Just to let you know, I have removed the post “Who and what is Sean ADL Tabatabai?”. Why? Because I’m sick and tired of seeing it at the top of my blog hits when it is now “has been” material and is hardly of any serious interest to me. This is, in part, why I stopped blogging. I recognised that, of all the deeply serious, substantive and significantly researched posts I have made re law, money, politics and terrorism etc, guess what got most hits? Anything and everything on David Icke, Sean and TPV. You know why? Well, in my view, it is because most people are still “The Sun” and “Daily Mirror” etc readers and just LOVE their gossip. So. although, at the time, the blogs I wrote re the foregoing were for a serious purpose, they are now old hat, boring, did the job.
Why don’t a lot of you actually find a fucking brain and use it?
So, we heard about the german, Richard Gutjahr – married to Einat Wilf an Israeli jew, Knesset MP and “ex” Lieutenant in the Intelligence corp within the IDF – who just so happened to have been right place (on his balcony) at the right time (literally seconds before the truck went on its rampage) in the previous blogpost. How “lucky” is that? That they weren’t in the crowd that night BUT Richard had the presence of mind to just start filming a truck at precisely the right time.
Richard and Einat have a son it would appear but, from the look of Richard, sorry, but I have to say I’m surprised. He looks like he should be fronting and LGBT group – but I digress.
So, this is the first couple of ATHEISTS (which they say themselves, they are “devout” about). It’s strange, then, when you read SO MANY TIMES of these jewish atheists (Einat) and their spouses who are also “very supportive” of one particular religion: Judaism. Even, in this case, a German atheist spouse! Why would an atheist (if that is what you are) have any singular interest in a religion? Unless, of course, they consider jews as a race – something the jews, generally, love to use when it suits and drop when it suits.
Here’s an interview with Einat Wilf:
Anyhow, they made a good choice of being in NICE together didn’t they? Oh yes they did! 😉
Now, here’s the next point and it’s a BIGGIE:
The UK’s Daily Telegraph reported as follows (and not too many people seem to have picked up on it – as usual) –
A JEWISH FATHER HAS A “PREMONITION” – these jews get their word from G-d you know (or they have Crystal balls if they’re atheists of course)
HOW DID YOU DO THAT, HAVE YOU GOT POWERS, HOW DID YOU KNOW?
Well, even his own son asks it BUT the zionist controlled media haven’t bothered to EVEN THOUGH they quote him on it. Odd don’t you think? 🙂
Not at all!
You see, once you READ (remember books and stuff and a requirement for more than an 8 second attention span?), you begin to see/recognise a big picture which is repeated and repeated time and again. I want to introduce you to a paper written many years ago by the American Think Tank, The CATO Institute. The paper is called “The Green Peril” and explains they creation of a new “bogeyman” to replace the “Red Menace” at the end of the Cold War. You see, the global establishment needs your belief in these menaces and perils to keep you in fear. Fear rules. Fear makes you lash out at created (by them) events which make you plead with your “betters”, your “leaders”, the “government” for protection. How do they protect? By taking away basic freedoms; by clamping down on free speech; by shutting down portions of the internet (and the time will likely come for this blog and many like it). You see, to give you these connections and to show you what we do, is called “hate speech”. You can shut hate speech down in a nanosecond if those who, still in fear, demand it. You just don’t get it though do you? As you give them the power to do this, they take it step by step and, one day, you’ll be shut down. I know tons of people who are scared today to speak their mind. Some of these people have been high up in her majesty’s Armed Forces. But, by all means, you keep demanding “protection” but don’t you think they aren’t doing a very good job of it? I can’t help but laugh at you cretins. Cretins are those of you who believe in statism – the Jeremy Corbyn believers and the Donald Trump believers. Those of you who always fall into the trap of being told by such people what you want to hear.
Anyhow, here’s the paper:
By Leon T. Hadar, a former bureau chief for the Jerusalem Post no less. (It gets funnier and funnier). And notice the year: 1992. So, another “crystal ball” from a jew a long time before the world even sensed such a threat. Why? Because it didn’t exist until they wanted it to.
Indeed, like the Red Menace of the Cold War era, the Green Peril is perceived as a cancer spreading around the globe, undermining the legitimacy of Western values and political systems. The cosmic importance of the confrontation would make it necessary for Washington to adopt a longterm diplomatic and military strategy; to forge new and solid alliances; to prepare the American people for a neverending struggle that will test their resolve; and to develop new containment policies, new doctrines, and a new foreign policy elite with its “wise men” and “experts.”
Islam does seem to fit the bill as the ideal post-Cold War villain. “It’s big; it’s scary; it’s anti-Western; it feeds on poverty and discontent,” wrote David Ignatius, adding that Islam “spreads across vast swaths of the globe that can be colored green on the television maps in the same way that communist countries used to be colored red.”
The creation of a peril usually starts with mysterious “sources” and unnamed officials who leak information, float trial balloons, and warn about the coming threat. Those sources reflect debates and discussions taking place within government. Their information is then augmented by colorful intelligence reports that finger exotic and conspiratorial terrorists and military advisers. Journalists then search for the named and other villains. The media end up finding corroboration from foreign sources who form an informal coalition with the sources in the U.S. government and help the press uncover further information substantiating the threat coming from the new bad guys.
Anyhow, there is a lot more so read the damned thing and enlighten yourselves. Otherwise, you’re just going to be another twat swallowing the crap from the BBC or CNN etc. There’s tons of such assholes – they’re called “normal” and think nothing of their country bombing the shit out of innocent human beings.
But behind it all is a jewish influence that needs to vilify Islam and the everyday jew supports it with their silence as do christians with their ignorance and as do muslims, believe it or not, with their silence and fear of being considered an “extremist”.
That said, what keeps it ALL going (even those who are controlling it) is ALL of us with our petty prejudices, racism, greed, ignorance and fear.
“THEY” love it!
I just thought this might be worth bringing to your attention.
I have been banned from Facebook so many times now I’ve lost count. Banned also from a multitude of Facebook political and not so political pages. I have even found myself having to provide data on myself (i.e tel number) to post to…. wait for it…. Infowars/Alex Jones pages! Because I have simply been blunt in my statements regarding the exposure of Alex Jones by bringing to people’s attention VERY obvious hypocrisies and lies by omission of Jones and crew.
However, I just wish to show you something which has just happened today which has had me blocked from posting for 48 hours for “not abiding by Facebook’s terms” basically. Facebook’s terms are applied as and when they see fit to apply them. There are real people behind these bans and blockings remember and so, one must appreciate that one is up against the prejudices of whoever it is that makes that decision.
Please note that, in my post which was removed for not meeting “Facebook’s Community Standards”, I make it clear in my “offending post” that I am responding to a video posted of Madonna clearly – over a PA system – uttering the word “motherfuckers” over and over again. Yet, this does not seem to be a problem for Facebook – after all, the website allows any and all media, cultural and other videos to be posted with content that would make a Dutch prostitute in the red light district blush. Anything and everything is allowed IF it emanates from an “acceptable” source like a pop/rock musician it would seem. Another (but different) example could be Kiss frontman, Gene Simmons, making a statement which displays clearly religious hate. I’ll come back to that.
So, there are a number of questions here. Is it against Facebook community standards for certain language and certain opinions by actual facebook users, in “print”, to state their opinions or use a certain style of language BUT Facebook see no issue and anything is fair game, if such opinions and language are stated by a non user within a video and that video is simply posted? The answer is no to that however because there have been quite a few videos which myself and others have posted on all sorts of topics which have been removed. I can say many with the speeches of Hitler for example have been removed and yet, as far as I know, it would be impossible for a dead man to be a part of the Facebook community wouldn’t it?
So, here is the “acceptable” video featuring Madonna which I commented upon….
And here is the “offending post” I made:
Then I receive a further “advisory”as I attempt to post to my own page (which is private):
So I decide to advise Facebook that they are being (and are, in general in fact), total hypocrites. You can post whatever you like, basically, on Facebook and, as long as people who comment on the post agree and there is no “offence” taken by one (“offence” being something which one decides to receive rather than something which is necessarily meant to offend) and no-one decides to report you (which, clearly, is done when another party simply wishes to get you in trouble with the Facebook “Police” because you’ve said something they don’t like and it is a form of revenge for them), it will stay up. Get one little creep behind a keyboard who has problems controlling their emotions however, and your post is toast and so may you be.
It’s pathetic but then so is the world we live in.
So, as you can see from the original post, I actually use the word “shite” (or “shit) in there too (which I didn’t even consider a problem given half of what I can read on the site that would be, to any sane person, considered sick and deranged) but where on earth do Facebook get the idea that the word “motherfucker” is ok and any other word I use is not? Or is it just my opinion which is unwanted and disallowed? Or is it – and this would be an immense irony – that I actually print the word out which Madonna uses again and again in the video?
Will I get a response by these poor little twats on Facebook who are the “law” of land in cyberspace? If I do, I’ll post it back on this page. I’m looking forward to seeing what these little brats say of I’m honest.
Now, back to Gene Simmons for a moment for those of you who have taken further offence that I suggest a “jewish agenda” (maybe that was it huh? Maybe you just are not allowed to have an opinion on anything much at all except the size of arse Kim Kardashian has or something else just as inane)?
Listen to Gene’s “anti gentilism” because that is exactly what this is. Then ask yourself the question (or questions): How is it that, posting such a video of obvious race/religious hate is no problem? After all, you can post this video as much as you wish AS LONG AS you are not pointing out the obvious in it and some jew or easily offended little idiot (perhaps a Christian zionist – again, the irony. A christian who doesn’t take offence to a jew saying that the christian is only worth serving the jew – and they report you and how is it that a jew can actually get away with stating this (and many more I may add) while we gentiles (or goyim) have not meant to take offence (whereas if the shoe were on the other foot we would be labeled “Nazis”) nor do we have a law against “anti gentilism”.
Well, there’s a reason for it but stating the reason makes me an anti semite.
SO BE IT!
Because I’ve had the hypocrisy of this up to my neck!
I think Hitler had also don’t you?
Here are two links/articles and one youtube which demonstrate fully, the psychopathy of was and of those who suggest to rule us.
Very little more needs said. However, one or two things I’d like to say and which I hope these bastards (who I have total disdain for – but a psychopath doesn’t care. That is what makes them psychopaths.) will read:
- The “son” of Tony Benn
Hilary Benn, how much did you hate your own father? A man of conscience, a man of integrity and, I might even go so far to say a man of love of his fellow man. You are a cancer on your father’s memory. You must have despised him to slap him in the face so many times in life and now, in death. Did he call you Hilary for a reason? Did he know you’d turn into a little bitch for the zionists? Is that what you hold against him bitch? The fact he gave you a girlie name? Are you trying to overcome the shit you had to put up with at school while you probably got buggered in the toilets?
- The “Prime Minister” of the United Kingdom
What is the definition of a “Minister”? – “One who is AUTHORISED to perform functions….”.
You don’t have to be religious to minister. When you minister to someone, you take care of them. All of these meanings of minister — both as a noun and as a verb — contain a grain of the original Latin meaning, “servant.” A minister in a church serves his or her flock, and a prime minister serves his or her country.
Directors in a company minister various functions. You have the technical Director, the Finance Director etc and at the top, the Managing Director (or Chief Executive Officer) – all “Ministers” taking care of different departments and, of course, a main Director (or Minister) to have overall responsibility. Now, in Private companies, such a Director may well have ultimate control because he also owns the company, however, in PUBLIC companies or PUBLIC functions, that is not the case. The “Main Minister” answers to the shareholders.In government, that “Main Minister” is, for the moment, Davey Boy Cameron – a little lad with a big greasy tongue to lick arse with. He licks zionist arse but he also licks Her Majesty’s arse. Why?
Because it’s HER Majesty’s Government, HER Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, HER Majesty’s Armed Forces, HER Majesty’s Courts, HER Majesty’s Police. ALL of them at HER Majesty’s pleasure. It’s also HER Majesty’s Intelligence services or, put another way, HER Majesty’s Secret Service.
She’s “Above politics” (and, by the way, the law of course) because she has to be seen to be “non political” (while if you do keep your eye on the newspapers and media in recent years, you may surely have noticed the number of times her and her brood interfere – albeit quietly). Now, you have to understand one simple fact – there are certain things that remain “The Royal Prerogative” and one of those things is the decision to go to war. While so many of you talk about Blair and Cameron being War Criminals (and yes they are), they are only doing HER Majesty’s bidding as her “Main Minister” – they serve HER Majesty.
So, while Jeremy Corbyn sat on the bench (as you can see in the video) with a face which was filled with passionately held hate (oh yes it was Jeremy) – It was in the knowledge that while that jerk off Benn spoke up on the side of the Conservatives and Hammond congratulated him (nonce), it was all just theatre. Theatre for the plebs who point blank refuse to recognise who runs this country. The Parliament know we despise them but they also know we have no power and they know where that power lies: With the Office of HER Majesty. I should clarify that that office does not only include her but includes the Rothschilds/City of London and others. So, again, while Corbyn sat there, he knows he will be allowed to play the voice of opposition but, as such – even if he holds his beliefs passionately – if he wishes to remain where he is (which he will because he is as much a sell out as the rest – they’re all power hungry socio/psychopaths) then he accepts that those who DO control, have had his party vote against him – all of it ensured by HER Majesty. You do recognise that there are GOVERNMENT Ministers and Ministers of the CROWN don’t you? Now why do you think that is?
But here’s another thing re poor Jeremy:
Now, read the article well and consider this point: “Joining the Privy Council will mean that Mr Corbyn is allowed to style himself “right honourable” by other MPs in the House of Commons, and be given briefings on areas of national security.”
Have you considered it?
The point being this: Can you imagine the idea of a democratically elected (that’s funny that we still believe we do that too but anyhow, I digress) Prime Minister, who would be a Republican and who you believe to have full say and control over this country, NOT having access to Intelligence reports? The ONLY way this PRIME Minister can have such is by kissing that bitch’s hand. Is the penny dropping? No? Then sorry, I can’t help imbecilic assholes.
So, you go ahead and scream and moan about these War Criminals in Government (while you are possibly even a monarchist and wave your silly little flags at more of this brood being born) but you’re missing the target and you always will.
So back to the articles and video which demonstrate the psychopathy:
CHEERING DEATH, DESTRUCTION AND MURDER (Never done so professionally and without remorse or consequences to them than in the UK Parliament)
Lastly: Yes I know what I have said about this guy in the past (and I still stand by the majority of it) but I have never said he is not right about the political reality he speaks about and he sums up the facts here so well – as only he can – that I think it is worth the 30 minutes or so of viewing.
Of course, if you read Zbigniew Brzezinski’s “The Grand Chessboard” from 1997, you can see it was all geopolitically planned. Not a word of what Icke says is mistaken. It is all fact.
Those of you who support this action against Syria need to ask yourselves one question: Is it you are ignorant or are you also a blood thirsty PSYCHOPATH?
Oh and a very final thing:
When Churchill bombed Berlin, Dresden, Hamburg, Munich etc, tell me? Did he send telegrams to Hitler a week before advising him he was just taking a vote first then he’d be able to watch the media broadcasting it across the world that the RAF was just about to take off?
HOW STUPID IS THIS COUNTRY? DO YOU LIKE THESE PSYCHOPATHS LAUGHING AT HOW INCREDIBLY DUMB YOU REALLY ARE?
Sun Tzu – The Art of War (Part 2)
“Confucius say: In war, surprise your enemy and tweet them you’re on your way!”
Earthling: It’s not the Elite’s intelligence which bothers me, it’s the population’s IQ.
We even invented God! See that H in Jesus H. Christ? It stands for HAMISH!
Ye dinnae mess with us ye know! We invented everything you can touch, see, feel hear, taste and smell! Even bullshit!
We believe all this crap because, really, we’ve goat bugger all else tae speak of. Well except for hills and lochs, ye see we’ve goat tae call them lochs rather than lakes because “lake” is an ENGLISH word! And “loch” sounds mair romantik ye know? Oh oh and we’ve goat “Nessie” tae! Cannae forget Nessie! Naw!! No Nestle! Nessie! The Monster! We make shit up aw the time because we’re good at it!
Harry Potter! We invented him tae! Totally made up and even England’s greatest spy was a scotsman called Sean. Totally made up again! In fact, SCOTLAND is totally made up! It doesnae even exist! It’s a word! That’s aw it is! A word coined to describe a bit o’ land where the “Scots” live. Scots? Aye that’s made up tae! Ask a scot what a scot means and where it originated fae and they couldnae tell ye. They’ll start talking aboot Picts and Celts and they may even mention vikings and crap like that but ye know what? THEY’RE aw made up tae!!!
Whay made them up? HAMISH knows!
Aw I know is that we need wee books with oor pictures in them tae move aboot this planet and they call it “human rights”. Aye, it’s a “human right” tae have a wee book with yer picture in it so ye can move aboot the planet. Yer no allowed tae walk aboot freely and ye even huv tae huv a piece o’ paper stamped and signed tae allow ye tae travel oan a road.
Who invented aw this shite? WE did!
So what ur we dae’in noo? We’re gonnae add ANUTHER wee book wi yer picture in it and create anuther division. Or we might no! We might just swap oor UK passports fur EU passports! Aye but we’ll guvurn oorsel’s ………. fae Brussels! Aye Brussels! It’s an unknown fact Jimmy, that Brussels wiz founded by a scotsman called Bruce! These foreign bastards just couldnae spell it right!
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…. and again….. and again. I’ll put my “analyst” neck on the block once more.
I read “The Grand Chessboard” by Zbigniew Brzezinski a few years ago and I KEEP going back to it because every single step I see in this “game” is following what I gleaned from that book. It’s a template. It’s a strategic geopolitical, warmongering blueprint and they are following it to the letter.
I created this video a few years back:
Many thought I was WAY off in the analysis. Just stupid they said because the globalists and Rothschild love Israel. Really?
And you’ll say today Israel are getting away with murder re Palestine. Yes they are (and no they’re not). Yes they are because they are committing genocide with impunity BUT haven’t you noticed? The rising disgust even in our mainstream zionist controlled press and political circles? Why’s that? Well it’s exactly the same reason that, during WW2, the zionists sacrificed jews. Yes they did! Stop ignoring this you everyday Israeli jews. You are being sacrificed once more and your “zionist” (note inverted commas because when I use them I mean the “zionism” which reflects those jews who want their racist based ‘homeland’) Israel will and is coming to an end. Who’s leading this end? Benjamin Netanyahu of course! But you think he’s on your side don’t you “zionist”? No, not at all. Benjamin Netanyahu is on the ZIONISTS side of the game NOT the “Zionist” side! 😉 Netanyahu is another Tony Blair and David Cameron. Bought and sold by the Rothschild family. These guys are just pawns on the chessboard and it’s the Rothschilds and Rockefellers and jesuits who are dangling their strings. YOU, little old israeli, working to scrape a living, are of as much interest to Netanyahu as we are to Blair or Americans are to Obama. You’re a jew but you’re a nothing to these people. Your nationalism is just damned useful and you’re being played like an old Stradivarius violin as you watch movies like Spielberg’s Schindler’s list and keep getting filled with the holocaust stories of people who benefit from it. Just like we’re led to believe in the British stiff upper lip and that Winston Churchill was a hero! hahaha. He was a schmuck working for the same zionists who are now going to cause you some severe pain.
You still don’t get it do you? And that’s why you’ll be sacrificed! You see, Rothschild didn’t create Israel because he loves you! Oh you naive little “zionist”! He created it for a “beach-head” which is now passed its sell by date because the REAL ZIONISTS who sacrificed jews in WW2 now have pretty much effective control over that region of the world. Israel is just a pain in the ass to them now when they want the muslim world on the west’s side against Russia and China.
Haven’t you noticed something else?
All the muslim immigration into the UK, the EU and the USA. Now WHY would ZIONISTS want this? Seems a ridiculous idea doesn’t it? I know, yes it does. But you see it isn’t. Not at all. I’m not talking about “Zionists” here, I’m talking about ZIONISTS!
How would muslim immigration be beneficial to ZIONISTS? Simple: What happens when there are millions of muslim immigrants in the west? Well they have family members in the islamic states don’t they? Whether children, grandparents, cousins whatever. So then what happens when there is a stand off or war between the west and China/Russia? Tell me? How many muslims are in China or Russia? Not many at all is there? So whose side are the muslim states going to be on when they have family members spread throughout the west and none in China and Russia?
And who are the muslim brotherhood? 😉
Saudi Arabia has funded the Muslim Brotherhood for over half a century. Now, as a previous blog or two of mine pointed out, Saudi and “Israel” (more correctly, ZIONISTS) are cousins. They’re on the same side!
Your time is soon up “Zionists”. The ZIONISTS are coming to get ya! How? Through the U.N. and the “International community” which Bibi is winding up into a frenzy with his genocide, entirely on purpose of course!
Now why do you think we’re getting these headlines these days? What’s with the U.N. outrage all of a sudden? You’ve been treating Palestinians like shit for decades so why now?
Because your shelf life is running out! It’s time to create the ZIONIST controlled Islamic states and keep them happy by giving them the impression that the west has finally dealt with Israel the “nasty terrorist nation that they are” and the IDF has done its job. A job they thought was for Israel but no. Again, they’ve been played. The Mossad? ZIONIST controlled NOT “Zionist” controlled.
Ah and I thought you jews were smart! Well, after all, that’s what you like us all to believe isn’t it? LOL
But hey, don’t say you haven’t been warned a number of times. I tried to tell you and you didn’t listen so please forgive me if I laugh a little as I see you destroyed. Your ignorance of the game brought it on yourselves. Oh and your “chutzpah!” 😉
Ok, enough’s enough.
Stop with this “Rothschild owns the freescale patent” crap! You’re showing you ignorance or simply your wilful ignorance because you despise the Rothschilds as much as I do. But AGAIN, you are doing the attempt of exposing real stuff a total disservice by promulgating this crap about MH370 being attacked because of Freescale and Rothschild ending up with a patent!
It’s just very poor investigative power and understanding of fact. It’s an embarrassment quite frankly!
Further, it is clear from this, that people such as David Icke and Jeff Rense etc do not do much (if any) due diligence on what they decide to throw up on their websites as “journalism”. It seems that, as long as an article meets a certain narrative then, just like the mainstream, these “alternative media sites” will post it.
I know what Rothschild “jewish” zionism is just as much as any of you and I am clearly opposed to it – to such an extent it has got me in a spot of bother with the “authorities” previously. But I will NOT push a story that is SHIT! No matter if it implicates them or not!
I said on a previous blog about this, that a company would never give its IPR (property right) away to the employees who were salaried to do a job by the Corporate legal person they work for. Do you think Corporations are stupid? Do you think the people that own and control them got here to where they are by being thick? If you do you’re proving how thick YOU are!
I’m sorry if you’re one of my readers and you believe this story and so get offended when I’m calling you thick but that’s just how things are. I owe you nothing and you owe me nothing so take your readership elsewhere if you’re so offended and unwilling to drop your ignorance and LISTEN! I lose nothing but a reader. I only want readers who are discerning in their thought anyhow! Those who aren’t are going to have no positive effect on this world either way!
AND I find it fucking irritating ok?
Here’s the fricking patent ok? READ what it says. It says: “ASSIGNEE: FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR INC.” Do you know what “Assignee” means? It means the patented technology has been invented by these 4 chinese guys BUT they had already (under the agreement of an employment contract) ASSIGNED the PROPERTY of the PATENT to FREESCALE!
Do you know what that means? It means EVEN IF THEY HAD LIVED AND MH370 HAD NEVER HAPPENED, FREESCALE WOULD STILL OWN THE FUCKING PATENT! GET IT? Now SHUT THE FUCK UP about people getting murdered over a patent which was never theirs to begin with.
The Constitution of the United States provides in Article 1, Section 8, that: the “Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing, for limited times, to authors and inventors, the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”
US law, unlike foreign law, requires a patent application to be in the name of the inventor. A company cannot be the inventive entity.
The definition for inventorship can be simply explained: The threshold question in determining inventorship is who conceived of the invention. Unless a person contributes to the conception of the invention, he is not an inventor. The inventor maintains intellectual domination over the invention. An inventor has to contribute something to the conception of the invention, not merely be the supervisor of the inventor or someone that acted under the direction and supervision of the inventor.
The assignee is the entity that has the property right to the patent. Patents are property. The inventor and the assignee may be one in the same but an employee will more than likely assign a patent to a company.
The assignment of a patent is independent from the inventorship. A patent may be assigned to a series of different entities but the inventorship, once properly stated, does not change. The patent office allows for correction of inventorship if the error occurred without deceptive intent.
Meanwhile, it’s just a patent for a new design of semiconductor wafer. WHOOPEEDFUCKINGDOO!
Get a grip with your “CONSPIRACY THEORIES” or bugger off because this sort of shit is of no use to anyone but your “Famous Five find a wafer” or “Scooby Doo invents a new hotdog” mentality.
Ok, give this some thought. The following is taken from today’s Malaysian Airlines website. A statement for today, Friday March 21st…..
“Hi, I’m the US secretary of Defence and I’m here to help you find your missing plane. We’ve processed and refined the inmarsat raw data to provide you with what we’d like you to understand. Any questions? Don’t hesitate to ask. Unless, of course, it relates to Diego Garcia.” 🙂
Friday, March 21, 05:30 PM MYT +0800 Malaysia Airlines MH370 Flight Incident – MH370 Press Briefing by Hishammuddin Hussein, Minister of Defence and Acting Minister of Transport
Malaysia continues to work on the diplomatic, technical and logistical challenges involved in the search for MH370. [Diplomatic challenges I have no doubt. Here’s a challenge for you MAS: Ask the United States if you can just have an inspector take a little peek around Diego Garcia. Just in case you understand. Not that you’re casting any doubt on the United states and the United Kingdom or the CIA but say something like “Captain Zahari had invented a cloaking device and we feel he may have possibly flown into Diego Garcia without you noticing. Hey! It’s worth a shot. Americans will believe anything and they believe Klingon cloaking devices are real! Just like they thought “Air Force One” with Harrison Ford was a true story!]
We are still awaiting information from the Australian search and rescue operation as to whether the objects shown in the satellite images released by Australia yesterday are indeed related to MH370. [Well, so far, it’s a “we don’t know it could be a container from a ship or it could be the debris from a martian flying saucer]
In the meantime, we are continuing search and rescue operations in the rest of the southern and northern corridors. I will now give you a brief operational update. [Still sticking to those corridors eh? You have a lot of faith in Inmarsat it seems.]
1. Operational update
Search efforts southwest of Perth continue, and the Australian authorities are intensifying their efforts in the area. HMAS Success is due to reach the vicinity of the objects tomorrow.
China has deployed 5 ships and 3 ship-borne helicopters, which are currently heading toward the southern corridor. 3 Chinese aircraft (2 Ilyushin IL-76s and 1 Shaanxi Y-8) arrived in Malaysia at 11:00 this morning. They will also be searching in the southern corridor. [That’s a hell of a lot of assets and expense for yet another ‘maybe’ isn’t it? PM Abbott having stated it could just be containers from a ship’s cargo. I’d have waited to see if there was anything solid regarding this before sending 5 ships from China!]
Japan is deploying its assets to Perth, including 2 P-3 Orions, to assist with the Australian search efforts. [Japan too? Wow! All on the basis of a really poor black and white photo which shows absolutely nothing. It’s great when you’re spending other people’s money isn’t it? Can the crews get a good tan on the deck down there?]
This morning I have spoken with the acting High Commissioner from the United Kingdom, who confirmed that the Prime Minister has spoken to the Prime Minister of the UK, and that HMS Echo is already heading towards the southern Indian Ocean to support the search effort. He also confirmed that the UK will be providing us with a list of possible assets that can be deployed if needed. [We’re sending a ship too down there? Hey Abbott and Malaysia, you owe me!]
He also has reaffirmed that, in addition to the technical support provided so far, it stands ready to provide further specialist search and investigative assistance once more information about the fate of MH370 becomes known. [UK specialist search and investigative assistance. I’m sure. Just to ensure that the right info is being handled properly.]
I have also been in touch with the French delegation, which is led by the French Ambassador to Malaysia, and includes the man who led the investigation into the Air France 447 crash. They have agreed to assist us with their considerable experience and expertise. [What? Taking two years? One crash. Expertise? I’ve been driving about 30 years and had about 3 collisions in that time. I must be a bloody expert!]
I will also be speaking to the US Secretary of Defence at 21:15 tonight, to request further specialist assets to help with the search and rescue efforts, including remotely-operated vehicles for deep ocean salvage. [Ah, specialist assistance from the US Secretary of Defence? That sounds about right.]
The Kazakhstan authorities have assured us that they have found no trace of MH370, and we are awaiting permission for Kazakhstan to be used as a staging point for search operations. [Staging point? To go where? Why don’t you just ask the countries around it to search too and if they say ‘no trace” then there’s no trace.]
On the police investigation, the Ukraine police have confirmed that the background checks on the Ukrainian passenger have come back clear. [Ukraine Police?? Now which side politically are they on? What if, which I guess they are, they are the police for what is, at the moment, a gang of criminal billionaire zionists? Don’t you think they may just follow their zionist bosses’ agenda? Wouldn’t they then wish to stick with the “two Iranians and stolen passports” story?]
2. Satellite data processing
I would like to briefly discuss the processing of the Inmarsat data.
The investigations team received the complete raw Inmarsat satellite data which included the six handshakes at approximately 15:00 on Wednesday 12th March.
This type of data is not normally used in investigations of this sort. It is only because we have so little other information to go on in this difficult and unprecedented situation that the data is being used.
Upon receiving the raw data, the Malaysian authorities immediately discussed with the US team how this information might be used. The US team and the investigations team then sent the data to the US, where further processing was needed before it could be used. [Meanwhile the US Secretary of Defence is giving “specialist assistance”. lol]
Initial results were received on Thursday 13th March at approximately 13:30, but it was agreed by the US team and the investigations team that further refinement was needed, so the data was again sent back to the US. [Uhuh! further processing, further refinement….How difficult is this? The data must be pretty damned simple AND, once you’ve subtracted the info from it, what other “refinements and processing” can possibly be required? But you don’t go into any detail whatsoever there do you?]
The results were received at approximately 14:30 on Friday 14th March, and presented to the investigations team at a high-level meeting at 21:00 on Friday. The UK AAIB, who had also been processing this data independently, presented their results – which concurred with ours and those of the US team – at that meeting. [Of course the Uk and US would concur. And since it is obvious that you need to use them to relate the info from the satellite to you, you’d HAVE to concur wouldn’t you?]
The Prime Minister was briefed on this satellite information at 08:00 Saturday 15th March, and publicly announced it at the press conference at Saturday lunchtime. Search and rescue operations were immediately shifted to the northern and southern corridor. [Your PM, then, is being manouevred by the US and UK info. I mean he won’t be a software analyst now will he?]
3. Family care
Last night in Kuala Lumpur we held a briefing for the relatives of those on board MH370. As I mentioned in yesterday’s statement, the briefing was to update family members on the latest developments, and to answer questions and clear up any confusion.
The meeting was well attended by family members from different nations, including Malaysia, and by representatives from the Chinese Embassy in Kuala Lumpur.
A high-level Malaysian delegation, including representatives from Malaysia Airlines, the Department of Civil Aviation, the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Council also attended the meeting.
We had a very constructive and frank discussion. Although we answered most of the questions they raised, we could not answer them all. These briefings will continue – at the families’ convenience – for as long as the families want them.
The briefing brought the families and the Malaysian authorities closer together, not just in terms of sharing information, but also in terms of listening to the voice of the family members. The Prime Minister’s Special Envoy to China will be co-ordinating the briefings in Kuala Lumpur from now on.
The high-level team I announced yesterday arrived in Beijing last night. Today they met with family members for three and half hours.
4. Concluding remarks
There continues to be a multinational effort co-ordinated by Malaysia and involving dozens of countries from around the world. We continue to receive offers of assistance, including specialist assets that can help with the search and rescue. We welcome all assistance as we continue to follow every credible lead.
Thursday, March 20, 05:30 PM MYT +0800 Malaysia Airlines MH370 Flight Incident – MH370 Press Briefing by Hishammuddin Hussein, Minister of Defence and Acting Minister of Transport
1. Australian satellite images
At 10:00 this morning, the Prime Minister received a call from the Prime Minister of Australia, informing him that ‘two possible objects related to the search’ for MH370 had been identified in the Southern Indian Ocean. The Australian authorities in Kuala Lumpur have also briefed me on the situation, and the Australian Foreign Minister has spoken to the Foreign Minister of Malaysia.
The Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) continues co-ordinating the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines aircraft within Australia’s search and rescue area, with assistance from the Australian Defence Force, the New Zealand Air Force, and the US Navy.
AMSA’s Rescue Co-ordination Centre (RCC) Australia has received satellite imagery of objects possibly related to the search for MH370.
RCC Australia received an expert assessment of commercial satellite imagery today. The images were captured by satellite. They may not be related to the aircraft. [It would be good if it had taken high resolution colour photos however.Which it is capable of.]
The assessment of these images was provided by the Australian Geospatial Intelligence Organisation as a possible indication of debris southwest of Perth.
As a result of this information, four aircraft have been re-orientated to an area 2,500 kilometres southwest of Perth.
A Royal Australian Air Force P-3 Orion aircraft arrived in the area at about 10:50AM.
Another 3 aircraft have been tasked by RCC Australia to the area, including a second RAAF Orion, a Royal New Zealand Air Force Orion, and a US Navy P-8 Poseidon.
The Poseidon was expected to arrive early this afternoon. The second RAAF Orion was expected to depart RAAF Base Pearce, Perth, mid-afternoon. The New Zealand Orion was due to depart this afternoon.
An RAAF C-130 Hercules aircraft has been tasked by RCC Australia to drop datum marker buoys to assist in drift modelling. They will provide an on-going reference point if the task of relocating the objects becomes protracted.
A merchant ship that responded to a shipping broadcast issued by RCC Australia on Monday was also expected to arrive in the area this afternoon.
The Royal Australian Navy ship HMAS Success is en route to the area but is some days away. The ship is well equipped to recover any objects located and proven to be from MH370.
Every effort is being made to locate the objects seen in the satellite imagery. It must be stressed that these sightings, while credible, are still to be confirmed.
[So the Australians have quite a substantial number of assets searching while HMAS Success will take two days to reach the area and there is, as yet, no confirmation of whether this satellite image relates to MH370 or just a chunk of ship debris. And yet, the Chinese are sending ships, the Japanese and the UK – which, I guess, will take more than a couple of days to reach, by which time, Australia could have confirmed the debris has nothing to do with MH370. Talk about poor fricking management! Are we dealing with sane, clear thinking people here or what? I say not!]
2. Assets deployed
The search for MH370 is a multinational effort. I will now give you an update on the assets which have been deployed.
During the course of this operation, the Chief of the Defence Force has spoken to his counterparts from countries including:
• New Zealand
• The UK
• And the USA.
All were very supportive, and all offered their assistance. As the focus of the search has moved from the South China Sea and Straits of Malacca to the northern and southern corridors, our international partners have continued to provide whatever support they can.
A number of assets have been deployed at different phases of the search and rescue operation.
Currently, there are 18 ships, 29 aircraft and 6 ship-borne helicopters deployed along the northern and southern corridors, as follows:
In the northern corridor, there are 4 aircraft:
• 2 from Malaysia
• 1 from Japan
• And 1 from the US.
In the southern corridor, there are 25 aircraft:
• 2 from Malaysia
• 5 from Australia
• 3 from China
• 4 from Indonesia
• 2 from India
• 4 from Japan
• 1 from New Zealand
• 2 from South Korea
• 1 from the UAE
• And 1 from the USA.
All 18 ships are in the southern corridor: [Yeah there’s not much call for ships on land is there?]
• 6 from Malaysia
• 1 from Australia
• 5 from China
• And 6 from Indonesia.
This deployment includes 6 helicopters:
• 3 from Malaysia, and 3 from China.
Until we are certain that we have located MH370, search and rescue operations will continue in both corridors. I can confirm that Malaysia is sending 2 aircraft to Kazakhstan, and the UK is planning to send 1 ship to the southern corridor.
In addition to the assets I just listed above, a number of countries in the northern corridor are carrying out search and rescue operations within their own territory:
• China is using every means possible, including 21 satellites, to search the area within its borders, and is ready to send more ships and aircraft wherever they are needed.
• In Cambodia, 4 helicopters are conducting search operations within Cambodian territory.
• The Laos Air Force is carrying out search operations within Laos.
• Singapore are using their International Information Fusion Centre, where a Malaysian representative is stationed, to notify mariners and help with the search.
• The Thai military are conducting search operations in the northern part of Thailand with all available aircraft.
• And Vietnam are conducting search operations within their territory using an unspecified number of aircraft.
Together this represents a significant international force deployment. I am thankful for the co-operation of our partners as we continue to focus on finding MH370.
3. Family care
The high-level team I announced yesterday is leaving for Beijing this evening.
I would also like to confirm that representatives from the Malaysian government spoke to the families who were present here yesterday.
In addition, the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy to China, and the Chinese Ambassador to Malaysia, will lead a briefing today for the Chinese families who are here in Kuala Lumpur.
Also in attendance will be the Department of Civil Aviation, the Armed Forces, the Royal Malaysia Police, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and MAS. A similar briefing will also be held for the other families.
4. Concluding remarks
For families around the world, the one piece of information they want most is the information we just don’t have: the location of MH370.
Our primary focus has always been to find the aircraft. And with every passing day, our efforts have intensified.
Yesterday I said that we wanted to reduce the area of the search. We now have a credible lead. There remains much work to be done to deploy the assets. This work will continue overnight.
Just get all your “assets” together and sail towards Diego Garcia. I think you might have a fair fight on your hands then but you’d have to torpedo the UK and US ships on the way there of course!
How can you possibly consider actions of any foreign government against you when you are relying on those foreign governments to feed you information and to help you? Sorry but DUH!
And don’t think Hishammuddin doesn’t know what I’m talking about:
Accusation of Anwar Ibrahim as a CIA agent
In July 2010, he had, along with Information Minister Rais Yatim, accused Anwar Ibrahim of being a CIA agent based on a blog article. However, Hishamuddin admitted the Home Ministry “doesn’t know if Anwar is a tool (of the CIA) or not”. This revelation was not based on any evidence, as he admitted, but on an article by an American blogger. Mysteriously, he added that “action” would only be taken if “national security” was threatened although espionage, i.e. working for a foreign intelligence agency, is a crime.
According to John Malott, a former US Ambassador in Malaysia from 1995 to 1998, this was not the first time UMNO made these accusations. In 2000, he had dealt with these allegations when the Malaysian government failed to prosecute Anwar. This time round it seems the government is unwilling to prosecute too. “Today, twelve years after I met with Abdullah (Badawi, who was then Foreign Minister), Malaysia still has not offered any proof that Anwar is an American agent – because it is NOT true,” he wrote. Malott also accused the Malaysian government and various media of disseminating false news.
Despite Hishamuddin admitting that they had no evidence to actually arrest Anwar, Rais pled to former UMNO members in PKR to rejoin the Malay party
It’s long but it truly is worth the read.
I hope you get as much a laugh out of this as I did. Well I laughed and I cried to be honest. These people are despicable, lying, deceptive bastards and it’s so clear. Corbyn, Dalyell and, yes, even Salmond know the score regarding Diego Garcia but the Crown Agents (because that is what you become when you take the seat of government – you wear two hats – Government Minister and Crown Minister) lie and evade and deceive through their teeth.
You will see, quite clearly, how the British Government (yes mine and yours) treated the Chagossians (Diego Garcia and the other island’s population). You’ll see how it just needs the UK and the US to agree a treaty and the UK buy up the land (probably at “gunpoint”) from Mauritius for a paltry £3M and then we kick out people who have lived there all their lives and then see how they fare in a land they don’t want and which doesn’t want them.
You will also pick up that Diego Garcia is also a nuclear base. Also you’ll note that the British government (Crown) just accepts whatever the Americans tell them and don’t question – because it’s not in her Majesty’s interests to question. So if the Americans simply say “We didn’t take prisoners to Diego Garcia” that’s good enough for us. Plus you will notice that DG is out of bounds for anyone but Forces personnel.
Following from that, you will recognise how Diego Garcia does not fall under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court – because it has no settled population! Well, it did, but they were thrown out so now it doesn’t. It just has forces. And the United States DOES NOT WANT to have a settled population because THEN it WOULD come under the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction!
Do you see how, at every turn, International law is a crock of shit? Do you see how they evade it because they control what it means and what it applies to?
THAT is why we have to attack the legal system and the legal person – it is ALL a crock of utter shit!
But lastly, in among all of that, there is a wondrous beauty pointing to the global deception of what we have come to be expected to believe – Climate Change/Global Warming.
You will see there is no such thing. Either that or God has given Diego Garcia (of all places) a pass. Perhaps it’s Noah’s island?
Diego Garcia/Chagos Islands
HC Deb 21 June 2004 vol 422 cc1221-2W1221W
§Jeremy CorbynTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been received from the US concerning the depopulation of the civilian population of Diego Garcia and the Chagos Islands that lie within the British Indian Ocean Territories. 
§Mr. RammellThe US authorities have in the past made clear their concerns about the presence of a settled civilian population in the British Indian Ocean Territory. However, I have received no recent representations from them on the subject.
§Sir Menzies CampbellTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what facilities exist on Diego Garcia for holding human beings against their will; and if he will make a statement. 
§Mr. StrawIn exercise of powers conferred on him by the Prisons Ordinance 1981 of the British Indian Ocean Territory, the Commissioner for the Territory has declared certain specified premises in Diego Garcia to be a prison. This was done by orders made in February 1986 (which replaced an earlier order made in July 1982), July 1993 and December 2001. Under various provisions of the law of the Territory, persons may be arrested in execution of a warrant of arrest issued by a Court or a Magistrate, or in certain circumstances without such a warrant, and any person so arrested may then be detained in such a prison until he is brought before a Court or a Magistrate. Persons who are ordered by a Court or a Magistrate to be remanded in custody or committed to prison are detained in such a prison as also, of course, are persons who are sentenced by a Court to imprisonment following their conviction of a criminal offence.
§Sir Menzies CampbellTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many detainees, and how many shipments of detainees, have passed through Diego Garcia, or the territorial waters off it, while in transit between other destinations; whether any detainees have been disembarked at Diego Garcia, and for how long; and if he will make a statement. 
§Mr. StrawThe United States authorities have repeatedly assured us that no detainees have at any time passed in transit through Diego Garcia or its territorial waters or have disembarked there and that the allegations to that effect are totally without foundation. The Government are satisfied that their assurances are correct.
Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Mr. DalyellThe right hon. Gentleman has used the words “overwhelming force” three times already. Does “overwhelming force” include the use of B61–11s? Those are the earth-penetrating nuclear weapons which, we are told, are based in the British Indian ocean territory of Diego Garcia. If there is to be overwhelming force, and if it is to involve nuclear weapons, with the B2 bombers that are based in the hangars at Diego Garcia, ought not the House of Commons to be told about it?
§Mr. AncramThe force that will be required is that which is appropriate and most effective in achieving the objective. I am certainly not going to speculate at this stage on what that force will be. Indeed, at this particular stage we need to make it clear that the United Nations resolution is the first objective to be fulfilled: only if Saddam breaches that will we consider the second option.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what applications he has received from the USA to construct new aircraft hangars on Diego Garcia; and if he will make a statement. 
§Mr. Mike O’BrienThe issue of possible upgrades to facilities at Diego Garcia has been discussed at annual talks between the UK and US governments. The details of these governmental talks are confidential and exempt under section la of The Code of practice on Access to Government Information, “Information whose disclosure would harm national security or defence”.
British Indian Ocean Territory
§Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North (Lab)I welcome the opportunity to debate what I consider to be a very serious issue. It touches on honesty in politics and in government, and it touches on issues of constitution and law and the way in which a group of people have been grievously treated by this country and, to some extent, the United States for more than 40 years.
The people who lived for hundreds of years on the Chagos Islands were descendents of its first inhabitants who had been dropped off there as slaves and traders or had settled there. They lived a settled existence, fishing and producing copra, and they inhabited an idyllic and pristine environment. Their problem was their location—the Indian ocean. The United States was eyeing it up in the 1950s and 1960s as a potential base, and subsequently decided to build what they euphemistically called a “communications facility” on the island of Diego Garcia. The communications facility turned out to be two of the longest runways that the world had seen and a base from which 4,000 US troops could operate. The base is now routinely used for the bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the United States ‘considers it to be a crucial communications facility.
Prime Minister Wilson and President Johnson discussed the matter in the 1960s and decided to do a deal and evacuate the population of Diego Garcia to make way for the American communications facility. The Americans insisted on the evacuation of not only Diego Garcia, but the entire archipelago, despite the fact that its other islands were some distance from the putative communications facility.
The language used by the then Colonial Office was outrageous beyond belief. Simon Winchester wrote a wonderful piece on the subject in Granta magazine in which he quoted the then permanent secretary in the Colonial Office who described the population inhabiting the islands as a group of “Man Fridays” and stated that it would be simple and easy enough to move them out of the way. The deal subsequently went through and, to make ready for the American base, the British authorities proceeded to remove people from the islands. However, it was never done openly.
Only two days ago outside the Foreign Office, I met a man who was part of a demonstration there. He told me that he had left the islands in 1966 and that he was not allowed to go back, as many others were not. When they went to Mauritius or the Seychelles—mainly Mauritius—for medical treatment or education, they suddenly found that they could not go back.
When the time came for the British to remove the population in earnest, they did so —putting them on a ship, taking them to Port Louis in Mauritius and simply dumping them on the quayside. When my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) speaks, I am sure that he will describe the conditions that he saw when he went to Mauritius at the time. The people were dumped there in terrible destitution. To ensure that nothing was left on the islands, the British commissioner had the problem of what to do with the islanders’ domestic animals and pets. The dogs were rounded up 272WHand gassed, all the animals were killed and the islands were left empty and uninhabited to make way for the American base.
The poor islanders were forced to eke out an existence in terrible poverty in Mauritius and the Seychelles. Ignored by everybody, they managed to survive and they never gave up two things: first, the hope, determination and desperation for the right of return; and secondly, the hope that one day, somebody, somewhere would recognise the fundamental injustice of their treatment.
Time has moved on and it is 48 years since the original and disgraceful deal was done between Wilson and Johnson, but the injustice has not gone away. I visited Mauritius a couple of years ago to meet the Chagos islanders and to see the conditions in which they live. They are very poor indeed. We have to remember, and we should remember, that the compensation that they finally won, some 15 years after the original removal from the islands had begun, was mainly eaten up by debt collectors and land agents. No one was given sufficient compensation and no one was made rich or wealthy by the process. This has been the subject of a court case that is still going on, so I cannot comment on anything more than the original facts of the case. However, it seems that the islanders were cajoled into signing what they did not believe to be a full and final settlement, and were told to accept it as such. The injustice and the poverty go on.
When I was in Mauritius, I spent a week visiting as many Chagossian families as I could. I talked to them about their lives on the Chagos Islands, when they lived there, and their lives now. They described their sustainable form of living, the type of community, religion and schools that they had and their lives in general. It was fascinating to talk to them, but one could see the hurt in their eyes at the way that they were taken from the islands and dumped on the quayside at Port Louis. Many of those families still live in desperate poverty in metal huts with outside toilets and little furniture. Although the current Mauritius Government have been kinder to them than previous ones, they are still very poor people.
Those people, however, were always going to campaign for their hope of a right of return; they would never give up. Eventually, a case was lodged in the British legal system and, in a court order of 2000, they were granted the right to return under British immigration law. It was ruled that they had the right of return. The following year, a further step forward was taken when theBritish Overseas Territories Bill was introduced in Parliament. My hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow and I raised the question of the eligibility of the Chagos islanders for British citizenship, on the basis that they would be entitled to British citizenship like everyone else in overseas territories had they not been removed from the British Indian Ocean Territory. To their credit, the Government accepted the thrust of our argument, and a Government amendment was tabled and accepted in Committee. Therefore, the islanders were given the right to British citizenship. There is, unfortunately, a grey area in which I hope ministerial discretion will be used to deal with the small number of those who have fallen outside the provisions of that law.
273WHThings looked quite good in 2000 and 2001, and a compensation claim was lodged to re-open the issue. In meetings we had at the Foreign Office with the Minister’s predecessor, Baroness Amos, on the right of return and the possibility of a visit, we thought that things were going very well. Indeed, in the Commons, Ministers have asserted two things. One is that there is a right to return, and the second is that there was no impediment to anyone going back at any time. Things were looking good, and we had hope, as did the islanders.
On 10 June this year, which everyone will remember as election day, staff at the Foreign Office were not out ensuring that people were voting. Instead, they were at the palace asking the Queen to sign an Order in Council. When I was told that an Order in Council had been signed, I misheard or misunderstood. I thought that it was a statutory instrument that I would be able to pray against, as I assumed other hon. Members would, so that decisions made by Ministers would be subject to some form of democratic accountability. I had to reconsider, and I spoke to Sheridans’ Richard Gifford, the excellent solicitor who has represented the Chagossians for many years. He calmly explained to me that I had misunderstood, and that an Order in Council signed by her Majesty was law. It overrides everything in which we believe about the democratic accountability of the Government.
There are two orders: one is the British Indian Ocean Territory (Constitution) Order and the second is the British Indian Ocean Territory (Immigration) Order. I shall just quote a little of one, to give the Chamber a flavour of it:Subject to the provisions of this Order, the Commissionerappointed under the constitution order—may make laws for the peace, order and good government of the Territory”.The order then goes on to declare,without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1)”,that the commissioner in effect becomes the supreme Governor of everything in the territory. The order says:All laws made by the Commissioner in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (1) shall be published in the Gazette in such manner as the Commissioner may direct. Every law made by the Commissioner under subsection (1) shall come into force on the date on which it is published”.We have handed power over to a commissioner. Never mind the fact that there were islanders living there and that several thousand people until that point had every right to live there; apparently, they now have no rights whatever. So much for the constitution order.
The immigration order was the second one passed, and I shall quote just two of its sections. Article 7 says:An immigration officer, acting in his entire discretion, may issue or renew a permit or may cancel a permit before the expiration, subject to the right of appeal provided in section 10.That is for people who wish to visit the Chagos Islands. Article 10 says:A person aggrieved by any decision of an immigration officer may appeal to the Commissioner, whose decision shall be final and conclusive.274WHSo the only person to whom one can appeal if one does not agree with a decision to prevent Chagos islanders going to their own islands is a commissioner appointed specifically to control the Chagos Islands in every way for evermore.
The Minister made a written statement to the House on 10 June, although frankly it should have been an oral statement and made at a time when he could have been cross-questioned about it. At least, however, we are debating the subject here in Westminster Hall today. His statement said:Following the departure of the Chagossians in the late 60s and early 70s, the economic conditions and infrastructure that had supported the community of plantation workers ceased to exist. While the judicial review proceedings were still pending, the Government therefore commissioned a feasibility study by independent experts to examine and report on the prospects for re-establishing a viable community”.—[Official Report, 10 June 2004; Vol. 422, c. 33WS.]I have some comments to make on that. The Chagossians did not depart from the islands in the 1960s and 1970s; they were rounded up, taken away and thrown off the islands. Let us not beat about the bush: that was a disgraceful, immoral act. It is time that a Minister stood up and apologised for that act committed by the Government of the time and for the treatment of the Chagos islanders by succeeding Governments.
I was kindly given the three volumes of the feasibility study by the Foreign Office when it came out in November 2000, and it said that there were problems with water supply, periodic flooding, storms, seismic activity and so on, as the Minister points out. However, it did not say that no one could live there or that life was impossible on the islands. When pressed on the matter, the Foreign Office retreats into arguments about the potential cost of resettling the Chagos islanders. I have two points on that. First, they have a moral right to return. Secondly, would any Minister stand up in the House and say that the cost of keeping the population on Pitcairn, St. Helena, Tristan da Cunha or the Falkland Islands was such that we were going to withdraw the entire population? They would not dare.
§Mr. Kelvin Hopkins (Luton, North) (Lab)My hon. Friend mentioned the Falkland Islands. Has he made any comparisons between the costs that he is talking about and the amount of money spent on defending the Falkland islanders when the Argentines invaded?
§Jeremy CorbynIndeed, the costs are on two completely different scales. The costs involved in administering the Chagos Islands are very small. At the current time, all the income from fishing licences—about £50,000 a year—is taken up by administration, and other money is paid to continue that administration. Were the islands to be resettled, however, and were there to be serious discussions with the islanders about resettling them, there would be an economy on the islands. There is fishing there, and the possibility of ecotourism or copra. Quite a lot of activities could take place on the islands. However, I do not get the feeling that there is any wish, desire, hope or intention of going down that road. The whole desire is to put the issue to one side and forget about it. That is because of an American base on Diego Garcia, for 275WHwhich I suspect nothing is paid, and because the Americans have said that they do not want anyone anywhere near their base owing to security concerns.
I think that we have every right to ensure the settlement of the outer islands—at least—and that we have a right to know exactly what is happening on Diego Garcia, which is, under the terms of the colonial order, sovereign British territory. Are there any prisoners on Diego Garcia? Is it being used for the sort of vortex of American justice such as occurs in Guantanamo Bay? I am assured that it is not. I want to hear that assurance again today and it would be much better if there were an independent inspection of what is going on.
I will make only a couple more points because I want to make sure that other Members get a chance to speak. On Tuesday, a group of Chagos islanders went to the Foreign Office to demonstrate. They handed in a petition signed by a substantial number of Chagos islanders who are living in this country legally. The petition demands:
- “1. Restoration of our right of abode in the outer islands of the territory.
- 2. Restoration of our fundamental rights as British Overseas Territories Citizens.
- 3. The immediate payment of compensation.
- 4. The setting up of a pilot resettlement in the outer islands.
- 5. The setting up of a social survey in Mauritius and the Seychelles with recommendations to support the vulnerable group of our community.
- 6. The organising of a visit to the ancestral sites in the British Indian Ocean Territory for the Chagossians living in Mauritius, Seychelles and the UK”
—and, presumably, anywhere else in the world. It seems to me that that is a minimal demand. I had a response from the Minister today and I hope that he will be able to give us further positive news on the possibility of a visit and a return to it.
Mr. HopkinsIt strikes me that there is something of a parallel between what has happened to the Chagos islanders and the highland clearances in Scotland, when the rich and powerful drove the poor and weak from the land. That has scarred and informed Scottish politics ever since. Is it not significant that two of the three speakers here today are Scots?
§Mr. SalmondI am glad that the hon. Gentleman raised that point, because I was about to come to it. One of the first and better acts of the Scottish Parliament when it came back into existence on the mound was in a debate such as this when it apologised collectively for the historic injustice of the highland clearances. They were not the responsibility of any Scottish Parliament, but it was felt none the less by all parties in that Parliament that such an apology should be offered, and that was done by representatives of all the parties. I very much hope that the Minister will do exactly what the hon. Gentleman suggested and proffer some sort of apology to the few thousand Chagos islanders who deserve not just an apology but some sign that future action and policy will be different from that in the past.
The islanders won the High Court judgment in 2000, which was in the days of ethical foreign policy. I shared the hopes that were expressed earlier that at last something would be done to rectify the historical 278WHgrievance and injustice. I accepted, as I think did many islanders, that there was an American base of long standing on Diego Garcia and that it might not be possible for all the islands to be reinhabited. However, basic rights—such as the right to visit the graves of ancestors, to occupy the outer islands and to receive reasonable compensation, and the right of the duty of care that any Government and the Crown should have over these people—should have been respected as de minimis compensation for the wrongs and injustices of the past. In fact, none of that occurred, and instead the Government, in a sneaky, underhand way, passed two Orders in Council on European election day to prohibit debate, to remove what little rights had been won and to rectify loopholes in legislation that allowed the assertion of the human rights of the islanders and their descendants.
The analysis that the islands are no longer capable of sustaining occupation because of global warming must be pretty bad news for the American military base—perhaps the runway is about to disappear under water. I have an overwhelming feeling that if Mauritius could be persuaded to send just one gunboat to the outer islands to establish the Mauritian flag again in what is arguably its territory anyway, we would decide that the islands were worth reclaiming on behalf of the Crown and dispatch a taskforce to the Indian ocean.
Global warming is an interesting concept, because it conflicts rather dramatically with what is on the US navy website. In a welcoming introduction to “The Footprint of Freedom” and Camp Justice, Diego Garcia is described as a paradise on earth and it is said that one of the best stationings that any US serviceman can have is on Diego Garcia. The website states:Although it is a British Territory, there are fewer than 50 British personnel (or Brits as they are commonly known) on the island.The Minister had better explain how the Government claim to know better than many respectable outlets of the US press. The Washington Post, for example, claims that prisoners are held on Diego Garcia for “rendering” before being transferred to Camp X-Ray. How confident is the Foreign Office in the information that the US authorities have offered it on what is happening on Diego Garcia, given that the Prime Minister seems to be revising his previous confidence in judgments that he has made about the international situation? Ultimately, the Minister should accept the collective responsibility of this and previous Governments for what has been done to the islanders. An apology should be proffered, but above all there should be a change of approach and of policy by the Government, who should offer some justice and some compensation to the islanders.
It may be thought that because of indolence or lack of concern among most Members of Parliament—there are a few honourable exceptions, who are here today such an issue is of no great moment, but it is precisely such issues that are of great political moment, because no member of the public could hear and understand what has happened to the islanders without having an overwhelming sense of injustice. If the Government cannot rectify the wrongs of the past for these few thousand people, what hope is there for their having any moral compass on the great issues of the day? Unless the Government are prepared to act and rectify the wrongs of the past, they are, in a moral sense, every bit as homeless as the islanders of Diego Garcia.
Let none of us suppose that there is a complete lack of interest in this country on this issue. When the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) had the opportunity to put a question to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, I was in company in Scotland. However, I subsequently heard, not only in university circles but more widely, that it was an important question. Indeed, some people went so far as to observe that it was the most sensible question asked of the Prime Minister for some weeks.
My hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) has inspired an important debate, but perhaps it comes 40 years too late. It was in 1964 that the Government began misdescribing the long-settled population as transitory workers in order to mislead the world into thinking that they had no obligations to that population. My clear recollection is that I raised the subject with the then Foreign Secretary, Patrick Gordon Walker. Frankly, having been defeated at Smethwick and about to be defeated at Leyton, his mind was on other things. A later Foreign Secretary was George Brown. When the general problem of the British Indian Ocean Territory was raised with him, he told me, in colourful language, to mind my own business. Perhaps I was not as tough then as subsequently, but George Brown was a formidable operator in his heyday. I raised the subject on the prompting of the late Sir Ashley Miles, the biological secretary of the Royal Society. It was his concern about the Indian ocean that first raised my acute interest.
Article 73 of the United Nations casts a “sacred trust” on a sovereign power to promote the welfare and advancement of the people, but the Government surreptitiously deported the islanders and misled the world about their status. At the United Nations on 16 November 1965, the British representative Mr. F.D.W. Brown, acting on the instructions of the Foreign Office, misdescribed the islands asuninhabited when my government first acquired them”,misdescribed the population aslabourers from Mauritius and Seychellesand misled the UN into stating that the new administrative arrangements had beenfreely worked out with the…elected representatives of the people concerned”.Instead, they bought the plantations, closed them down, forced the people to leave on boats, which incidentally were horribly overcrowded, and led them to exile, where they still remain. Their lives have been a tragedy of misery, poverty and despair, the only alleviation of which has been the heartfelt desire to return to their homeland, where their villages and ancestors lie.
In 1969, on my return from Australia, I stopped in Mauritius to stay the night with the former general secretary of the Labour party, Len Williams. Harold Wilson had wanted him out of Transport house and made him Governor-General of Mauritius. His wife Margaret Williams was a very intelligent and nice lady, and she decided that I should spend a morning with some Ilois people. It made a strong impression on me.
What is remarkable is that in the same speech by Mr. Brown representing the Foreign Office, he described the wishes of the Falkland islanders, whose 280WHrepresentatives were consulted. Here we return to a previous intervention and a proper comparison with the Falkland islanders, of whom Mr. Brown said:It has been suggested that this population is somehow irrelevant and that it has no claim to have its wishes taken into account …it would surely be fantastic to maintain that only indigenous inhabitants have any rights in the Country”.He then quoted Woodrow Wilson from 1918:Peoples and Provinces are not to be bartered about from sovereignty to sovereignty as if they were chattels or pawns in a game”.Within months, the Chagos Islands had been given to the United States and the destruction of the islanders’ homes and lives was soon to follow.
These days, we are all too familiar with conducting foreign policy on the basis of false or misleading facts. The historical record now revealed by the islanders’ legal struggle has after 30 years shown that a small and vulnerable population of British subjects can safely be written out of the history book on the pretext that they are not really a population at all. There is nothing new in deceiving the world while acting in breach of civilised standards of international and constitutional law. That point was made by my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North in his powerful speech.
When the islanders finally won their struggle to return in the High Court in November 2000, Lord Justice Laws stated:The people are to be governed, not removed.He also stated that the Immigration Ordinance 1971 was an “abject legal failure”, which hadno colour of lawful authority.That is not my view but that of a distinguished Law Lord.
We are supposed to have an ethical foreign policy. The then Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook), accepted the Court’s judgment and said:I have decided to accept the Court’s ruling and the Government will not be appealing.The work we are doing on the feasibility of resettlement of Ilois now takes on a new importance. We started feasibility work a year ago and are now well under way with phase two of the study.Furthermore, we will put in place a new immigration ordinance which allows Ilois to return to the outer islands while observing our treaty obligations.The Government has not defended what was done or said 30 years ago. As Lord Justice Laws recognised, we made no attempt to conceal the gravity of what happened”.History is repeating itself with the same moral turpitude. This time, given that the islanders had already been promised that the Government’s policy was to move towards their resettlement on the islands, the new banishment is a cruel change to what has already been offered. Moreover, the reasons given are again based on inaccurate and misleading information.
The Foreign Office press statement claimed that it was the feasibility study that prevented resettlement. I am glad that this Minister is replying to the debate, and I thank him for his personal courtesy in seeing my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North and me in the Foreign Office. He cited a conclusion, supposedly made by the consultants in their executive summary, that the costs of maintaining long-term inhabitation are likely to 281WHbe prohibitive. However, that was not based on any work of the consultants, whose terms of reference precluded any consideration of cost. Even if he had read only the executive summary, he would know from page 3 that the consultants reported:This report has not been tasked with investigating the financial costs and benefits of resettlements”.I feel entitled to ask where the conclusion came from. It was certainly not from the consultants.
The Minister further stated thathuman interference within the Atolls…is likely to exacerbate the stress on the marine and terrestrial environment and will accelerate the effect of global warming.However, other things might accelerate global warming.Thus”,he continued,resettlement is likely to become less feasible over time”.Again, that judgment was not based on the work of the consultants, who stated in volume 3, paragraph 8.3:At the present time it is not possible to quantify the risk associated with climate change for the Chagos Islands.The Minister’s conclusion had crept in from somewhere else.
Finally, it is impossible to take seriously the suggestion that only a resettled population will face difficulties. Are we really to believe that the 64 islands offered back to the islanders by the then Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Livingston, are going to sink under the waves, while the one island occupied by the Americans is to provide defence facilities for generations to come? It is the biggest military base outside the continental United States.
Only yesterday, in the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Sedley referred to the shameful treatment to which the islanders were subjected:The deliberate misinterpretation of Ilois history and status, designed to deflect any investigation by the United Nations, the use of legal powers designed for the governance of the islands for the illicit purpose of depopulating them, the consequent uprooting of scores of families from the only way of life and means of subsistence that they knew, the failure to make anything like adequate provision for their resettlement, all of this and more is now part of the historical record.Moreover, he went so far as to compare those removals with the highland clearances of the second quarter of the 19th century. He stated:Defence may have replaced agricultural improvement as the reason, but the pauperisation and the expulsion of the weak in the interests of the powerful is the same. It gives little to be proud of.Now there has been a cruel new blow to this mistreated population. Their hopes, which were raised by this Government, have been dashed. Nothing in this game of cat and mouse is any less culpable than the lies and inhumanity that characterised the removal of the population.
It is not, however, too late to render justice. The right of the islanders to return to their homeland should now be recognised, and proper scientific studies should be undertaken, with proper, independent input from respected scientists whose conclusions ought to be binding on the Government.
I am pleased to be able to make a brief contribution to the debate. I am relatively new to this subject, but when I read the press reports a few weeks ago I could not believe that the Government, whom I so strongly support, are taking this action. I know the Minister to be a good man, and I cannot believe that his sleep is not a little troubled due to these problems.
The test of any Government, or any man or woman, is how they deal wit h injustices felt by powerless people. I urge the Minister to make a stand on this issue; if there are forces beyond his office, outside or within the Foreign Office, that are urging this course of action, I urge him to take a stand. I have looked at the press release—that is all we can go on as to the reasons why we are taking this action. I could see four: the risk of flooding; the precarious nature of life for any people who return; the effect on the delicate marine and terrestrial life caused by people who return; and the cost.
With regard to the risk of flooding, I have consulted one or two experts on the level of the land there, and a lot of it is higher than that in East Anglia. We know about flooding in my constituency of Selby, and if we accepted the argument on flooding that the Government are using, half of my constituency would be depopulated. Some outlying islands were inhabited in the past, and some were based on banks that were shifting in storms. There were tall copra trees on the islands and the inhabitants had worked out a mode of living—growing copra successfully, and in some cases raising huts on stills. The argument does not seem overwhelming to me.
We have talked about the precarious nature of the life that would face any islanders who returned to the outer islands. The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) was rather restrained and understated in quoting the American publicity about the islands. I shall detain the Chamber for a moment to give a little more flavour of what the US navy says about Diego Garcia in its message to its recruits. It says that Diego Garcia boastsunbelievable recreational facilities and exquisite natural beautyas well as “outstanding” living conditions. There is no mention of the threat of imminent demise from flooding. In fact, I understand that the US is seeking to extend the lease on its base, which would expire in 2016, so it is thinking long term. There is a windsurfers club, a yacht club, an annual Miss Diego Garcia competition, regular picnics to what the US describes as some of the best unspoiled beaches in the world, fishing, snorkelling and a beauty parlour. It does not sound that precarious to me.
As for the delicate marine and terrestrial life, the impact of the 1,500 US personnel, the British personnel, the 2,000 civilian contractors and the various military equipment must be at least as worrying, if it is the major concern, as the effect of some islanders returning to the outer islands.
The cost of returning is obviously a serious matter. From a preliminary scan of the literature, it is very difficult to work out whether any payment has ever been made by the US Government for the use of the island.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) on securing the debate and on setting out in stark terms a dark chapter in our history and the impact it has had on the Chagos islanders. Other Members have dwelt at length on the history of what has happened, but I want to focus on the immediate past, the present and the future.
On resettlement, the Government statement of 15 June, which banned all rights of return of the Chagos people to their homeland, relied in part for its justification on the findings of the June 2002 feasibility study on the resettlement of the islands. Several hon. Members have referred to that and I want to highlight a couple of points.
That report concluded that the resettlement of the islanders would be prohibitively expensive and precarious to their safety. The Minister will be aware that Jonathan Jenness, who is a resettlement expert, carried out an independent review of that study. He examined the claims that the Government-inspired report made and it is clear that the Government’s consultants were not given the task of assessing the financial costs and benefits of resettlement. The Department for International Development has not carried out, or received, any estimate of costs of the resettlement of the islands. I would be interested to know whether any Department has such figures.
On the safety of the environment, the review conducted by Mr. Jenness found that the Chagos Islands have a “benign environment” and that no available material can assess the possible consequences of global warming. As several hon. Members have pointed out, the Minister must explain why a micro 284WHclimate exists in Diego Garcia, which ensures that it is safe from global warming, whereas the rest of the islands are under threat.
On resettlement in general, the review of the study—undertaken by Mr. Jenness—says thatit is fatuous to imagine that the islands cannot be resettled…they were settled, successfully for several generations”.Of course, Diego Garcia is successfully settled by the Americans and the BIOT administration. What assessment have the Government conducted of the review by Jonathan Jenness? Can they make any such assessment public, so that we can see how they responded to the valid points he made? I hope the Minister can say whether any discussions took place between the UK and the US Governments on these matters in the run-up to the decision that was taken on 15 June?
On compensation, to which other hon. Members have referred, it is clear that the level provided was insufficient and that when the Chagos islanders entered into the arrangement that we are discussing it was not made clear to them precisely what they were signing up to.
On visitation rights, the Minister must say why the security concerns are so great that people are not, for instance, allowed to return to visit graves. Before I turn to the issue of Camp Justice, I will discuss the report in today’s papers that Mauritius may sue for Diego Garcia. Perhaps he can say also what discussions have taken place with the Mauritian Prime Minister on that subject. How many times has the UK been taken to the International Court of Justice—that is what is being proposed? Has the Prime Minister replied to Mr. Berenger’s letter? I understand that he is very angry not to have received a response. Can we have assurances from the Minister that the Government will not retaliate and perhaps take it out on the Mauritian Government in relation to subsidies that they receive for sugar?
Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Mr. Tam Dalyell(Linlithgow)I echo what the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) said about the affront to democracy. I shall set an example by making a speech which is much shorter than 10 minutes. It is in the form of a question, and it is apposite that a Minister from the Ministry of Defence should be answering this debate.
My hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) and I have been much involved in the case of the Chagos islanders. Their lawyers told us of a problem with the Ilois returning to Diego Garcia because of the building of six huge temperature-controlled hangars. We were asked what we would do to protest to the Government about that. We asked what the hangars were for. Apparently they are for B52 bombers and, particularly, B2 bombers that have to be repaired and maintained in a particular temperature. Why does one have B2 bombers? It is particularly to carry earth-penetrating nuclear weapons, specifically the B61–11.
My question, which I hope will be addressed in the reply, is this: we are talking about a British base, the British Indian Ocean Territory, of which Diego Garcia is a part and which is a House of Commons responsibility. The House of Commons should be told if nuclear weapons, albeit tactical, earth-penetrating nuclear weapons to destroy bunkers—one can understand why the American air force may wish to have this particular weapon in relation to Iraq—are to be launched from British soil, with or without agreement by the United States air force. We should be told in the winding-up speech tonight.
First, the issue is not about human rights in Iraq. The Foreign Secretary made great play of them and the dossier covers them. We need no persuading that Saddam Hussein’s regime is about the most evil in the world today. It has committed atrocities on a scale unseen almost anywhere else, but that does not justify armed intervention 52in Iraq. If I may say so, it is something of a red herring. The debate is about something wider, more important and of greater application to the world outside Iraq.
Secondly, there can be no controversy about the evidence that Saddam Hussein has developed, and is continuing to develop apace, weapons of mass destruction. The dossier, which puts forward the evidence in a calm and measured way, makes the case conclusively. Surely that can no longer be a matter of dispute.
Thirdly, does Saddam having and developing such weapons amount to a threat sufficient in immediacy and gravity to justify armed military intervention, even as a last resort? As my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) said in a powerful, lucid and cogent speech—I am afraid that I did not agree with much of it—the threat issue is a matter of judgment. Everyone has to make their judgment about the gravity and immediacy of that threat.
We must look at other countries that have developed weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and ask ourselves what it is that distinguishes Iraq from, for example, India, Pakistan or even Iran. The answer is that there is clear evidence from the history of the Saddam Hussein regime that it is fundamentally an aggressive regime. He has developed these weapons, not as an instrument of deterrence to deter attacks on Iraq, but as weapons of aggression. In the past 20 years, the regime has twice invaded its neighbours. On a number of occasions, it has launched ballistic missiles against neighbouring states. It is not a regime under external threat that has developed these weapons to create a mutual deterrence, as is the case with India and Pakistan—regrettably, perhaps, but one can understand the reason for them doing so. Those considerations do not apply to Iraq.
In my judgment, this threat is clear, serious and present enough to justify decisive intervention by the international community in whatever shape that takes to enforce a disarmament of the regime.
My fourth point is about the threat to the stability of the middle east and was raised by my right hon. and learned Friend and others. We should be very clear about this: the greatest threat to the stability of the middle east is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. Quite apart from the actual attacks that he has mounted against his neighbours in the past 20 years, the fact that he consistently sponsors suicide attacks by Palestinians helps to prevent the peace process that we all yearn to be restarted from resuming. It is hard to see how the successful disarming and removal of Saddam Hussein can do anything other than contribute to the stability of the middle east.
Of course, the same concerns were expressed before the Gulf war, 12 years ago, but in fact the successful conclusion of the Gulf war was the trigger for the start of the Oslo process—
Guantanamo Bay: British Detainees
My Lords, first, I thank both noble Lords for the welcome that they have given the Statement. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Howell, that we particularly welcome the context in which he started his comments. However, I think it is only fair to say that none of us envisaged the possibility of two armed aeroplanes being flown into buildings in the way that occurred on 11 September. That was a dramatic shock to the international community……
In relation to the issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire, about whether there are people being kept at Diego Garcia and elsewhere, the US has confirmed to us that there are no such detainees. Of course, we rely on that assurance.
12.46 Intriguing new line from The Malay Mail Online.
Police scouring Capt Shah’s flight simulator – which he installed in his home – have found five Indian Ocean practice runways.
One is in the Maldives.
One is on Diego Garcia.
The other three are in India and Sri Lanka.
So, not such a crazy idea after all. We have the Anwar/Globalist issue. Anwar now coming out to admit he’s related to the pilot. We know why the west wants to destabilise Malaysia and we know the CIA are active in Malaysia and have been for some time. We also know the Council on Foreign Relations is happy with Anwar and the west definitely want him as their man in Malaysia.
We know it is highly unlikely that this plane could have travelled across multiple territories such as the northern arc suggests without being spotted. The southern arc leads to nowhere. So what’s left?
Why fly over Maldives instead of direct to Diego Garcia? Well it makes sense to me. You see, by doing so (if, in fact it did) it would give the possibility of being spotted by the Maldives. It would then suggest that the plane was heading to Africa. The straight line between Maldives and Africa suggests the flight is heading toward…..
And we all know who live in Somalia don’t we? It’s full of pirates and Al Qaeda! 🙂 So we’re told by our wonderful media programming on behalf of our governments.
So then what do we expect next? Well, what I expect is for Israel to start screaming! “Oy vey! Oy Vey! They have a plane now in Somalia loaded up with nuclear bombs. The Iranians are in on it! We need to destroy Iran before they use it. They’re going to wipe out Jerusalem and the Temple Mount! Oy vey! Oy vey! The International community must now attack Iran and Somalia and destroy half the middle east so we, god’s people, can continue to live on this planet, in peace and suck the life out of every last living human creature with our monetary system!”
Ok perhaps I’ve slightly overdone what the Israeli’s might say and demand but have I? They’re fricking “religious” (yet atheist?!) nutters! And they’re desperate for a war!
Yes you read that right. From ZETA – a group of what I guess we have to call humans who like to fuck animals.
So, by the same token, the mere concept of morality regarding sexually abusing a child or even murder have no business being law. If this is the way you want your world to go and this is the world you want your children and grandchildren to live in, then just keep liberally accepting the “progressive” laissez faire and “live and let live” and “Do what thou wilt” culture of depravity that just keep creeping along while our governments don’t listen to the moral concerns of most people but give way to the well funded minority groups who lobby. When did you ever hear of a group of lobbyists for “normality”? Never.
then omnisexuality (anything goes)
One thing though: When did you ever hear of a donkey speaking a language and, therefore, giving consent? Or do the zoophiliacs suggest that “Eee haw” is chinese for “Yes please”? ‘Mere concepts of morality have no business being law,’ said ZETA chairman Michael Kiok. Just state it is a “lifestyle choice” and demand your “human rights” to make such a choice and hey presto! You get a licence to shag a sheep! But people like Dharmabro (an ex commenter on here) can’t really say anything against it (thereby supporting it) because, as he says “homosexuality is natural and exists in the natural world”. Yes Dharmabro it does. Just as cross species sexual activity does, therefore, that MUST be ok too. You can’t argue with that otherwise your entire reasoning for homosexuality being “natural” is damned – which, by the way, it is. So what we have here is the homosexual community, simply by their own reasoning, support bestiality. It might not be their preference BUT, if they speak out against it, they are hypocrites and, not only that, they are zoo-o-phobes! Now you don’t want to be labeled a “‘phobe” of any type now do you homos? So what’s your way out? I can’t HEAR you! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2352779/Bestiality-brothels-spreading-Germany-campaigner-claims-abusers-sex-animals-lifestyle-choice.html What I find strange with this comment re “his once friendly flock of sheep were beginning to shy away from human contact” is that do the new batch of sheep never see the older batch being taken away by humans and slaughtered? Doesn’t it even occur to them? Stupid sheep! But then who are we humans to talk? We ignore the shearing of ourselves by the governmental and banking shepherds. BAAAHH!
“Mere concepts of morality have no business being law”
And there lies the entire problem because, in fact, as has been stated by the lawmakers themselves on many occasions, morality does not enter into it. In fact, lawyers I have personally been up against stated such in their reply saying they believed my argument to be a moral rather than legal one. It was both but, nevertheless, they had the audacity to state it.
What TV PROGRAMMING do you watch?
Isn’t it interesting that one of the longest running series on TV anywhere in the world, is a PROGRAMME entitled “Coronation Street”? Think of all the PROGRAMMES which have been broadcast on the BBC/ITV and other stations over the years. Many excellent dramas etc but only ONE remains and just keeps going. Yes it’s because it gets the audience. Of course. But there are others which got audiences just as big for the time they were broadcast. The establishment maintain Coronation Street because it does its job excellently. The writers for it keep churning out the stories and plot lines that keep so many watching and those watching will support the series as being “current” and full of plot lines which make you think. Yes indeed. That is precisely what they intend it to be. Through those story lines, they embed within your mind what subjects should be considered by you. They even make certain subjects taboo or not taboo just by the way they are presented. The sheer fact some ARE presented suggests to the mind of the observer that “this is acceptable”. Gay is acceptable, transsexualism is acceptable, SUICIDE is acceptable, wanting to die so as not to be a burden on your loved ones or society is acceptable and noble! Just keep feeding it all in and, eventually, that acceptance will be achieved.
But very few give any consideration to the agenda which is being promulgated in all of this. They just view it as “entertainment” while being a statement, at times, on present society. They cannot even fathom that it exists as a solid society changer within a far bigger picture. That’s just “crazy talk” and taking things too far.
No dearies, it’s not.
In the early 1900s Fabian Society members advocated the ideal of a scientifically planned society and supported eugenics by way of sterilization. This is said to have influenced the passage of the Half-Caste Act, and its subsequent implementation in Australia, where children were systematically and forcibly removed from their parents, so that the British colonial regime could “protect” the Aborigine children from their parents. In an article published in The Guardian on 14 February 2008 (following the apology offered by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to the “stolen generations“), Geoffrey Robertson criticised Fabian socialists for providing the intellectual justification for the eugenics policy that led to the stolen generations scandal. Such views on socialism, inequality and eugenics in early 20th century Fabians were not limited to one individual, but were widely shared in the Fabian Society and throughout a broad political spectrum.
While living and working in Singapore for over 5 years, the following has been of no surprise to me whatsoever considering that Singapore is, effectively (and very definitely) a “Labour camp” which does not even recognise itself as such. If you are an outsider looking in however (and I don’t mean a hop-over for a few days on the way to Australia when all you appreciate is what is on show on the surface while you do not have a clue about the undercurrent of sheer misery) it is as close to communism for the masses who then work for Singapore PLC while the elite sit in their ivory castles and decide at what age and under what circumstances people are allowed a home for themselves to live in – it is what is coming in the west, slowly and gradually……
Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore, stated in his memoirs that his initial political philosophy was strongly influenced by the Fabian Society. However, he later altered his views, considering the Fabian ideal of socialism as impractical. In 1993, Lee said:
“They [Fabian Socialists] were going to create a just society for the British workers – the beginning of a welfare state, cheap council housing, free medicine and dental treatment, free spectacles, generous unemployment benefits. Of course, for students from the colonies, like Singapore and Malaya, it was a great attraction as the alternative to communism. We did not see until the 1970s that that was the beginning of big problems contributing to the inevitable decline of the British economy.”—Lee Kuan Yew interview with Lianhe Zaobao
Singapore not a country one would want to live
Ladies and Gentlemen,Singapore is just one big fraud. And underneath all that glitter, it is really not a place someone who had a choice would want to live.
On the outside Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew paints a picture of a modern first class city. You have TV newsreaders who try to speak good English imitating someone from any other city like London, but with one difference. Those in London are free of government censorship while the Singaporean specimen reads out prepared texts vetted by government agencies. You have newspapers published in glossy paper just like in London, except in Singapore they are state owned and controlled, where journalists report to government ministers on what they have plan to write. You see lawyers all dressed in black dragging modern briefcases with books overflowing with wisdom, but in actual fact they are more afraid of the government than their clients ever were.
If you fall into hard times you starve unless you go to some government minister’s office and beg on all fours for a handout. In the west there are established procedures for welfare for the unfortunate in society to live with their heads up.
Singapore has no place for people who want to better society towards a more humane and compassionate one. The political philosophy is that of Lee Kuan Yew which is not very different perhaps from how the Chinese peasants lived under the Ming or Tang Dynasty many centuries ago. Which goes something like this. You wake up in the morning, go to work, be respectful towards your rulers and superiors, don’t think you know any better than your masters and work your way up the ladder through the recognition of your superiors. Of course above all your superiors there is the great master or leader who is better and wiser than all. In the case of the Chinese Dynasty, it was the Ming or Tang emperor. In the case of Singapore, it is Lee Kuan Yew and in his absence, his son.
I am sorry but this is not the way I like to live. And neither do I think anyone who has an understanding of the way things are going on in the island and has the means to live somewhere else.
So what is left of native Singaporeans are those who simply cannot leave because of lack of skills or an understanding of their plight or those who are not concerned about living as free men an women as long as they earn sufficiently large amounts of money. In this group are the Lee Kuan Yew minions who stay behind.
You have of course the foreign Western businessmen and professionals who do business in the island. For them it is only a case of making money. They are naturally not concerned about how they live their lives since it is not their country and they are there for short periods, when they will go hone to France, Germany or the USA. Most of them leave their families at home in the West and even if they bring them here, they study at foreign schools with their German, Italian or American teachers. As far as they are concerned, they despise Singaporeans for a cowardly people, willing to live as slaves in Lee Kuan Yew’s island, which they would not in America, Germany or France.
Then there are the middle level professionals, some from England, Australia, India and other places. For a variety of reasons, they spend some time in Singapore working as engineers, bank officers, and executives. They too are totally unconcerned about how Singaporeans have to live their lives since they are here temporarily. In 6 months, if they got a better job in Rangoon Burma, they would spend some time there if possible.
In the end, all you have in Singapore at the upper levels is the revolving door phenomenon. People come in for a time, and then leave, only to be replaced by other people who come in and who themselves leave too.
If there are going to be anyone left behind to run the place, it is the handful of sycophants and crawlers who willingly take orders from above as to what to do, regardless of right or wrong. And their numbers are shrinking too, as Singapore students leave for a foreign education and opt to remain where they are. Singapore is reaching a point where it cannot find sufficiently capable people to run the show and this is entirely because of what Singapore is today, a life of submission and obedience, which people with an education find unacceptable.
Unless the native Singaporeans who have a stake in the country take drastic real earth shattering action to demand a democratic system of government, literally taking Lee Kuan Yew to task, I don’t see him doing anything to arrest the decline into which Singapore is sliding.
Attorney at Law
Disbarred from practicing law in Lee’s Singapore, imprisoned and refused entry to the island for criticizing Singapore’s judiciary in this blog (see blogpost May 29, 2008 Singapore. Judge Belinda Ang’s Kangaroo Court)
Actively practicing law in California and in good standing at the California Bar.
Member in good standing as a lawyer in England and Wales (Barrister).
39737 Paseo Padre Parkway, Suite A1
Fremont, CA 94538, USA
Tel: 510 657 6107
Fax: 510 657 6914
This leaves us with a further problematic interpretation of the stakeholder concept – that related to the welfare state. No sooner had Mr Blair sat down in the Far East than maverick Labour MP Frank Field was claiming the speech heralded a root and branch reform of pensions and benefits. It is certainly true that the present welfare system does not protect workers from summary restriction of pension and unemployment insurance “rights” which they believed the state had bestowed. While it is unthinkable in a free society for the state to rescind individual property rights – indeed they are so deeply-rooted that they have often re-emerged in eastern Europe after 50 years of communism – the same is not true of the communal pension and benefit rights bestowed under a democratic welfare state.
One way of remedying this problem is to require individuals to build up their own “provident accounts” on the Singapore model of forced savings. These can be used for unemployment insurance, education, pensions and even housing. Since they are individually assigned accounts, and fully funded by supporting investments, they cannot be lightly cancelled by the state, and would certainly be compatible with a stakeholder economy. But would a generation which is already heavily taxed to pay for the unfunded pensions of its parents now vote for a second dose of forced savings to pay for their own pensions as well? It seems rather doubtful, to put it mildly. This may be another area where New Labour needs to proceed cautiously as it puts meat on the bones of the stakeholder idea.
Then we have the following from the book: ” Autobiography and Decolonization- Modernity, Masculinity, and the Nation-state” By Philip Holden
Do you see it? I have been saying to people for some years now that the way the UK is going is precisely what I saw when I lived in Singapore. Gopalan Nair is precisely correct when he speaks about the expats having disdain for the slaves who make up the populace in Singapore. I did at the time but I was unaware and ignorant of what I know now about the world because I was just too busy making a living until what happened to Gopalan happened to me and the corruption, which lay underneath the squeaky clean pavements you thought you could eat your dinner off, hit you right between the eyes.
But then you also have this, from the CFR and Henry Kissinger re Lee Kuan Yew:
So why diverge into all of this stuff about Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew and fabianism when the post is meant to be about Coronation Street for god’s sakes?
Well, it’s simple really. To achieve what Lee Kuan Yew achieved takes decades and it will take decades here too. What needs to be done is create, over time, and entirely multi-cultural society (that said, Singapore isn’t quite as multi-cultural as it likes to portray itself. It’s still 80% chinese and the rest (Indian and Malay in the main) are second and third class citizens. The expats are a little “oasis” of their own and Singapore does its best to make them feel “at home” and comfortable BUT, you hit any issue (as I did) and the vultures come out to tear you apart because you’re “making money” and they see a way of getting it back while why would a Singaporean lawyer and judiciary give a damn about what they did to you and your family? It’s just business and you’re primed to be stripped of whatever they can get their hands on – with no jurisdiction, it doesn’t matter, they’ll fuck you over and over.
Anyhow, there’s the multiculturalism to cause even more division in the populace – therefore there is no one voice shouting at our corrupt government – plus there is the total change of the benefits and pensions structure. You see most people are squealing at the conservatives for the austerity measures and the benefits issue but, in fact, it all started a very long time ago and, to give the creep his due (David Icke that is) it has been a totalitarian tiptoe to where we are now. Again, it doesn’t matter who’s in power – Labour, Tory or Libdem – because they don’t create the policy, they just implement it. It’s the Crown which dictates from the shadows and the Crown like Lee Kuan Yew because they see he’s created that slave driven powerhouse on an island no larger than Greater London.
Now, you have a massive proportion of the UK who regularly and faithfully tune into Coronation Street (Coronation? Crown? Indeed!) and that one long time serial drama has fed (but, in many respects, created) the morality of this nation while they now have another vehicle, long standing, which doubles that effort called “Eastenders”. Both drip feeding into the collective consciousness almost night after night. Most thinking they are just reflecting society as they go along. Wrong! They are, in many respects, creating society by colouring stories the way the establishment want them coloured. Have you also noticed another thing about these series? They tend to be pro monarchy all in all. Coincidence? Not at all. And just like the Queen’s celebrations and the Queen’s speech, Lee Kuan Yew has his “Singapore Days” where he has his media create a celebratory atmosphere of pride in the country tied into “democracy” (a joke) and all thing wonderful and historic. Precisely what we do here. And it works and always will.
So back to the eugenics message Coronation Street has just fed you.
Here is George Bernard Shaw, a fabian just like Kuan Yew and Blair (and quietly our entire establishments):
Got that? Now please don’t think or consider this is just one very “mad” man from many decades ago. If you do so then you’re just allowing yourself to be wilfully ignorant of everything going on around you. Shaw’s words reflect Singaporean (and soon British) society to a T. Singapore is an economic slave camp where anything but democracy exists and yet the British government treat Singapore as an exemplary example of democracy and success at work yet families have to stay together in small HDB flats because there is no welfare state (all tax receipts are for the top echelons) and they must support each other through their entire “lifecycle” and I use the term “lifecycle” because singaporeans are nothing more than products/resources to keep the machine running. There is no quality of life in Singapore (but they have been taught/conditioned to believe there is and be intensely proud of their achievements – which are all economic but not for them personally rather than simply for the singaporean elite to tell them “how lucky they are” and they believe it. Some don’t however but their lives can become very difficult (just as Gopalan’s did). The same thing is happening with those of us who speak out too loudly in the UK now too.
“Done very gently”…. i.e. humanely not cruel while Hesmondhalgh herself is a member of the Humanist society. A society which pitches itself as being pro human but is as much pro human as the World Wildlife Fund is pro wildlife.
Then we have to remember Newsweek and Time magazines in the last couple of years presenting us with these articles:
So a little more on eugenics:
“Oh that’s about a century ago!” I hear you say. God! You just don’t get it do you?
What about this then….
Which all leaves the question……
Answer: Well, for one thing, ask Lloyd……
Britain’s Queen Elizabeth has found herself down to her last £million while a palace insider stated she had approached David Icke for advice regarding donation funding. Mr Icke, a world renowned conspiracy theorist, is reported as having pointed her majesty toward the Indiegogo website.
Next she’ll be down the local pawnbrokers with her diamonds and tiaras and selling her shares which are protected from the population’s general knowledge.
Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II, long thought to be one of the world’s richest women, is apparently down to her last million in savings, with palaces leaking and falling to pieces as MPs say she has been failed by her advisers and the Treasury.
The Queen’s courtiers have been advised to take money saving tips from the UK treasury, as her finances dip to an historic low with just £1 million left in reserve, the Telegraph reported.
A report by the Commons Public Accounts Committee found that her reserve fund had fallen from £35 million in 2001 to £1 million today. While the Royal household had made efficiency savings of just 5 percent over the past five years, government departments have made savings of up to a third.
MPs on the committee said that the Treasury must help to protect royal palaces from further damage and deterioration.
“We believe that the Treasury has a duty to be actively involved in reviewing the household’s financial planning and management – and it has failed to do so,” said Margaret Hodge, the Labour chairperson of the committee.
Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle are both in a terrible state of repair with staff required to catch rain in buckets to protect art and antiquities.
Meanwhile, in Buckingham Palace the 60-year-old boilers were running up bills of £774,000 a year and the wiring has not been replaced since 1949. More than a third of the royal estate has been found to be below “target condition.”
The committee compared Buckingham Palace, which has just 500,000 visitors a year, to the Tower of London, which has more than £2 million.
“If you look at the Tower of London and its visitor numbers it makes you think that there’s potential here. Have they done their darnedest to maximize value for money?” Hodge said.
The report also found that the royal household has not even attempted to cost up its huge backlog of repairs because it believed there was no point in doing so until it has new funding in place.
The Crown Estate gets 15 percent of its income from the Sovereign Grant, which replaced the old way of funding the Royal Family through the civil list in 2012.
While the Royal Household’s net expenditure was £33.3 million last year, £31 million of this came from the Sovereign Grant. To find the difference, it had to dip into its reserve fund.
A spokesman for Buckingham Palace insisted that the Sovereign Grant had made the Queen’s funding “more transparent and scrutinized” and was resulting in a “more efficient use of public funds.”
But the committee found that much more needs to be done if the Crown Estate and the Royal Household are to properly manage the Queen’s finances.
“We got the impression that they just haven’t tried to make greater savings. Here we are, we’re all in it together, but they are failing to eke out better value for the Queen. They are dipping into their reserves in a way that just isn’t sensible,” Hodge said.
The report found that the Treasury was not doing its job properly. It is responsible for overseeing the Royal Household finances but is not doing enough and should draw on its extensive experience and “offer advice on key packages.”
“The Household needs to get better at planning and managing its budgets for the longer term – and the Treasury should be more actively involved in reviewing what the household is doing,” Hodge said.
A closer look at both the report and the figures in it reveals that the Queens finances may be healthier than the Committee found, and in areas where she has lost money it is not the fault of the Treasury but of her managers, the Guardian reports.
The report its self was compiled from a series of questions and answers with just two witness giving the answers, Sir Alan Reid, Keeper of the Privy Purse and Mike Stevens, Deputy Treasurer to the Queen.
When asked why they did not cut back their expenditure, Sir Alan Reid replies: “We really believed that it is not wise to cut back on the level of activity of the monarchy.”
The figure of 1 million pounds does not accurately reflect the value of assets held by the Royal Household, the Guardian says. Their total reserves stand at 14.2 million pounds, 11.8 million pounds of which comes from property, plant and other equipment.The biggest chunk of royal spending goes on payroll, and although staff numbers remained unchanged over the past year cost have risen considerably.
Austin Mitchell, one of the members of the committee, asked: “It looks to me that you managed to survive and manage the finances by letting the buildings deteriorate, by freezing the staff costs and by digging into the reserves. Is that a fair summary of what has happened?”
To which Sir Alan replied, “I think that does summarize, to a degree, what happened last year.”
However, the last minute intervention of Mr Icke may have just saved the Queen’s bacon. There are rumours within the establishment that, due to Mr Icke’s advice and enlightenment of the Queen on how to make vast sums of money out of people without going to the bank for a loan, the Queen had a quiet word with her cabinet and the secretary of state for media, to give Mr Icke a pass regarding the requirement, by OFCOM, that no politically motivated person can hold a British broadcasting licence. Mr Icke seems to have quietly apologised to the Queen for calling her a reptile all these years and she quietly pronounced him a Knight of St John of Jerusalem even though he has no royal lineage. He did much the same, quietly while telling poll tax protestors he wouldn’t pay his either but then quietly did so. The Queen likes the name David since it originates from King David as she believes she does. She’s very happy with David Cameron and David Dimbleby we hear also. David Beckham also got a kind word from the Queen although she quietly mentioned to him that she thought Posh was a bit of a slag.
Below, you can see the Queen in her Indiegogo campaign requesting donations to upgrade her property’s boilers. Seemingly, her majesty is not aware that the government runs a free boiler programme for the elderly and those on certain benefits. Perhaps if she were to let her £1million run down to less than £6,000 in the bank then she would qualify and wouldn’t have to come scrounging off the subjects she and her family have lived off their entire lives.
MUSIC: Well it had to be The Flying Lizards right?
Richie Allen of TPV (You couldn’t make this up if you wanted to):
“The idea that former (and current) BBC, ITV and MTV staff would be party to any impropriety is frankly ludicrous.”
You have GOT to be joking Richie?
While your “houseguest” preaches to the world about how the mainstream media is “programming” them, how they’re owned and controlled by the establishment (as now you are through OFCOM) etc etc.
And yet YOU Richie, come out with a statement like that? I am seriously pissing myself, I don’t know about anyone else mate. That was either seriously dumb, seriously naive or, most likely, both! Sorry mate but you said it! lol
Statement from Richie Allen …
“I’ve been producing and presenting radio/television programmes for over 15 years. I’ve been in London for nearly four months now. I arrived in late September and rented an apartment in North Wembley. David Icke arrived the day after me and moved into our spare room. Caroline (my partner) arrived a week later. The rent is £1200 per calendar month. David pays £250 per month for his room. It’s a bit of a madhouse, with Jazz (our dog) running around looking for attention. But we have a lot of fun. Caroline is crazy about David and mothers him, even though he is at least one hundred years older than us!
I am paid to present and produce a show for TPV. I pay my rent from that. Full stop. The station pays its senior presenters and producers and depends on the support of dozens of volunteers, many of whom have jobs and come in in their spare time. Many do not have a job and come in anyway. It’s remarkable. I’ve never seen such commitment to an idea. Whatever comes of it, I will always remember those who come in, research, edit or perform various administrative tasks and ask for nothing in return. To a man and woman, the folks I am working with, who right now are running around and multitasking and working like crazy to get us on air, are absolutely disgusted that someone who left the project, rather than face the music and explain her intolerable abusive behaviour, has cried foul and made baseless allegations about the appropriation of funds at TPV.
The idea that former (and current) BBC, ITV and MTV staff would be party to any impropriety is frankly ludicrous. I am staggered at what we achieved in seven months with ONLY £300,000. To turn a massive empty floor into a state of the art broadcasting facility, pay senior staff and pay the exorbitant taxes and business rates and STILL be on the air is miraculous. The guys who dreamed it all up (David Icke and Sean Adl-Tabatabai haven’t taken a penny. In fact David is forever putting his hand in his pocket and spending money to plug gaps, as is Sean. In fact Sean has had to take a mainstream production job in the spring to make ends meet. They have taken NOTHING The oversight is first class.
What annoys me most about the half baked autodidact who made these allegations is the abject cowardice she has shown in making them. You abuse your producers until they leave (4 of them), no volunteer wants to work with you. You regularly threaten to leave if you don’t get your way and when you are asked to explain yourself, you run away and cry foul. What happened to taking responsibility for your actions and saying; “it’s a fair cop guv” and taking your medicine.
I said it before and I’ll say it again, I am 39 years old (shit) and I will never be involved with anything more important than this as long as I live. May the good Lord bless the good ship TPV and all who sail in her!”
I have to go now. The insanity of this circus has me in between stitches laughing and, as Icke just stated on his explanatory video with a handheld camera, close in shaky shots and his mouth dry with a mixture of nerves, anxiety and deep deep anger, “I despair at the sheer stupidity of the human race”.