that they would be tried under Scottish law, but because of the public feeling about the bombing, it would be held in a neutral country, Holland.

Only, they changed the rules, they didn't use jurors like a normal Scottish court, they used three main judges. The evidence was so good against them, that one guy was aquitted because he had a watertight alibi that he was in Sweden at the time. I suggest you read the follwoing sections in the next link, Trial, verdict and appeals. Paying particular attention to the details about the witness and what the UN observer said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdelbaset_al-Megrahi#Trial

So, why was he released. Partly because the then UK government wanted to do an oil deal. Secondly Megrahi's team had won the right to show some documents/information in his forthcoming appeal that the UK government didn't want coming to light. Not only would these prove his innocence, but they would also be extremly embarrassing.

The Scottish government did NOT, I repeat NOT want to let Megrahi go, because of the bad publicity it would give them. But they had no choice, as the UK had signed a PTA (prisoner transfer agreement) with Libya and only the UK government could overrule/make exceptions, which they were not willing to do. The Scots were literally begging NuLab to make an exception for Megrahi, but Blair, Brown and Straw all said no. This link shows all the requests from Scottish ministers.The second link went 404 error in April 2012, the third link is an exact copy of the letter on the BBC.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/925/0085873.pdf


http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/docs/20080211-jack-straw-to-alex-salmond-prisoner-transfer-agreement-libya.pdf

For some reason the document has been removed by the government, but here it is on the BBC website

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/01_09_09_straw_salmond.pdf


As for evidence to come out that will embarrass people involved, this is the sort of thing I'm talking about.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/scottishnews/3627650/Lockerbie-lawman-witness-bribe-rap.html

There's a whole shedload of dodgy dealings about the whole thing. If you read some of the other reports, you see that the Scottish police say that CIA guys were at the crash site within 24 hours, taping areas off, taking evidence away. This is why the Scottish victim's families were not bothered about Megrahi's release, because they know all this and more, they've obviously spoken to the Scottish police that were involved. Lockerbie's not a big place, people know each other, difficult to keep secrets.

Jim Swire was the Scottish families spokesman, he lost his daughter on the flight, this is his view.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-11368387

Almost finished (and you've only had the very short version), a couple of links for further viewing/reading. First a documentary film about the bombing and even this has had contreversy, read the Wiki page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Maltese_Double_Cross_-_Lockerbie

The full film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B5hv6scbBo

And lastly a book, it's almost thirty chapters from memory. It's by one of the CIA guys that was based in Cyprus and it gives a lot of the background into what went on, how the Franfurt operation went on and the fact that they were onto Jibril and found some of his identical bombs to the Lockerbie one. Don't be put off by the first few pages, it does get into the detail soon after.

Trail of the Octopus -- From Beirut to Lockerbie -- Inside the DIA, by Donald Goddard with Lester K. Coleman at American Buddha Online Library
http://www.american-buddha.com/trail.toc.htm

Wednesday, 21 October 2009

Royal Mail strike













The Royal Mail, what a name, it was the first postal service in the world. Remember the first stamp anyone, the Penny Black?













So what is the reasoning for the strike and the current dispute?

Normally I don't have a lot of time for people who go on strike. I've spent most of my life working for private companies, where if you went on strike you'd be sacked immediately. But I have sympathy for the Posties at RM. Why, well it was never a well paid job, early starts and half of it during early winter mornings. The one bright side of it, was that they could finish early (if they completed their round early) and have the afternoon to themselves or maybe have a part time job to top up their wages. Whilst some may shout they get paid to work a full day, to me this is no different to the bankers that get a bonus for doing their job.

So, what is all the hoohah about and why is the Labour government (Mandelson) supporting the CWU?

Well, it's simple, it's all part of the EU master plan. The EU wants the Post Office/Royal Mail sold off and all politicians are following their master's bidding. The EU have said that the RM (along with other countries' postal services) must be privatised by Dec 2010 and both Labour & the Tories are complying with this directive.

So, the once profitable RM that delivers you a letter to virtually anywhere in the UK next day for less than the price of a Mars Bar, will be sold off and taken over by a European company, just like all the energy companies and most of the telecommunication/mobile phone companies and quite a number of our banks.

The RM will be sold off to either the Dutch operator TNT or the German postal service Deutsche Post within the next 15 months.

When this happens, the new companies will cherry pick services and those of you who live in the South and have a granny living in Inverness, will find that it costs a lot more that 39p to send her a birthday card and it'll probably take a week for it to arrive.

Why do the EU want to wreck what works already? I attach two blog posts for you to read, with a short quote from each.

"Therefore the ‘privatisation’ of Royal Mail from its position as majority universal service provider must occur by 2011. In targeting April for a sell-off, our Labour administration is simply doing as it is being told by our EU masters in the Commission rather than following the advice of any policy groups or reports.

I should also point out that even if the Conservative party were against the ‘privatisation’ of Royal Mail (which they are not), then it wouldn’t make the blindest bit of difference. Our continued membership of the European Union confers upon us the necessity of obeying its legislation which is now part of our own law."

http://www.chrispalmer.org/2008/12/21/swiftly-they-move/

"Before too long, we will have a European postal service - but it will be messy, delivered by multiple providers, albeit under the control of the EU. The final stage – decades into the future – is then to "rationalise" and "consolidate" the market, slimming down the number of providers until a few megaliths service the entire (European) system under the benign control of the Platonic guardians in Brussels."

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/05/destruction-phase.html

Tuesday, 20 October 2009

Global Warming

Well, Global Warming, it's a hot topic in the world of politics today.

Now first off, I have to make my point of view perfectly clear, I care about the planet and my country. However the politicians feed us many untruths to justify their State control of us. Please bear with me, this is not a rant, I will present facts and leave the reader to decide. Since 9/11 we have had many of our rights curtailed by "the war on terrorism" and the next agenda is "the war on CO2".

The Earth is currently going through one of its lowest phases of CO2, 500 million years ago during the Cambrian period, the CO2 levels were 20 times what they are today. Hard to believe, yes, but it's true, Google it to see for yourself.

The Earth has been cooling for the last 8 years and the general recent trend is for temperatures to drop. The Earth has warmed and cooled many times in the last few thousand years, we had a warm era during the Medieval warm period (MWP) when wine was produced widely in England. The WMP was followed by the Little Ice Age, when temperatures dropped considerably.

The fact is, the Earth cools down and warms up as part of its natural cycle and CO2 has been considerably higher in the past. Our governments are using Global Warming as a platform to scare us, control us and tax us. If they were truly interested in stopping Global Warming, then they would not have given the go ahead to the 3rd runway at Heathrow and they would be giving money to the car manufacturers that are developing fuel cell cars. But they don't want to stop business because that brings in revenue and they don't want cars that run on water because the Duty & Tax they get from petrol consumption will disappear.

I urge you to watch this video, it is long (1.35hr) but at the very least, forward it to 20 minutes in and watch it until it reaches 40 minutes. You will be amazed to hear the lies that are spouted by the "Green" industry and even the UN.

Global Warming Reality!

Thursday, 15 October 2009

Geert Wilders

video

Anti-Islamic Dutch MP Geert Wilders to visit UK within days


The far-right Dutch MP who overturned a United Kingdom travel ban, despite being labelled a threat to “community harmony”, is planning to visit the capital this week.

Geert Wilders, who is accused of Islamophobia but won a case against the Home Office yesterday to allow him to enter the country, said that he did not want to come to incite violence, but to have a debate.

He won't be showing his short film about radical Islam but intends to return at a later date (this is the clip shown above). Mr.Wilders had been refused entry into the UK earlier this year and was turned away at Heathrow in what was widely seen to be a political decision rather than based on law. The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ruled that there was no evidence that a previous visit had caused problems and said it was more important to protect freedom of speech.

Interestingly at the same time a radical Muslim group has launched a massive campaign to impose sharia law on Britain.

The fanatical group www.Islam4UK.com has ­announced plans to hold a rally in London later this month. It is calling for a complete upheaval of the British legal system, its officials and ­legislation. Members have urged Muslims from all over Britain to converge on the capital on October 31 for a procession to demand the full implementation of sharia law.

Tuesday, 13 October 2009


Private Eye will I'm sure be enjoying a few beers today after their great nemesis Carter-Ruck did a swift about turn of their gagging order on The Guardian newspaper.

Private Eye's most famous victory against Carter-Ruck was in 2001 when the firm took the majority of a case brought by accountant John Stuart Condliffe on a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) basis, and total legal fees have been estimated at reaching £1.75m.Condliffe's case against Private Eye concerned an article in the magazine that claimed he overcharged clients. The case was discontinued after six weeks and Private Eye was awarded £100,000.

However Carter-Ruck (Peter) was on the side of Private Eye in 1989 when a jury at the High Court in London awarded £600,000 damages to Sonia Sutcliffe, wife of the Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe, against the satirical magazine Private Eye.

"Famous libel lawyer Peter Carter-Ruck said the award was disproportionate and called for the libel laws to be changed. He said juries should be guided by the judge on the sums they award. "

On the steps of the court he (Ian Hislop) said: "If that's justice, then I'm a banana."

He pointed out the award was 100 times larger than that awarded to three of Sutcliffe's victims.

Monday, 12 October 2009

UK debt and Gordon Brown's legacy




Gordon Brown used to love talking about economic prudence. He certainly did, but at the same time as the UK was having record tax receipts income, he was still borrowing. We all know the old adage that in the good times you save for a rainy day. Unfortunately Gordon spent, spent, spent, during the good times and then borrowed some more as well.

Whilst he claimed to be in charge of the economy and doing a good job during the good times, he says it's all someone else's fault during the bad times. Looking at the graph above - JP Morgan data, based on IMF estimates, of the cost of the banking crisis not in billions, but as a percentage of GDP, it's clear we're far worse off than either the US or the Euro area and both France and Germany are already out of recession.

We're going to be paying this back for a long, long time and even worse, when GB's money printing (QE) finally breaks through, we're going to have real inflation problems and those mortgages are going to get really expensive.

Friday, 9 October 2009

Ireland's reward for the Lisbon Treaty - Redundancies

video

Nigel Farrage giving a Dan Hannan style speech on the EU/Ireland's one-sided campaign on the Lisbon Treaty referendum.

Suprise! Many companies have announced redundancies this week. Odd how they didn't announce any last week, prior to the referendum or could that be, because one of the big sticks they wielded was that voting Yes was the only way to safegauard jobs. Politicians lying to us, well I never.

Intel 300 compulsary redundancies.

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/No-surprise-as-300-jobs.5709109.jp

700 redundancies

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/No-surprise-as-300-jobs.5709109.jp

Various other companies announced redundancies this week, bringing the total to over 1,500.

Thursday, 8 October 2009

The Lisbon Treaty


Well it looks like it is left to the Czech Republic and their president, Vaclav Klaus, to hold out to give the UK time to hold it's referendum, as the BBC* is reporting today (8th Oct) "Poland's President Lech Kaczynski will sign the EU's controversial Lisbon Treaty on Sunday, a top aide has said."


The map above is a little out of date as Ireland voted the "correct" answer yes last Friday and Germany deposited (already ratified) it's agreement late in September. I doubt very much that the Czech president will be able to hold out until May next year, as he will come under immense political pressure (both from the EU and internally) and bribes from the EU.

At the moment Dave Cameron is being very coy and not very bullish about what will happen if the Treaty is ratified before the election (UK). This I think will be major topic of discussion and flash point for the Conservative Party and the election as a whole. The Treaty is far more than just tidying up two previous treaties. It gives the EU far more powers and is very relevant to the election and future law making decisions and powers of our own elected MPs.

More to follow on what the Lisbon Treaty actually means and what are the options once it has been ratified and the Conservatives are elected.

* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8296243.stm

Sunday, 4 October 2009

ID Cards


So Gordon Brown said this week that he was scrapping ID cards. Well he kind of hinted at that, but what he actually said, is that they're being delayed. When it's such a voter loser why don't they just scrap them and save the money, we could certainly do with any extra money at the moment.

Why are the government so keen on ID cards? They will tell you that it is to combat terrorism and crime. So how will it do that? They won't, the 9/11 terrorists had valid ID cards as did the Madrid bombers and the 7/7 London bombers had valid passports. They won't stop illegal immigration, only effective border controls do that and there is so much legal immigration from the enlarged EU, which is far more of a problem. Crimminals, how would ID cards stop them, and let's face it, most terrorists and crimminals have the ware with all and finances to obtain fake ID cards.

If the government know this then why are they pushing ahead with them regardless. The cost is rumoured to be about £20bn if the LSE have their figures correct. The real reason is to monitor and control the public, they want it to build up a digital database, the mass gathering of personal data on travel, bank details, mobile phone locations, health records, internet usage, criminal records however minor, fingerprints and digital pictures that can be data-mined and applied to different scenario – boarding a plane, behaviour on the Tube or taking part in a protest.

The nothing to hide, nothing to fear phrase is usually trotted out, but do you really want the government knowing your every move? Eventually it will be linked to all government departments and that will include the NHS (your GP records). They already sell our names and addresses via the DVLA to anyone who will pay £2.50, I'm sure they'll happiliy sell our details to insurance companies. For anyone who thinks it is still just an ID card like a driving licence, Google the National Identity Register. Oh and it will be voluntary, really, then why when you renew your passport will you automatically be registered on to the register which will take your biometric details from the passport.

This is all from the government that brought you micro chipped bins and fines people for over filling them or putting them out a day early. They already access your loyalty card information, both the NHS and the Inland Revenue use this information.

If you want to read a more in depth review of ID cards, the reason for them and what it means to the individual, then click on the link below. It contains an example of the sort of Big Brother I have been alluding to, where NY Governor Eliot Spitzer was making a nuisance of himself to the Bush administration by highlighting the banking prblem last year, so they "sorted" the problem.
"Less than 3 weeks later, by 6 March, Spitzer had been forced to resign due to a call-girl scandal, revealed by government surveillance of his bank account, using (or rather, abusing) anti-terrorism powers granted by the USA PATRIOT Act".

Do you know any other country that abuses the powers of the RIPA act to spy on individuals?


http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2009/09/those-pesty-id-cards-everyone-will-have.html