"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past."

None of us exist, Craig, least of all those who speak truth to power. Everything is illusion. The only reality in this world, it seems, is power. Fight on!

Feel proud and flattered Craig. The powerful are afraid of you.

Well WE know you exist Craig-as do your nearest and deearest.That's who matter.

Also,if you're being airbrushed out then take it as a compliment that They know you exist and you're succesfully getting under their skin.

The mainstream printed media is dying a death anyway.They're gonna be obsolete and the blogosphere is ascendant.Your existence herein is all that matters,and you're very well known,globally,in this monde.

What you do,and have done for years, is a vitally important contribution to humanity and human rights worldwide.

I salute you.

Chin up Craig.

"Discovering That I Do Not Exist"

When judgement day comes we will all find out that it is they who will "Not Exist" anymore.

It's good that the issue is being aired at all, and you should know that's to your credit even if your name isn't mentioned.

It's also frustrating when there are inaccuracies or glaring omissions, whether on purpose or due to poor research or editing. It raises the obvious question of whether the reporting has been subdued and is just damage control or whether it just isn't very well written.

Whatever the reason for the omission, it's a shitty feeling to not get any recognition for your great sacrifices (including your career). Especially now when it'd be a good example of what you're trying to stand for in the election.

Even though we're in an online age, I doubt there's much chance of those articles being updated.

To a very small degree, on a far, far, far less important subject that I've put nowhere near as much of my life into, I know a little tiny bit how you feel.

Anyway, keep up the good work. More and more people are aware of what you've done and what you're doing and I think in the end all the crappy journalism in the world is just going to drive people away from the crappy news sources.

It was as much the things the supposedly liberal BBC and Guardian *didn't* say as the things they did say which drove me away from them. (Not that I've switched to the Daily Mail or anything. Screw them as well.)

"the Guardian's survey of key points of evidence for the existence of a secret pro-torture policy, does not mention anywhere that it was denounced by a British Ambassador who was sacked for it and published documentary proof"

I am very struck by this, thanks for posting it at 7Kb/s from Accra.

Readers of Private Eye regularly observe this phenomenon - perhaps one in ten of the abuses of power or corruption scandals they reveal makes it into the mainstream media - often months or years later - whereupon it becomes an official scandal, with people having to account for their conduct. But Private Eye is never credited, it is like it doesn't exist.

Yet everyone in the establishment knows and reads Private Eye, but the material it exposes (however well evidenced) is allowed to be ignored.

I am fascinated to understand the mentality of establishment figures who think they are guardians of free speech and probity, but actually designate and freeze out official unpersons, and suppress the facts with the best of them. Personalities like Alan Rusbridger and the Peter Florence (?) (the Director of the Hay Festival) spring to mind.

On what basis do they decide who is acceptable and who isn't? For example, Philippe Sands (who basically says the same things as you) is allowed to exist, but you aren't. How come?

(Reminded of the performance by Peter Florence on his own website where he made an elaborate performance of pretending he had no idea who you were, which was a blatant barefaced lie.)

In one way it is perfectly rational and understandable for Blair or Straw to do all they can to ensure you become an unperson - for them it's about survival.

But how do the likes of the Editor of The Guardian or the Director of the Hay Festival rationalise and fit this to their view of themselves and their role?

Craig you have been pretty close to the heart of the British establishment and I would be delighted to read any more of the insights into its thought processes and self-justification you must have had over the years.

I like what George Dutton said (June 18, 2009 1:08 PM)

and everyone else come to that :)

I agree with Leo here - your work will have pushed the Guardian to run its story - perhaps it got to the point where it realised it could not longer put its fingers in its ears on this issue. In any case, since you are in contact with Ian Cobain, I wonder if you could ask him why your evidence has not received even a small mention?

On an older topic, is there any fresh news on Dismore and his potential conflict of interest?

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/05/andrew_dismore.html

Don't take it to heart mate. It means you've got them worried with your straight talking.

You are only just getting started.

It's because of the egregious shilling for The Official Line that papers (The Guardian included, or perhaps particularly) are not trusted anymore.

I'm sure the shade of John Delane is appalled at the depth to which his "public writers" have sunk.

So much for "for us, with whom publicity and truth are the air and light of existence, there can be no greater disgrace than to recoil from the frank and accurate disclosure of the facts as they are. We are bound to tell the truth as we find it, without fear of consequences - to lend no convenient shelter to acts of injustice and oppression, but to consign them at once to the judgement of the world..."

No wonder, in the USA, some 40 percent of people now shun the papers and get their news information from the Internet.

I think Strategist has hit a very big nail on its head! My thoughts exactly.

Here is a parallel observation, on a slightly different, but related, track.

Clearly, while my observations assign the word, 'white' or 'honorary white' to the power sructure and those who benefit from it, I am using the term politically but using it very deliberately partly because of its emotive weight. As Craig's experience demonstrates, white artists, journalists and commentators also are excluded.

Last night, on one of the UK TV channels, a new three-part drama was broadcast called, 'Occupation' which deals with the lives of several fictitious British soldiers in Iraq and their families during the years following 2003. Iraqis feature as background fauna except where they rise to being love-interest (as in 'white man attempts to rescue educated brown woman from nasty fanatical brown men, only to find that it is a fruitless mission'). Technically, it is very well-written and the acting was superb. It is posing as a critique of government policies in relation to the invasion, destruction and occupation of Iraq.

However, while appreciating the drama and the sentiment, several matters occur to me:

1) Powerful elites of white - or 'honorary white' artists, commentators and journalists seem to monopolise all sides of the argument in the public space of the West. [Btw, I use the term, 'white' here politically rather than cod-anthropologically, as (though the West remains conveniently ignorant of this) there are many people in Iran, Afghanistan and even Pakistan, for example, who could be described as, white.] They get paid large commissions, get given prizes and their careers are made, for writing, directing, etc. big anti-war productions which become, when exported, exemplars of British culture (let's wave the flag!) and the whole exercise begins to assume the aspects of an farcical opera of apologetics. They just drop a trendy (on the stage, on the page, as in couture, after the war there comes the fashion!) narrative line into the pot and hey presto, they're a (rich) saint! Meanwhile, the voices of the subaltern are brushed to one side, not reported, ignored, because truth can come only from a safe mouth.

2) There is an element of confession, catharsis and redemption in all of this, I mean as a society. I do not think this is always appropriate. There is no redemption or salvation for killing two million people.

3) I would like to see Iraqi writers, directors, casts, etc. - those living in Iraq - given commissions and full editorial control to make dramas about this issue aimed at everyone, not just at audiences in the West. But then, of course, everything is tainted, as the money would come from the same West which undertook the destruction in the first place, so it would have to be 'Middle Eastern' money. This is why Iran's film industry is so powerful - artistically - it is independent of Western formal cliche.

Usually, people like 'us' are hauled on to write about such things as, 'Lolita in Peshawar', or the 'Kite Runner/ Bookseller/ Bicycle-Rider of Kandahar'.

4) I have real problems with anything about any of this type of thing being converted - sublimated - into 'entertainment'.

Yes,

The amazing thing is that both the main authors of the guardian articles, Philippe Sands and Iain Cobain, were there at my evidence to parliament and taking notes. So it is not as if they didn't know or had overlooked it....

Craig, journalists are in the pay of their editors, who are in the pay of their owners, who do favours for the people who can afford to buy them.

As many have said you're being ignored deliberately which is far more interesting than just being ignored.

Reason? Fear.

Letter to the Guardian:

To: letters@guardian.co.uk
Subject: RE: Tony Blair knew of secret policy on terror

I am astonished that you make no reference to the efforts of Craig Murray ex-UK Ambassador, smeared and sacked by No 10 when he sought to draw this to public attention 5 years ago and more recently when he gave evidence to a parliamentary Committee …which D. Milliband declined to attend.

Cheating on expenses is only a minor crime compared to the dishonesty involved in this government’s proven complicity in torture.

Anyone wanting to see the detailed evidence / history etc. should visit Craig Murray’s blog

Mike Dobson
Sutton

My guess is that ministers are afraid that what happened to Pinochet could happen to them. Imagine if Tony Blair were extradited by some European 'superjudge' using his own laws on extradition!

Craig,

I, too, was astonished to see no mention of you in these articles. It is inconceivable that your name would not surface to any journalist researching this issue and it is also inconceivable that your story would not be, at least, mentioned. The only reasonable explanation is active suppression of your role in all of this.

It will come back to bite them one day.

If it's any comfort, this sort of thing isn't confined to politics. Many years ago I worked for a high tech manufacturing company. They were encountering fierce competition from Japan on price and quality. In particular, Japanese manufacturers claimed that their product had zero parts per million (ppm) defective - meaning that in any sample of one million parts, all would be functioning properly. Our equivalent figure was about 3000 ppm defective - pretty bad. An initiative was declared to achieve Japanese levels of quality, and within two years it was achieved.

However a member of my team noted in a report that the level of defectivity he saw being shipped from our warehouses was still at the old level of about 3k ppm. All hell broke loose. I was asked to check his numbers. He was right - the books were being fiddled. I wrote to the head of quality, and I was denounced in turn. "If that were true" (I was told) "our customers would be letting us know all about it".

Fast forward two years, to a new general manager. He reveals that customers are going crazy about our quality, which they say is no better than it ever was. Steps then began to be taken to do something real about it, but no mention was ever made of our earlier report exposing the situation, in spite of its notoriety at the time.

Mike D. The genius idea is always simple!
Write to the Guardian and politely ask.
The idea never crossed my mind.

I wonder if they'll print it.

We shall see.

Don't fret, Craig. I very much doubt whether Miliband would have given his highly selective evidence at all if it had not been for your compelling appearance the other week.

They are scarcely likely to mention you if they can help it. After all, you are the elephant in the room!

An earlier poster made the excellent point that had it not been for all the work you do then perhaps this issue wouldn't have made it into the mainstream press at all...

Your airbrushing adds simply adds further weight to your claims.We understand this clearly whereas censors always miss this delicious irony,fools that they usually are.

The Truth is coming out,more and more,day by day.

What you do/have done is absolutely vital.

Thank you again.

I agree with Strategist and his experiences, it is convenient for todyas pwoer brokers to nill those who are in direct opposition to their vested interests, politicians are their marketting managers and as such not very good at it, hence the redirecting of historic facts.
There has been a blacklisting by many companies, a secret list of Union workers and shop stweards for years, so why should the Guardian stoop so low if their balls are not being squeezed by their editors and/or advertisers.
I now know why I do not aspire to read about their eclectic form of self interest anymore, they are not very good at hiding their editorial dependency anymore.
Don't think anything of it, Craig, you have arrived.

@Suhayl - interesting comments, especially your second point. I draw a personal analogue from the views of one or two acquaintances who were in favour of the war. (I should say I suspect they are just pro-military, and so they supported the war by default, rather than supporting it from first principles). They have at various times expressed the view that individual troops "did a good job" and were "heroic" under "pressure", etc. This of course mirrors the lamentable, adulatory performance of the mainstream media.

But it naturally poses a dilemma. To what extent should ordinary people be engaged in troop back-slapping and mutual self-congratulation when the occupation has presided over such a lethal catastrophe? Can our troops come back "proud", or should they accept a share of British and American shame? I sometimes wonder of these cheerleaders whether the Iraqi death toll - admittedly poorly reported - matters to them at all. Even if I were to accept the IBC figures of 100K deaths - which I don't - surely such a figure should cause even the most ardent hawk to lose sleep?

On your suggestion of an independent movie about imperialism/Iraq made with Middle Eastern money - two problems. First, it would not be independent. I think big money (i.e. power elites) in Middle Eastern countries have a sort of quid-pro-quo arrangement with their Western counterparts. They are quite content with their own corruption, and so may prefer not to rain too heavily on ours. Secondly, even if it were to be made with a tone to our satisfaction, would it not be dismissed in Western spheres as propaganda, and thus would be ignored or villified?

@ Suhayl
A question for you, if you don't mind: in the years before 1994, what did you do that contributed to bringing down the apartheid regime?

@Jon 5:28pm Our troops should come back and feel contempt for us, the general population, that allowed them to be sent on an illegal war and then shortly after reelected the principle liars. They should tell us that the next time we really need them to lay down their lives for us they might just reserve the right to refuse.

Ego freak Blair had only one purpose in life: making his name in history by doing bad things and then whitewashing over them.
The opposite approach of trying to help other people and being rebuked and forgotten for it, is described in the short chapter of the Qur'an, roughly translated:
In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful.
1. By the passage of time ( or the declining day )
2. Man is in a state of loss
3. Except those who believe and do good works,
and encourage one another towards truthfulness,
and exhort one another to endure patiently.

This active suppression strategy and all its nauseatingly grubby implementation tactics have been elaborated to a diabolic art form by NuLab. Indeed, for those of us who have serious experience of bona fide whistleblowing it can be felt as a form of torture. But, hey, that's their stock-in-trade isn't it? Sad...ultimately they're sad loser sub-human specimens.

Craig, you have my total admiration for carrying on carrying on! You exist! There are still a number of us good guys around still in existence too. Basic physics: eventually the pendulum has to swing back.

I wasn't at all surprised Craig's evidence wasn't used.

In court cases where there are serious allegations of state crime the courts or the CCRC omit any evidence that bears any suggestion of government complicity in illegal activities.

I'm sure the government very reluctantly let Craig give evidence but with all the emails etc sent to the Committee their back was against the wall. A priority of the government is to be seen to be democratic, fair-minded etc.

In these circumstances maybe it would be a very good idea to deluge the government with requests asking why Craig's evidence was not taken into account.

@Craig

You can wear MSM airbrushing as a badge of honour in the full knowledge that you are respected in this space. You will man the cyber pearly gates when these people come knocking on the door after the collapse of the MSM and the current political hierarchy. You can then tell them all to piss of down below. Just make sure it's on CCTV for the rest of us.

Rath Dé ar an obair. Keep it up.

I agree with commentators who say that if it hadn't been for Mr Murray, and others whose work I haven't followed, this issue would not have been raised and would not be in the papers, and Mr Milliband would not be subject to scrutiny, even by a committee appointed by government, whose own chairman protests about the fact. The thing for Mr Murray to remember is that he was one of the first people to break the wall of silence, as far as I know. He therefore made room for those after him.

Being first is necessary, and as far as I can see, is not always a thankless task, but often. But the task continues. Thank you.

PS Sorry if that sounds a bit pompous.

From the Morning Star today

Blair told: 'Come clean on torture'
Thursday 18 June 2009
Louise Nousratpour

Politicians and legal experts queued up today to warn ex-prime minister Tony Blair that his knowledge and tolerance of torture during the Iraq war made him unfit to continue as Middle East peace envoy.

The Guardian newspaper alleged that Mr Blair was aware of instructions given to agents regarding torture in the aftermath of the September 11 2001 World Trade Centre attacks.

The policy offered guidance to MI5 and MI6 officers who were questioning prisoners around the world in the event that they complained of being tortured by the US military.

Officers were apparently given instructions that they must not "be seen to condone" torture or "engage in any activity yourself that involves inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners."

But the guidance made it clear that they were under no obligation to stop prisoners from being tortured.

"Given that they are not within our custody or control, the law does not require you to intervene to prevent this," the policy stated.

Law professor and QC Philippe Sands said that the guidelines breached the UN convention against torture.

Referring to ministers' reluctance to disclose information about alleged torture of former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, legal charity Reprieve director Clive Stafford Smith said: "We now know why the Foreign Secretary was so insistent on keeping this torture policy from the British people.

"It has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with the immoral decisions made at the highest level of government."

He added: "When Binyam Mohamed was questioned by a British agent, he thought his torture would surely end. Instead, the agent was apparently under instructions from Number 10 to abandon Binyam to his fate."

Liberal Democrat shadow foreign secretary Edward Davey said: "Surely Tony Blair cannot remain Middle East Envoy when he is accused of breaking the UN convention against torture."

Craig, a political pundit on telly tonight was mooting July 23 as a likely date for Norwich North...

David Miliband had taken note of the evidence of Professor Sands about the opinion of Lord Bingham who believed torture was justified in individual cases where there are life and death security issues. He had also taken note of the loophole about cases sub judice. He was following the script from the JCHR committee and responding to it.

In front of the JCHR committee, Professor Sands portrayed the government's contravention of the Geneva Convention and Human Rights legislation as having been in effect replaced, at least in the minds of this government, by Bush's argument that our opponents in the war on terror had lost their rights to any protection.

'This sausage is made from 100% British beef' doesn't mean the same as 'This sausage is made 100% from British beef.' Human Rights legislation has become a very small part of a larger sausage which is made up from political colouring, colonial and commercial dealings plus a lot of other trash.

Lawyers know exactly how to present evidence in a way that is factually correct, but makes it appear uncontraversial. In the small part his evidence that I have seen, Miliband started to build his case on the plinth that Professor Sands had provided in the earlier hearing. viz, if you stick with national security, all the other issues will be lost. Both are just being lawyers and but that's not Milibands job. He's supposed to be a leader for this country's future, not a pathetic apologist for our recent past. No doubt when the moment comes he will deal the fatal blow to Blair. For now he is just toeing the Brown line, securing his own position. Sod torture, there are Brownie points to be won working for the grey suits.

Mary's Morning Post post is encouraging, but today the BBC was full of the great and the good grunting loudly about the need to put all of these inconvenient accusations behind us with a fudged, final enquiry. You can't beat a good sausage, full of fat and flour filling, red hot from the barbeque. That's what the public want and that's what they'll get.

Jon, you're absolutely right. Thanks very much for considering the issues.

Abe, I don't claim to be a 'Che Guevara', but I was a member of the Ant-Apartheid Movement for many years and distributed leaflets through doors, for decades tried to avoid buying South African produce and consistently argued against the regime, etc. I wasn't a writer then and so had no public profile.

I'm very open about these things.

Thanks for asking - but if I may ask, why do you ask?

@ Suhayl

You seemed keen on 'white' as a political label, and the label 'honorary white' was used in South Africa for certain visitors (e.g. E.R. Braithwaite, who wrote a book by that title about his visit there in the 1970s). I wondered if you had any related activism.

Craig.
You can get decent internet connections in Ghana. Try BusyInternet on Ring Road North - it's the biggest net cafe in town and also does great work incubating local business. As a disclaimer - I'm due to start helping them on their esoko.com farming project soon.

Yes, as usual, you're spot-on! I was thinking precisely of E.R Braithwaite's seminal book when I used the term and was almost going to reference it in the blog-entry, in fact, but I had an instinct that it might muddy the waters - you know, people might have thought that I was somehow comparing the UK to Apartheid-era South Africa, a comparison which would have been daft! If I'd been writing an essay, I would've referenced it, obviously. The term's passed into the language now, to some extent, in any case. I picked up the book second-hand during the 1980s when I was exploring that sort of thing, you know, British 'kitchen-sink' films from the 1960s, etc. Very well-spotted, Abe!

Returning to an earlier topic on Craig's blog, I see that this whinger is still moaning.

http://blog.dorries.org/id-1441-2009_6_The_Black_Stuff.aspx

@Mary

Just had a look at your reference - someone smashed Nadine Dorries' furniture and sent a message boasting of it to her. I hope that Justice catches up with the perpetrator.

This sums it all up,i think.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/cartoon/2009/jun/19/cartoon-tony-blair-interrogation-policy

Abu Rene - The whingeing was about spending £2,000 to entertain constituents. Why did she do that? Don't forget about the details of her ACA claims.

More from her here.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/06/14/torment-of-claims-row-tory-115875-21438950/

From the BBC website

NADINE DORRIES

Claim: The Telegraph accused Ms Dorries of spending only free weekends and holidays in the property she calls her main home. It said her claim of £18,000 in rent on the property she designates as her second home was therefore unjustified. The newspaper also said she claimed for a New Year's Eve hotel room and a lost £2,190 deposit on a rented flat.

Response: The MP for Mid Bedfordshire refused to clarify publicly what she considers to be her main home. Instead, she released a long statement on her blog explaining her various living arrangements.

Ms Dorries denied the allegation about the hotel room but said she had claimed for the lost deposit. She also wrote: "There is one thing I know about me better than anyone else. I never do anything I know to be wrong and I have common sense by the bucketful."
________________________________________

Chutzpah!

The vandalism of Dorries' furniture must be seen as an indictment of public opinion against all MPs, even though her behaviour has been pretty poor also. From mary's quote of the BBC: "The MP ... has refused to clarify what she considers to be her main home" - what a goddamn cheek, after all that has happened!

In my view she does not deserve public sympathy, even if she is genuinely bewildered why people are angry, or certain that she has done nothing wrong.

@mary
"The whingeing was about spending £2,000 to entertain constituents. Why did she do that? Don't forget about the details of her ACA claims."

I do not know what MPs typically spend to entertain constituents, but I understand that tickets to visit Parliament through MPs are much in demand. Thus if it were customary to offer them even modest hospitality like coffee in the restaurant used by MPs, and 500 visited in a year, the costs could mount up.
As for ACA, if Nadine Dorries were led by the Fees Office to think of ACA as unofficial income, I think that was a bad mistake, and that raising MPs' salaries to a level commensurate with their responsibility but treating expenses the same way as in other organisations (i.e. fairly strictly), would have been a better idea. But what's done is done.

Time to come home, Craig. We believe we are living in the first days of a better country. Scotland will need every shoulder to the wheel if we are to defeat the relentless media assault on our future.

Craig,

Well I've had no internet connection at all for over a week whilst trying to keep up with my wife in Lancashire and the Lake District.

You may or may not be pleased to know that I suggested to my wife one night that I was considering spending a few days in Norwich - depending on other committments and timings - tramping the streets - trying to get people to vote for this bloke who's book I'd read on our last holiday.

She not only said - Go for it - but that She was coming too. She hasn't read your book - but I guess I must have told her rather a lot about it.

The book I read on this holiday - when it was really pissing down cats and dogs was "Escaping the Matrix — How we the people can change the world" by Richard Moore.

I thought over 50% of it was absolutely brilliant and I would recommend the first few chapters as an exceedingly good summary of recent history leading to why Craig and others come out with statements such as "Discovering That I Do Not Exist"

The last few chapters explore possible solutions largely based on a concept of local democracy and empowerment at the local level rather than the current bureaucratic central dictatorships. The ideas here are largely based on meetings structured to find solutions that everyone can agree with and to which all interesed parties are welcome and become committed to. In theory it sounds wonderful - but then so did John Lennon's song Imagine - and nearly everything has got worse since he sung it.

Tony

So when I suggested to my wife that I was considering tramping the Streets of Norwich wearing a Posh Suit doing all the Working Class areas and just telling them to get off their Fucking Arse - and Put an Honest Local Man in Parliament by voting for him...

She laughed

You in a Posh Suit?

And then she got me in training (normally my longest walk is to the local pub to see a band)..,She got me doing 3 miles - first down the Devil Steps - and then on a Circular Tour of New Skelmersdale (they are all Scouse - the original Woolyback Old Skem Western Lancashire accent has been almost completely wiped out) But Skem ain't so bad as a New Town - virtually all the Scousers have got a Garden - the Planners ( I think my Cousin in Preston might have done it ) - They Didn't do High Rises - just normal houses with gardens

And so after surviving Skelmersdale

We arrive in Keswick

And I get Two Poles - as If I am going Ski-ing

And She says Don't Look Embarrassed - All The Serious Walkers Use These

So we are doing an "Easy" Walk from Rossthwaite to Watendlath

And the Ambulance and The Mountain Rescue Crew Turn Up At The Same Time as Us

And He is Blocking The Way

And They are all going for it seriously doing the mouth to mouth and the pumping the chest - and the oxygen mask - and so well I thought what should we do?

Its a bit impolite to step over the body - and say we have got to get to Watendlath

So we sit and wait by the Sheep

I mean there is fuck all we could do - the Professionals were in attendenance

And they went for it for well over 30 minutes

And we were getting bored. Is this guy going to come back to life from the dead or not?

And we still do not know if he survived (we have been trying to find out)

But he had a quality pair of walking boots on - and his wife didn't look much different to mine.

So we followed the sheep's path past and tried not to cause any disrespect or embarrassment.

But that could have been me - he was far better prepared.

So we WALK to Watendlath.

And it is the Most Beautiful Place In The World.

The Next Day We Walk Round Buttermere (She Gave Me an Easy Day)

So Norwich Should Be No Problem.
(We Have Friends in Norwich)

Tony

Cogito ergo sum – or as Craig would not like us to know – Blogito ergo sum. Sure he exists, and does so in a huge way in the blogosphere. Press on mate – exist!

Panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis hodie.
Trans. Give us our daily pain.

I followed the links to The Guardian in Craig's post and found it. There was Gordon Brown's self-pitying face saying New Labour are going to win the next election because of his socialist policies of mitigating the worst effects of the recession.

What is he on? Our fathers and grandfathers were locked up as prisoners of war in the middle of a full-scale war against Fascism. Nobody tortured them, hooded them, pissed on them and set savage dogs them. Their families were not taken hostage and handed over to prisons where electric drills were driven into their heads.

What has socialism got to do with anything? We the British people demand that the perpetrators of the Iraq war are convicted under the existing international legislation on human rights and that the sovereignty and assets of Iraq, which was illegally attacked, are returned in their entirety to the Iraqi majority, which happens to be 60% Sunni, rather than to the puppets of USUKIS aggression.

New Labour has cancer, the illegality of the Iraq and Afghan wars. It is shortly going to be put to rest and we can all step over its dead body and proceed with our walk.

@Courtenay Barnett: "Blogito ergo sum"
That's a good one!

The thing is I am a human being and I was emotionally Affected by what happenned.

He died - he was 73 years old and he died with his walking boots on - just like that - on his way to Heaven

Watendlath

I found this information by a Google search and I found the website of the Mountain Rescue Team

These Guys Do It For LOVE of their fellow human beings who get their boots on and see the Beauty Of Our World For Real

Tony

anon,

Thank You for saying this

"Our fathers and grandfathers were locked up as prisoners of war in the middle of a full-scale war against Fascism. Nobody tortured them, hooded them, pissed on them and set savage dogs them. Their families were not taken hostage and handed over to prisons where electric drills were driven into their heads."

It sort of makes me feel for the kid who was sat exactly here (where I am sitting) - and got into the Spitfire - just down the Road at the Main Airfield

And Won The Battle of Britain

If The German Nazis had captured him - there is No Way they would Do

What Tony Blair/George Bush/Dick Cheney Did

Tony

Not only have they murdered, tortured and left millions scarred for life both physically and mentally, they and the puppet Iraqi government have intentionally failed to reconstruct the country so that Iraq is forced to lose its vast oil resources to US and UK oil companies at the end of June.
On the surface it appears the UK/US military presence is disappearing with the UK army having left Iraq and the US troops about to.
However, what I'd like to know is who actually owns the mercenary companies operating in Iraq? Who initially funded Aegis' precursor, Sandline? Is there any relationship between it and government; this includes secret unelected permanent government.

Not only have they murdered, tortured and left millions scarred for life both physically and mentally, they and the puppet Iraqi government have intentionally failed to reconstruct the country so that Iraq is forced to lose its vast oil resources to US and UK oil companies at the end of June.
On the surface it appears the UK/US military presence is disappearing with the UK army having left Iraq and the US troops about to.
However, what I'd like to know is who actually owns the mercenary companies operating in Iraq? Who initially funded Aegis' precursor, Sandline? Is there any relationship between it and government; this includes secret unelected permanent government.

Not only have they murdered, tortured and left millions scarred for life both physically and mentally, they and the puppet Iraqi government have intentionally failed to reconstruct the country so that Iraq is forced to lose its vast oil resources to US and UK oil companies at the end of June.
On the surface it appears the UK/US military presence is disappearing with the UK army having left Iraq and the US troops about to.
However, what I'd like to know is who actually owns the mercenary companies operating in Iraq? Who initially funded Aegis' precursor, Sandline? Is there any relationship between it and government; this includes secret unelected permanent government.

I've just posted a comment three times but it's just ended up in the preview section though it's been counted twice in the comment section.
Is there something wrong?

@Ruth

It may be just a lag in transmission. I have had to resist the temptation to repost comments I thought hadn't got through.

Then again it could be a tech-glitch.

By Ian Fleming's criteria, though, three times is enemy action. [1 = happenstance; 2 = coincidence; 3 = enemy action.] I always loved that one. Really simplifies your life.

Ruth, Póló et al:

After posting, if your post does not automatically come up at the end, refresh your page - usually by pressing F5. This should reload the page properly, and you'll see your post.

This is slightly annoying but this feature helps reduce the load on the server by telling the browser software to use the copy it already has in memory. It means that high traffic web sites can cope with more users than they ordinarily could.

Craig, the rule is this:

I think, therefore I am not.

June 28, 2009

"CIA Crucified captive in Abu Ghraib Prison"

"The Central Intelligence Agency crucified a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, according to a report published in The New Yorker magazine."

“A forensic examiner found that he (the prisoner) had essentially been crucified; he died from asphyxiation after having been hung by his arms, in a hood, and suffering broken ribs,” the magazine’s Jane Mayer writes in the magazine’s June 22nd issue. “Military pathologists classified the case a homicide.” The date of the murder was not given."

“No criminal charges have ever been brought against any C.I.A. officer involved in the torture program, despite the fact that at least three prisoners interrogated by agency personnel died as a result of mistreatment,” Mayer notes."

"An earlier report, by John Hendren in The Los Angeles Times indicted other torture killings. And Human Rights First says nearly 100 detainees have died in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan."

"Hendren reported that one Manadel Jamadi died “of blunt-force injuries” complicated by “compromised respiration” at Abu Ghraib prison “while he was with Navy SEALs and other special operations troops.” Another victim, Abdul Jaleel, died while gagged and shackled to a cell door with his hands over his head.” Yet another prisoner, Maj. Gen. Abid Mowhosh, former commander of Iraq’s air defenses, “died of asphyxiation due to smothering and chest compression” in Qaim, Iraq."...

http://tinyurl.com/kk3xbx