It seems that the JHCR is another organisation, like the 'Electoral Commission', whose name is sinking under a burden of Orwellian irony. It says something of our times that the behaviour of the JCHR can be simultaneously disgraceful but unsurprising.

Just keep trying, I suppose, Craig.

I have resent my original letter to jchr.

I have entitled it: [Delete Unread} for the attention of the Chairman.

I have added the following envelope:

Dear Chairman (if this gets as far as your eyes).

I did not put a tracer on my original message below as it had not occurred to me that the Committee Secretariat would delete messages unread.

As Craig Murray has now revealed this practice on his blog
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/03/so_you_think_th_1.html
I would be glad to receive confirmation that you actually read what I wrote to you.

You claim to be a Committee independent of Government, which, at the end of the day, is the only justification for having a committee at all. Your apparent behaviour does not inspire confidence on this score and undermines your arrogant and defensive reply to Craig.

And to think that I once visited Whitehall in the early 1970s, in the course of my professional governmental career, to study "best practice" in the financial area.

Thank God for a post-Imperial world (oops).

Yours in exasperation,

Pól Ó Duibhir

I copied my email to all the individual members who have email addresses, as follows:

AndrewDismoreMP@parliament.uk,
austinj@parliament.uk,
info@evanharris.org.uk,
sharmav@parliament.uk,
margaretasalt@tory.org, (for Richard Shepherd MP)
timpsone@parliament.uk,
lestera@parliament.uk,
frances@billmorris.info,

Those that I couldn't find email addresses for, I emailed individually via "They work for you":
Lord Bowness
Lord Dubs
The Earl of Onslow
Baroness Prashar

I received two replies, in agreement with what I wrote about torture, but non-committal otherwise, from Bowness and Dubs. (MPs won't generally write back to someone not in their constituency). From that I learnt two additional email addresses:

DUBSA@parliament.uk
BOWNESSP@parliament.uk

The most positive reply was from Alf Dubs: "I am not the Chair of the committee but will ensure that your point re Craig Murray is passed on."

Hope you can keep pursuing this, Craig

'Remember, if you even glance at them, that is more than the parliamentary committee on human rights did.'

I am sure these emails were more than glanced at in some quarters.

What retribution is in store for us, I wonder?

Yes, resend them :) with a 'foreword' addressing the possibility it was deleted without being read.

Pól gives an excellent idea to cc the e-mail to a number of people also whom may have a interest or connection to this case, inc. ones MP.

But I should say, there could yet be an innocent explanation. The e-mail's may even have been copied first (before being opened) and then the inbox cleared. Or some clutz (like an employed sibling of an MP (!) may have accidentally pressed delete or given by what I've seen of the standard of MP's; perhaps an MP themselves clutzed up!

It's possible they still reside on some Westminster server somewhere.

On the other hand, it must also be noted the signs that there is something "peculiar" about our democracy have been growing stronger by the year. If I were a bookie, I'd offer odds evens that this was as Craig called it.

Somebody mentioned a TAX STRIKE a while back? Time to pull it off the shelf, blow the dust off it and give it a second reading perhaps? That would really give them the willies!

"there could yet be an innocent explanation. The e-mail's may even have been copied first (before being opened) and then the inbox cleared."

This is surely possible. Material going into the anonymous general letter box 'jchr' is then forwarded to individual committee clerks; the email in the first box is then deleted unread.

The equivalent being if you sent a letter to Parliament, you wouldn't expect the chaps in the post room to read it, you'd expect to get it to the correct intray.

We need to be putting some heat on this committee, but probably not on this particular matter. Volume of correspondence is crucial and the idea of copying to every individual member of the committee is a good one.

Craig, If you look at my comment to your article of March 4th – “Your help needed” – you will see that the UK is very far from being a democracy. Deleting emails “without being read” is just one of the tricks used to protect politicians from having to deal with potentially embarrassing issues. It’s called Ostrich Disease. Democracy is dependent on rule of law, and as my issue of death threats and government cover-up demonstrates, the UK has not been a democracy for many years. Roderick Russell

The committee, and the establishment, regard Craig as, not so much a source of information, but rather as a source of irritation, he makes their job harder, not easier.

Craig's seen as a 'crackpot', a loose cannon, off-beat, unreliable, naive, probaby mentally unstable. Many of these labels were used to characterize dissidents and 'frame' people in Russia during the Soviet era.

We don't live in a functioning democracy anymore. The concept of an active and sovereign citizenry is central to the 'utopia' of democracy, and that died years ago, if it ever really existed.

Strategist,

They would not have been forwarded before being deleted. I organised with the committee which ebox they should go to - that is the email for the specific committee secretariat, not a general "postbox". It would make no sense to have me direct them there and then have to send them all unopened somewhere else - I could have had them just all sent to the final address in the first place. I have no doubt they were deleted unread.

I think the committee see Craig as a threat rather than a source of irritation. The attempts by the government to smear him over the years haven't worked. He is very, very well respected. Any move against him will be seen as perpetrated by the government. He has a strong hand and by the number of emails sent to the committee a strong following on his website. All eyes will be on the committee; the subject can't be swept under the carpet.
In my experience the priority of the government and its agencies is preserve the facade of acting democratically. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. I think the committee is cornered.

>>>I have no doubt they were deleted unread.
Well, they are undoubtedly out of order, then. I think the approach of copying to each of the individual members of the committee is a good one. Fax is also a good way of getting something in front of an MP. Or snailmail of course.

I absolutely agree with Ruth's point above, btw. Dismore is in a quandary and sweeping under the carpet is the best available option, but that can't work if the internet community keeps sending in letters & emails.

The option that best preserves all the proprieties and facades of parliamentary democracy would be the resignation of Jack Straw. That's not a bad scalp for this committee, I simply cannot understand why they are unwilling to go for it.

"I simply cannot understand why they are unwilling to go for it"

Hmmm...A highly lucrative peerage comes to mind,amongst other things.

Hmmm...A highly lucrative peerage comes to mind,amongst other things.
Yes, for doing 'the right thing' and being 'patriotic'. The corruption is profound. It seeps into every vestige of government including the judiciary.
Of course, corruption will always exist but the scale and audacity is almost beyond belief.
Hence, the question that really needs addressing is why.
Perhaps the answer lies in the odd use of the word 'patriotic' but it ties in well with something I've heard, which was at one point, I think in the early 90s, the UK became bankrupt. Although at that time the public knew the economy was in a very bad state, they didn't know exactly how bad. This has led me to speculate that the UK was 'saved' by the US and possibly Israel and that the country is irrevocably tied in with the agenda of these two countries. Hence, to do anything that would jeopardise this relationship would be felt as 'unpatriotic'.

This is disgusting treatment. I posted an email to them also objecting to this paractice and their wishes to crry it out. It is a shocking abuse of my liberties not to take my concerns on board.

"This has led me to speculate that the UK was 'saved' by the US and possibly Israel and that the country is irrevocably tied in with the agenda of these two countries. Hence, to do anything that would jeopardise this relationship would be felt as 'unpatriotic'."

Ruth

You hit the nail on the head there.

The other reason I have long thought..the UK is in no position to upset the USA...they can harm us in many ways.I think the UK is about to be "set adrift" by the rest of the world on the economic front anyway. Brown and a few others are making to many comments, speeches saying the same thing..."we are all in this together"..."we must work this out together"..."come together to solve our problems"..."It is time the international financial institutions were reformed and along with them the UN Security Council enlarged"..."The G7 is no longer inclusive enough and it is right that the G20, despite being somewhat unwieldy as a steering mechanism, is at last - some might say rather late - taking primacy. The forthcoming meeting in London in a month's time will be important"...

"In fact it is probable that the G20 will find it more and more difficult to simply meet, as the growing trend is one of « every man for himself »."...

http://tinyurl.com/b3n8kb

General shake-down.
Practically all nations are bankrupt and indebted to the few big banksters
who hide behind their apparently super-rich trustees.
The Fiat money scam is built for failure.
Fort Knox has not had an audit since 1954.
Gold price is totally manipulated by mainly one family.
The aim is total control and slavery,
war (food, water, cancer, etc, bombs, race, revolution) and genocide the tools.

Let's hope good hearted people can start helping each other.
But don't trust anyone with any measure of success.
The MP revealing the assassination of David Kelly for example
is participating in the cover-up.

It's upsetting - and I was one of many who sent emails in support - but the question is, where to go from here? My first thought is to get this situation in front of an MP who might be willing to take it further through House of Commons procedures.

Norman Baker and David Howarth are two MPs who come to mind: other names might be added to that list, but the point is that MPs are in a privileged constitutional position as regards making a stink about this kind of thing, and finding MPs who will take up the cause is an important part of any ongoing strategy.

I received two deletion notifications for my message, one as follows form the joint committee's email address

"Your message

To: Joint Committee On Human Rights
Subject: Let Craig Murray testify to your committee.
Sent: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:51:42 -0000

was deleted without being read on Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:46:42 -0000"

and one from the email address of Emily Gregory time stamped Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:54:37.

Might be worth a try...complain to the below about the deleted e-mails.Anything to bring this (so called) Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights into disrepute in the eyes of the public won`t be a bad thing.

"House of Commons Guide"

"Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards:"...

http://tinyurl.com/cczu3

In the above link it say`s..."What to do if you wish to make a complaint"..."Write a letter (not an e-mail)...You just got to laugh,you couldn`t make it up.

ISPs must comply with snooping law from Sunday 15th March 2009.

Article in computing.co.uk. Story here:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq75bm

The pretence of the democrat facade tumbles even further.

It's really quite simple,a junior member of staff, on a short term contract seconded to help out , "accidentally" deleted a whole batch.

As the pre ordained date for responses has passed the submissions cannot "unfortunetely" be taken into consideration.

I received an out of office reply so have proof my submission got there.

Inthe final analysis they destroy , lose, lie,deny , hide, obfuscate and simply wear down any opposition.

You just can't get the staff these days... although no doubt details of all applicants have arrived with the various offices that are set up to deal with the awkward squad.. Just in case.

"Inthe final analysis they destroy , lose, lie,deny , hide, obfuscate and simply wear down any opposition."

Ziz

When you look at the link I give above you will find out who is on the..."Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards:"...Andrew Dismore MP.

FWIW, I'd be surprised if Evan Harris replies. He's my MP and has never replied to any emails or faxes I've sent him, ever.

He tends to vote the right way, but he's bloody hopeless at actually replying.

Isn't it very interesting that Fatty Soames is Deputy Chairman of Aegis, Tim Spicer's outfit, the subject of many posts on this site!

http://www.aegisworld.com/index.php/about-us/mi

and that he is also on the Select Committee of Standards and Privileges along with Dismore.

THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS AND PRIVILEGES

The Committee Members are appointed by the House of Commons and are all Members of Parliament.

Rt Hon Sir George Young (Chairman)
Rt Hon Kevin Barron
Rt Hon David Curry
Andrew Dismore
Nick Harvey
Elfyn Llwyd
Chris Mullin
The Hon Nicholas Soames
Paddy Tipping
Dr Alan Whitehead
PUBLISHED INFORMATION
The Code of Conduct and Rules relating to the conduct of Members are published by HMSO (HC 351) and are available on the internet at www.parliament.uk (look under ‘C’ in the index on the home page).
The Register of Members’ Interests is published annually by the Stationery Office. Regularly updated versions of the Register are available for public inspection in the House of Commons (Tel: 020-7219 4300 for an appointment). Both the published edition and updated versions are on the internet at www.parliament.uk (look under ‘R’ in the index on the home page).
Further guidance on the complaints procedure outlined in this leaflet is available in the ‘Publications’ section of our website, the address of which is on the cover of this leaflet.
Issued
_______________________________________

Can you smell the stench from the Augean stables in Pugin's Palace? I can from 30 miles away.

Also look at the composition of the Committee on Standards in Public Life for some other interesting connections and then the Joint Intelligence Committee, Chairman Dr Kim Howells, latterly chairman of Labour Friends of Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Howells

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_friends_of_israel

Redress run an item on Stooges on their website.
http://www.redress.cc/

Ever get the feeling you've been cheeted?

England has never been a democracy and it has used the name of democracy only when it feared stronger opponnet like germany in first world war then it started pimping the word democracy to attract sympathy and legitimacy about its own exploitation of the rest of the world.

If england is a democracy then democracy itslef is the msot vile, lair system in the world which must be destroyed.

no england is no democracy -never has been.

quotes-"====
Lincoln won the civil war by ignoring international bankers(controlled by London) and printing his own, interest-free, money.

By April 1862 $449,338,902 of debt free money had been printed and distributed. He said:

“We gave the people of this republic the greatest blessing they ever
had, their own paper money to pay their own debts”.

The Times was incensed. In that same year it wrote:

"If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture,
then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will
pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all
countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe".

By 2001 there were only 7 nations left without a (Rothschild-controlled) central bank. These were: Afghanistan: Iraq; Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba and Libya.

Note that by 2003 that number was reduced to five. By the end of this year it may be down to three. Note also the extraordinary coincidence between not being in debt to international banksters and being labelled an "axis of evil".

=====================================================================
DAVID ROCKEFELLER at the 1991 Bilderberg meeting:

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

Do you plan to MARCH toward world government? I sure as hell don't. Don't be their chattel. WAKE UP! Get off your good intentions and organize. Shut down Wall St, shut down Pennsylvania Avenueand certainly shuit down the dowing street-the headquarter of evil.

=======================================================================

"The minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses, and make its tool of them."
Doctor Albert Einstein (in a letter to Sigmund Freud 7/30/1932. 1879-1955)

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the government of the U.S. ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT (on oligarch Fascist rule in a letter to handler “Colonel” Edward M. House, confidence man for the cartel and founder of the Council on Foreign Relations. House also handled President Wilson for the foisting of a private and unconstitutional “Federal Reserve” Corporation sham with its IRS in 1913. November 21st, l933 from the book "F.D.R.: His Personal Letters" - New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce 1950)
"

Keep voting Tory and Labour, fools. Keep chatting. Keep talking. Keep writing comments. Keep e-mailing.

The only thing they'll listen to now is violence.

The British are weak. It's get violent or be trampled all over.

Other John.

I understand your sentiments exactly, but I think TAX strikes and other financial disengagements, would achieve things without the bloodshed.

Shouldn't bloodless options be tried first? Although the old story of 'rulers' heads being used as footballs in London, does sound like it's not too far off.

They are already planning for civil unrest and I think it's fair to say their methodology wont be "bloodless first" We are all a Jean Charles de Menezes now!

"In the final analysis they destroy , lose, lie,deny , hide, obfuscate and simply wear down any opposition." Well said.

Craig, this deliberate denial of our right to make representations to a Parliamentary body is despicable. I'm so glad you have the strength to push on this. It's clear that you have the support of many decent people.

And no, I don't think we live in a democratic country. I have my own professional experiences of promoting the extension of democracy which testify to the wholesale, blatant and shameless attitudes and practices that are routinely employed by, it has to be said, largely unthinking, jobsworth functionaries (who are obviously just following orders).

I wish you all the best in the struggle to bring truth to light - and I wish that you keep safe and well. How dreadful that people can - apparently seriously - say 'we are all a Jean Charles de Menezes now' and call Dr David Kelly (RIP both) to mind. Are we getting paranoid or are we actually at that point now?

Sam

I know it's a long shot, and I know it might be a bit too close for comfort to the Tin-Foil Hat brigade, but have you considered the Alex Jones Show? He's pretty much guaranteed to give you airtime, and his previous interviewees include such respectable people as Congressman Ron Paul, former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura and various celebrities such as Willie Nelson. It's your descision, of course, and a UK-based radio host might be better (if any other commenter knows of any that would have him on) but it will get your story out there, and to another level than the blogosphere. Just a thought to maybe help counter the problems you are having with the media.

"It's get violent or be trampled all over"

Other John

That is not my way and NEVER will be.

We need to start living a better way/existence,take away greed and it`s cause...FEAR.

What we really need to do is out the truth

Greed isn't caused by fear - but it is fear and lack of moral principle that have motivated British government policy since 9/11 and if this state of affairs continues it will prove a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If you haven't already done so please read Frank Furedi's "Culture of Fear" and "Politics of Fear". He is very enlightening.

Other John - What makes you think I vote and even for Tory or Labour? I am sorry that my forebears fought for the franchise of women but I will never vote again for ANY of the main parties.

Re Mary's comment regarding Soames and Aegis.
It's odd that an MP is vice-chairman of Spicer's mercenary company in Iraq. May be this mercenary army is in fact owned by the 'deep government' or the Privy Council and that Spicer is the front man.

An interesting question would be where Spicer got his start up money for his previous company, Sandline.

Ruth - The question is why.

As you say, it's hard to know if the massive control of the Israeli lobby over New Labour, even to the extent of forcing us to go to war against Saddam Hussain, is at global or party political level.

I think that New Labour was first funded and then controlled by Jewish interests.
What is happening now is that they are being blackmailed by them for the appalling things like torture and the horrible consequences of invading Iraq which we all foresaw.

As to UK bankruptcy, anybody with Christian or Muslim principles in the 1980s could see as clear as day that the Thatcher principle of entrusting our money to rich bankers was fatal.
The greedy know only how to steal.

So it is mundane things like the political gravy train and the sheep-like quality of the English male who patronisingly explains to his wife that the market is in control, that have been our undoing.

It is a battle of religious faiths, the disgraced faith of Judaism, combined with the disabled faith of Christianity, together declaring war on the alive faith of Islam which alone in the world speaks out for integrity.

This is what they cannot stand. That is the purpose of the war on terror, to destroy criticism. By the way, in a PC society, if we have to put up with males having sex with males, why can't we have UK patriots like Craig running UK foreign policy, instead of Israel?

"Islam which alone in the world speaks out for integrity." As a Muslim, I would like to say I disagree with that statement. There are Jews and Christians who reject Talmudic Zionist Kaballism and Gnostic Calvinism respectivly.

They are few in number perhaps; theology is after all 'boring' and 'irrelevant', and the Islamic faith is perhaps the most visible, but they (all three) do exist.

And in fact, within that fortress lies the best hope for us ALL in resisting the Zoharian Kaballists, itching to put into practice the teachings of supremicism via genocide under the gross delusion its God they are following and not, as is actually the case, Satan.

This is all very well, but there's not much criticism allowed in Islamic states, is there?

avatar singh

sorry, that comment was so log and such a digression I have removed it as it is distracting for this thread.

anticant.

Haven't you understood the estrangement between the ruling class and the citizenry yet? Or is that division the preserve of the West?

But I would agree, criticse the puppet presidents and corrupt Kings and its "Welcome to the Cairo Hilton" time!

"So You Think This Is A Democracy?"

"The FBI files reveal he was still under their surveillance in the UK up to the 1960s. Zoe shows the files to Professor Martin Sherman, an expert on the McCarthy era. He explained that the FBI would have seen the various groups with which Sam was involved as front organizations for the Communist Party, even though they may have only been promoting social justice; the ruling class saw this as dangerous and radical in the anti-communist hysteria of the1950s. Wanamaker was on a security index of people to be rounded up in the event of war with the Soviet Union"...

http://tinyurl.com/crrq68

Things have never changed.

So why do not the citizenry of these corrupt Islamic tyrannies rise up against their effete and cruel rulers?

I have no time at all for the West's complicity with these dreadful people for the sake of oil and money.

The problem for those of us who wish for harmonious relations with Muslims living in Britain but who reject any notion of Islamic theocracy as advocated by so-called "extremists" is that the constantly cited "moderate Muslim majority" remain stubbornly silent on the issue, like the dog which didn't bark in the night.

Is it possible to be any sort of a Muslim - "moderate" or otherwise - and NOT to wish for a Muslim-ruled society? That is the question which Muslims living in Britain must answer in an unequivocal manner if they wish to be welcome here.

That Zionists control the Neo-Cons and New Labour
is because the banksters paid for them and promote them trough their mass media.
Islam is just another mind-control tale
created and used to own and conquer, divide and rule.

During the eighteenth century, the British were making encroachments into the Arabian peninsula, but Mohammed Abdul Wahhab, the founder of the Wahhabi movement, instead declared "Jihad" against the entire Muslim world. Wahhabism is now financed by Saudi wealth delivered by Big Oil (Western Oligarchy).
The Muslim Brotherhood, which, though it poses as an orthodox Muslim organization, is secretly derived from Egyptian Freemasonry, has long been a tool of Western intelligence agencies. The Muslim Brotherhood received training and support from the Nazis prior to WW2, but after the war, control of the organization was passed to the Americans. However, instead of rounding up former Nazis, the American hired them.
In the 1980s, the CIA financed and armed the so called Muslim Terrorists Bin Laden and consorts, partly through ISI.

The divisions between warring religions is engineered and financed.
Mankind is the most programmable animal by nature,
always looking for leaders and clans to adhere to for sexual and material gain and protection.
War is a Racket (Smedley Butler, 1933).

So far so good:

Your message

To: Joint Committee On Human Rights
Subject: [DELETE UNREAD] for attention of the Chairman
Sent: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 11:40:39 -0000

was read on Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:51:12 -0000

I believe we are a democracy, and that the natural progression of a democracy in times of prolonged stress is fascism.

http://jimmygiro.blogspot.com/2008/05/democratic-fascism.html

Pol

Yes, that's progress. On the rather wide-ranging discussion on the neature of society, I should say that I am rather offended by any notion that I can't be a good person if I don't suscribe to any particular religous view. But I see no problem with Muslims wishing for a Muslim-ruled society, as long as they seek to promote their views peacefully.

Oh sure, honey, it's all naturally fascist.
Nothing but pure natural evolution, you see ?
Like the lions and their prey.
Beautiful harmony and a natural saviour for us all.
No brain or heart, only the "laws of nature" as i cherry-pick them for you.
Now just show me your tender throat, silly.

There is no religious test to determine good people.

Religion may help some people be good, and then again it may not.

By their deeds shall ye know them, etc.

Keep up the good work.

anticant

Weary of defending Muslims while Ziowestern mega crimes eclipse virtually any other wrong doing anywhere else on the planet, the respect I hold for you having read a number of your comments on this site, energergize me to engage.

Muslims have tried to overthrow these tyrants before. With very little to show for it. These insane leaders don't want to give up their silk bed sheets, fine foods, and prospect of dynasty for the life of hardship they have put so much energy into engineering. It explains their feverish lust for the occasion cull. Craig's book "Murder in Samarkand" and the ‘05 mid May massacre will show you the grim example.

What about the Brits? What are they doing to stop THEIR ELECTED officials bludgeoning the world? Aaah, the good old British march! Mid February 2003 Bliar must have been laughing his filthy Pinocchio nose off, twitching at the curtains, wondering for a fleeting moment what all the commotion was about.

Many Muslims HAVE spoken out against extremism with a particular reference to terrorism (acknowledged by those who were listening), but to feel threatened by Shariah law in the UK is utterly irrational. http://stephiblog.wordpress.com/2008/02/08/why-rowan-is-right-about-shariah-courts/

Most Muslims were born in Britain and consider themselves British. Nobody has a right to deny their desire to aspire to have Shariah law apply to them, Just as no one has the right to deny a British person the right to aspire to being a republic or even a Christian theocracy. Isn't that a principle of Democracy?

Perhaps some are silent about the Shariah bit because most may be happy living under the British system? A number of Muslims have actually said this to me. "You can practice Islam better in the UK." were the independently spoken words uttered to me on more than one occasion, and in particular by the foreign/naturalised Muslims! On some aspects of that I'd disagree, but never the less, that was their perception. I will point out however that "Muslim Countries" are terrible examples of an Islamic society.

One cannot read into any perceived silence on the matter, an unspoken approval for an Islamic theocracy in Britain (which is actually their right) because they may be content under the current system and some Muslims are apathetic creatures too you know.

You said “That is the question which Muslims living in Britain must answer in an unequivocal manner if they wish to be welcome here.” I take issue about your demand for a British Muslim to have to answer your demand to answer any questions. What right do you have to welcome or not welcome?, and how does that demand stretch to the Anglo-Saxon British converts?

"What right do you have to welcome or not welcome?"
Like, you have no rights ?

The massive immigration is organised with the aim to destroy and divide.
Race riots are being prepared to weaken the people.
Bush junior alone for example flooded the USA with some 10 million immigrants in his efforts to bring the USA down in preparation for martial law, NAU and a gold-backed Amero.

I appreciate the courtesy of your reply. You raise many issues which are inappropriate for debate here. If you want to know my views in more depth, you can scroll through the archive on my blog 'anticant's arena':

antarena.blogspot.com/

You will learn there that I abhor all religious fanaticisms, whether Muslim, Judaic or Christian. I do not in the least defend past British actions in the Middle East: the 1917 Balfour Declaration was one of the most dishonest, because patently absurd, diplomatic documents ever written, and much of the area's subsequent troubles have stemmed from it.

As for Muslims in Britain, whether immigrants or born here, they surely realise that their constant claims to exclusiveness and special treatment do not reassure British non-Muslims of their desre to live amongst us on terms of mutual equality and respect.

British democracy and secular pluralism are far from perfect, but they are non-negotiable. It is not the function of liberalism to tolerate the intolerant.

I still ask Why? If there are 'good' human beings in every society, why does our government not seek that good through the political process in places like Iraq, Afganistan and Uzbekistan?

Even if atheists and Jews have joined forces to seek the evil in those societies, why is my government participating in this dangerous game? In politics you have to please your master. Every torturer goes home at night to his wife and children for a nice cup of tea.

Who is the master in this deadly game?
Surely it is the devil, who teaches that we will not be held accountable for what we do in this world. That is why I say this is a religious issue.
It doesn't make sense to me otherwise.

researcher

I'm not sure what your question in reply to my question is getting at.

And I'm not too sure why you are raising the issue of race. My last post was about Muslims. Perhaps then Muslims will be free of predicted race riots, seeing as they are not a race. I suspect however you were drawing upon the underlying issue of civil conflict due to different culture, which is symbolised by different races.
In which case why are we getting hot under the collar about culture or indeed race?

I believe all people have an in-built animosity (of varying degrees) towards different cultures and display various degrees of racism. This isn't a problem if it's benign. Why offer Bush or Obama or anyone else culture/race strings to be pulled?

anticant

"I abhor all religious fanaticisms" while I have to guess at what you mean by that, I'd think it likely most Muslims would share similar feelings. But let's get a sense of proportion here. By far, the greatest pain and misery come from western acts of state-sponsored terrorism, principally for the purpose of economic exploitation and possibly armageddon hastening philosophical motivations.

I believe the struggle Craig documents here shows this, and how bad it's become.

"claims to exclusiveness and special treatment " May I ask what these are? Do you mean seeking permission to build Mosques? or have the Adth'an (call to prayer) broadcast by loudspeaker? or the demand to wear a hijab at school/work? Surely any requests like this are trivial and can be tolerated in a society we are told should be pluralistic.

If to you British democracy is non-negotiable, doesn't that mean if the country ever becomes over 50% Muslim, and they want an Islamic theocracy, then you would necessarily have to conceed to that?

The recipient of the Balfour Declaration and the heads of his clan.
Their profits have always been derived from wars and deception.
They finance religion too in order to put the blame on various imagined devils.

"Greatest pain and misery" etc: let's not get into games of "mine's bigger than yours".

What I mean by abhorrence of religious fanaticism is detestation of those of any faith who seek to impose their beliefs upon others. Has this not been a prime characteristic of Islam since its inception?

I do not know what permission - apart from planning permission - Muslims need to build mosques in this country. I do know that no Christian group would get permission to build a church in Saudi Arabia. "What's sauce for the goose...."

Calls to prayer should be subject to public nuisance regulations, like any other annoyance.

I couldn't care less what people choose soto wear as long as they aren't doing it as a political gesture [there is a law agaist the wearing of political uniforms].

As to your final question, as I am over 80 I shall thankfully be dead by the time this country becomes over 50 per cent. Muslim. I am, however, curious to know whether that is your and your co-religionists' ultimate aim? I would certainly not wish to live under such a dispensation.

A Muslim Speaks wrote (in answer to anticant):

You said “That is the question which Muslims living in Britain must answer in an unequivocal manner if they wish to be welcome here.” I take issue about your demand for a British Muslim to have to answer your demand to answer any questions. What right do you have to welcome or not welcome?, and how does that demand stretch to the Anglo-Saxon British converts?

Two follow-ups come to mind - one facetious. I presume (the facetious one) that Celtic converts are also covered by the "Anglo-Saxon British converts" category?

The other is more serious - one that I've raised more than once before - many Muslims living in the UK have served in HMF (fewer now from WW2).

I would consider that come what may they have earned their place in the sun and that it is a gross impertinence of any bureaucrat or politician who has never served to ask them to prove anything that involves loyalty to Britain or the Crown.

Much of the later discussion has little to do with the topic of having the committee receive Craig's evidence.

Pardon if this comment appears out of line, and far be it from me to try to control the agenda, but if one were truly plotting revolution, this would not be the forum one would choose.

On the other hand, if one were attempting to give the impression of an intemperate and divided group who is best ignored or worse, one would likely send a provocateur online, to raise exactly such a question. I suppose such will always be the quandary of an intellectual and concerned group of people.

I am impressed with the calm with which these issues have been discussed here. Nevertheless the change of context would be very convenient for one wishing to discredit those who wrote to the committee. Let us see if such an assessment of those writing in this forum is mentioned again by Dismore or others in a position to reject evidence.

As I've said previously, I don't think this thread is the right place to debate the wide subject of how compatible the teachings of Islam are with British democratic values and traditions.

I only stated my opinions in response to some observations by Muslim posters here. I agree that we should return to the main issue of the undemocratic response of the Joint Committee to Craig's request to give oral evidence and their failure to respond to the many supporting emails which have been sent to them.

If they refuse to hear him, it will be quite scandalous and should be exposed with the maximum publicity we can muster.

And that is exactly why I commented here that I would never trust Dismore - not ever.

This is the usual seedy attempt to cover-up and manipulate which will, inevitably, be portrayed as cock-up rather than conspiracy.

What one might question is whether there is no back-up system - if not, why not?

Is this the Mother of Parliaments? Yes, I think it really is.

Interestingly the topic changed after I posted the following comment:

Re Mary's comment regarding Soames and Aegis.
It's odd that an MP is vice-chairman of Spicer's mercenary company in Iraq. May be this mercenary army is in fact owned by the 'deep government' or the Privy Council and that Spicer is the front man.

An interesting question would be where Spicer got his start up money for his previous company, Sandline.

Perhaps there's more than a little truth in what I wrote.

You are right again, Ruth.
Thanks again for your great insights.

I am certainly not an establishment spook trying to stop Craig giving formal evidence to the committee, and I'm very sure the same is true of anticant and researcher. Discussions do wander! But your point is acknowledged.

Ruth, your bringing up Spicer and Soames was itself a topic deviator (worthy of discussion though it may be) and speaking for myself, there was no intent to get off the Soames/Aegis connection. Given that Spicer is likely to be passed secret information for various operations in Iraq (and perhaps elsewhere), he and his company of killers should be fully and independently investigated outside the inquiries act, as well as the Soames connection including any issues of graft that may be involved. The findings should be results be made public. I think almost here would agree.

And anticant, it as actually you who specifically brought up the Islam/Britain issue in your 12:21 PM post. You were not simply reacting as the "Islamic content" was about Muslims in Muslim countries living under the jack boot of despotic Muslim Leaders. But it’s no big deal.

Back to JCHR, it would be a(nother) gross violation of British democratic tradition (and probably I would guess legal procedure) if he (or the of the committee) saw any supposed justification in amongst what is discussed here as authorisation to reject any communication to them to call Craig to formally present his evidence.

I agree, if Dismore or the committee do as you suggested, then we should take greater steps to petition them not to ignore Craig.

I brought up the Muslim issue in the context of stifling criticism. I am entirely in accord with your views about the Middle East. Western - and especially British - policy has been disastrous there ever since the 1914-18 war.

Alas, I am not an establishment spook.I don't think they would have me, although I could do with the money.....

Forwarded Alert: UK/USA – A Public Independent Inquiry must be Held into the Full Extent of British Involvement in Extraordinary Rendition

16 March 2009

Demand an end to British involvement in extraordinary rendition and firm assurances, backed by evidence, that the UK is no longer involved in any way.

16 March 2009

Forwarded Alert: UK/USA – A Public Independent Inquiry must be Held into the Full Extent of British Involvement in Extraordinary Rendition

Background to “Extraordinary Rendition”:
“Extraordinary rendition” is the illegal CIA programme of kidnapping individuals in one country and flying them to another country or countries to be tortured. The CIA alleges that it is an intelligence-gathering exercise, yet the use of evidence obtained through torture is banned in most countries. Torture is banned completely under international law and is not allowed under any circumstance anywhere in the world.

The CIA has admitted to “rendering” over 30,000 men, women and children who just “disappear” off the face of the Earth. The actual number may be far higher. Countries all over the world, in all continents, have been involved in the programme, either through sharing intelligence used in the programme, allowing “rendition” flights to stop over, refuel on or fly over their territories, assisting in torture directly or handing over individuals to be “rendered”. The UK is involved too.

continues on http://www.ihrc.org.uk/show.php?id=4038

In short, Israel needs the whole world to use its banking system which it can clean out from time to time AND to scare the wits out of any civilian population that opts out of this racket
by the use of extraordinary rendition.

Rome got fed up with them in 30 A.D. How long is it going to take today's
superpowers to come to the same conclusion?

Sorry, in 30ish A.D. Jesus peace be upon him, prophecied the destruction of the newly reconstructed temple. Mark 13, Luke 21. Jerusalem was broken up by Rome after 70 A.D.

If you think I am being anti-semitic, why not read what he said about his own people.
' Alas for you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackloth and ashes '.

Since the holocaust we have forgotten who and what these people are and nobody can say one thing against them. They are the instigators of the U.S. policy of torture and genocide.

Allah says of them in the Qur'an, quoting what He revealed in the Torah, Qur'an Surah 17, 4 - 8, after speaking of the destruction of the temple by Rome. 'In udtum, udna'
If you return to ( wrong ), We will return ( to punishment likewise ).

It is a infallible promise from Allah that the financial crimes and crimes against humanity of torture generally and genocide in Iraq, which the Jews have instigated and to which we are witnesses today, will be punished, and all their accomplices with them.

Anas

I am no more tolerant of rants against Jews than I am of rants against Muslims. People are people. The State of Israel is a bad construct and causes much harm in the World. To generalise from that to Jews in general is plain wrong. And as for anathematising a people based on some supposedly divine piece of ancient writing, that is not acceptable either.

Yes , Craig. But the reason why I knew Mrs Thatcher was wrong to do what she did and others did not, and Mr Blair was wrong to do what he did and others did not, was because of those ancient, divine texts and therefore I stick with them even if it's not acceptable to my more naive, non-political anglo-saxon personality.

Dear Craig Murray
In regard of religious excesses in my own locale I think it worth reminiscing on a film in which the American aactor Gig Young played Adolf Hitler..."mistakes and all that kinda thing". If such a film axists and considering some excesses use American influence in a way that is spoilt.
I don't mean the film would be spoilt. far from it.I live in Lancaster England

Dear Craig Murray
In regard of religious excesses in my own locale I think it worth reminiscing on a film in which the American aactor Gig Young played Adolf Hitler..."mistakes and all that kinda thing". If such a film axists and considering some excesses use American influence in a way that is spoilt.
I don't mean the film would be spoilt. far from it.I live in Lancaster England