BP Profit From Torture

by craig on September 7, 2011 10:20 am in Uncategorized

Just when you thought that nothing could be more sickening than the revelation that the mad Mahdi Blair was godfather to the baptism of Murdoch’s daughter in the River Jordan…

Kudos to the Daily Mail for outing BP’s Mark Allen as the MI6 man who wrote the sickeningly jaunty message to Gadaffi henchman Moussa Koussa on the rendition to terrible torture of a Libyan dissident and his wife and family. Lest we forget, this is the message:

I congratulate you on the safe arrival of Abu Abd Allah Sadiq. This is the least we could do for you and for Libya to demonstrate the remarkable relationship we have built over recent years

Allen then moved seamlessly from MI6 to a £200,000 pa job at BP working on their relationships with Gadaffi and other Arab dictators. We can only hope that one day Egypt emerges from military government to democracy and its security files too are opened. But I am willing to bet that MI6 and CIA shredders have been put in to Cairo government offices and will be working ceaselessly for the next few days. Expect the odd fire too.

.

Tweet this post

85 Comments

  1. A grotesque episode. From the Mail piece, we see Mr Jack Straw at work again. His bloody hands have been into everything rotten that has occurred since 1997.
    .

    In 2007, Sir Mark had made two telephone calls to Jack Straw, the then Justice Secretary, to discuss a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya, although BP insists it had not lobbied specifically for Megrahi’s inclusion in any deal.
    .
    It just so happened that negotiations over prisoners were blocking a £15billion oil drilling deal that Sir Mark was helping to broker between BP and the Libyan regime. Weeks after those telephone calls, Mr Straw allowed Megrahi to be part of the prison transfer agreement with Libya. It was a decision that put the White House on a collision course with the UK. And last year the American Senate Committee announced that it wanted to cross-examine the former spy over his role in the shameful affair.

  2. Here are two articles from The Guardian about Mark Allen. They include various other details, but seem to present him in a rather positive way, and make only one passing mention of BP:
    .
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/05/whitehall-papers-libya-spy-agencies-torture
    .
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/06/libya-mastermind-wmd-triumph-minefield

  3. Channel 4 have a “Who Knows Who” tool:
    .
    http://whoknowswho.channel4.com/
    .
    Allen is shown with links to MI6, BP PLC, and good old Jack Straw.

  4. The Guardian would wouldn’t they. They are there to prop up the structure of the military- industrial complex.

  5. Wikispooks has a page on Allen. He’s “Senior Advisor” to the Monitor Group Company, “a global consulting and private equity firm”, and on some board of London School of Economics:
    .
    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Mark_Allen
    .
    He is also on the board of the Mile End Group, Queen Mary’s college London University, and he wrote an eulogy to Daphne Park, “Queen of Spies” for the Special Forces Club:
    .
    http://www.meg.qmul.ac.uk/board.html
    .
    http://www.sfclub.org/daphneypark.htm

  6. Who is this Sadiq? The name sounds familiar. Check: ah, Abdel-Hakim Belhadj! And he is a dissident for you! :) )) Just like “Thank goodness the NATO bombing campaign will now end.” (22 Aug)

  7. “the revelation that the mad Mahdi Blair was godfather to the baptism of Murdoch’s daughter in the River Jordan…”

    Godfather indeed, in every sense.

    I thought it said a lot about the Catholic Church that it would be so ready to accept a criminal like Bliar into it. To imagine this man has any belief system or morality at all beyond power and greed is surely a sick joke. Presumably he promptly cleansed his bloodstained hands with 5 minutes in a confessional…

    As for countries like Egypt emerging into democracy… Let’s hope their new leaders don’t hold their electorate in quite as much open contempt as ours do. We may grumble about the likes of Straw, Allen, etc, etc – but they sail on regardless and apparently fireproof when they should be in gaol to a man, demonstrating how little real power any of us have.

  8. Libyan oil is some of the finest and most easily and cheaply refinable in the world, known as, light, sweet, crude. It’s also among the last great deposites of this high-quality oil left on the planet.

    About a year ago a restricted report by the Bundeswehr, the German Army’s Future Analysis Department was “leaked” to the magazine Der Spiegel. The densely argued report dealt with cosequences; economic, social, political, strategically, militarily, of the world reaching maximum oil production of around 85 million barrels a day, and what would happen when that rate of production could no longer be maintained and would begin to fall, perhaps drastically. This is also known as Peak Oil, which the military analysts mentioned and calculated had been reached in 2010.

    The report is devastating reading and pulls no punches. Recently the entire report has been published by a Swedish group, and it’s been translated into english.

    The report states that for various complex reasons the potential decline in economic activity and disruption could be far steeper than the coming decline in oil production. They were especially concerned about the challenges we will face in relation to both the production of food and the transport of food internationally, both of which are highly dependent on cheap and plentiful supplies of oil.

    The report also deals with Europe’s growing dependence on Russia for its oil and gas supplies, how this could effect our geo-political stance and relations with Russia, and our lack of alternative sources of oil and gas.

    I think this report puts our attitude towards Libya in a clearer perspective, especially the aggressive posture of France and the UK, which were deeply involved in the conspiracy to topple Gaddafi and install a, hopefully, more pro-western regime in Tripoli.

    My second point deals with a speech Gaddafi made in Tripoli in February in front of an “adoring” crowd of supporter. This speech has been presented as a declaration of genocide aimed at the civilian population of Benghazi, and has been used as a pretext to attack Libya.

    Gaddafi is supposed to have threatened Benghazi with a fate, a massacre, like Tienanmin Square in China, Gaza, Falluja in Iraq and called the people of Benghazi “rats.”

    Strangely he also mentioned the “massacre” in Waco, Texas, which hasn’t been reported so widely. That got me thinking. I also wondered why Gaddafi would supply Nato propagandists with such a gift, knowing full well that Nato was looking for any excuse to intervene in Libya and topple his regime. But then I remembered, he’s mad of course.

    The media and experts have endlessly referred to this particular speech as evidence that Gaddafi was planning to unleash a genocidal attack on the defenceless population of Benghazi and slaughter them in their tens of thousands. His guilt was established with his own words. What could be clearer?

    But if one bothers to examine the Gaddafi speech one finds that he actually said the opposite to the version which our media, politicians, and tame experts, have endlessly repeated.

    Gaddafi compared his restrained strategy, naming the above examples, of how other nations, China, Israel, the United States, had dealt with rebels, terrorists, and civil unrest, using tanks and bullets to crush demonstrators, something he hadn’t ordered, methods he hadn’t employed, though he could have. Nowhere does he directly threaten to unleash his black, African, mercenaries on Benghazi’s civilian population, in a frenzy of bloodshed and destruction. On the contrary.

    It’s extraordinary how our media, our politicians, and our rebels have twisted the dictators words, reversing his meaning in order to justify a moral war, or crusade, to protect civilians from genocide. Propaganda at its finest.

    Even the ranting about “rats” in Benghazi is problematic. The man also referred to “cats” Benghazi, as he describes the rebels fighters, not the ordinary civilian population who he thinks have been misled and don’t deserve punishment, only the guilty deserve punishment and when found guilty, death.

    It’s a very emotional speech, a long, confused, desparate, rant. He calls the West, the US, Nato, and Israel, “rats” too, but he doesn’t threaten to attack them, or unleash genocide on anyone, though clearly he’s pretty pissed at the rebels who he believes will unleash a terrible civil war and destroy Libya.

    So, it would appear we’ve been all led up the garden path again, taken to war on a raft of distortion, lies, exaggerations, and hysterical propaganda, which is par for the course in wartime. But that our “free” media allow our politicians to get away with it again, after Iraq and the non-existant threat from their WMD, is extraordinary and deeply troubling.

    Have we seen the virtual end of bourgeois, liberal, democracy? Have we entered a new era? The era of “totalitarian democracy” where our politicians can get away with anything, and cannot be held to account for their gross crimes?

  9. Murdoch, is Blair’s… Godfather. Though it hardly seems to matter, as a river of blood has passed under imperialism’s gore-spattered bridge since then, and the stench of the charnel-house will always follow Blair, no matter how much he showers or bathes himself in expensive perfumes.

  10. Will the British government be sending the next generation of Libyan political refugees to be brutally maltreated by the incoming Libyan élite under nice Mr Belhaj?

  11. One can read an excellent analysis of the Bundeswehr report, in english, by hoping over to Energybullitin.net, in case anybody is interested.

  12. Apologies. It should be energybulletin.net. Sorry. Alas, my brain is beginning to fade on me.

  13. Writeon, the powerful have known about Peak Oil for decades. It is notable how little that subject appears in the mainstream media.
    .
    Alas, many of the powerful came to be powerful because they are those who are competitive, and good at competition and deception. I’m convinced that the challenges of Peak Oil could be met by global cooperation, but those with power see the world primarily in terms of competition. Thus, they initiate conflict.
    .
    In the short term, there will be a few “winning” groups, and far more that lose. In the longer term, all humanity will lose out.

  14. Off topic; a petition to support the UN call to delay the evictions at Dale Farm:
    .
    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dalefarm/

  15. Well said Clark. Remember the Roma and the Third Reich.
    .
    It’s ironic that as Basildon is ready to spend £millions on these evictions (was it £8m?) to defend the Green Belt, Gideon Osborne is ready to give carte blanche to the developers to carve it up be sweeping planning legislation away. He says it is what the economy needs. What economy?
    .
    http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planningsystem/planningpolicy/planningpolicyframework/
    …’the draft National Planning Policy Framework, which intends to slash 1,000 pages of policy to just 52′…. BBC website

  16. UK complicity at the highest level in extraordinary rendition is all too evident now with accusations made by Abdel Hakim Belhadj. NATO and the governments it represents may regret not having taken the advice “Be careful what you wish for” in getting rid of former ally Gaddafi. In their ‘dirty tricks’ pursuit for oil they have added more evidence against themselves to that already before Gibson (if Gibson is still seen fit to chair the enquiry).
    .
    Talking of which, did you ever get a reply Craig to that brilliant email as to whether Gibson saw the torture documents released by the Guardian? Or are you not at liberty to comment? Just curious!

  17. Hi John,

    I did indeed – just working on how to put a post together.

  18. Can’t wait.
    .
    Jack Straw is like the 3 monkeys, with his hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. If MI6 is so detached from senior government I can see no reason for having security services. My guess is Gibson saw no evil either.

  19. 5 September 2011
    Torture inquiry to examine UK-Libya intelligence linksClick to play

    .
    Allegations that MI6 was involved in the rendition of Libyan terror suspects will be examined by an existing inquiry, David Cameron has said.
    .
    It comes after papers suggesting close ties between MI6, the CIA and the Gaddafi regime were found in Tripoli.
    .
    Sir Peter Gibson’s inquiry into alleged involvement in torture by UK security agencies has said it will investigate.
    .
    A former Libyan foreign minister has claimed MI6 was co-operating with the old regime until about six months ago.
    .
    Meanwhile UK officials, including staff from the Foreign Office and Department for International Development, have arrived in Tripoli to re-establish a diplomatic presence in Libya.
    .
    Making a statement on Libya in the Commons earlier, Prime Minister David Cameron said: “We’ve asked the retired judge, Sir Peter Gibson, to examine issues around the detention and treatment of terrorist suspects overseas and this inquiry has already said it will look at these latest accusations very carefully.
    .
    “My concern throughout has been not only to remove any stain on Britain’s reputation but also to deal with these accusations of malpractice so as to enable our security services to get on with the vital work that they do.”
    .
    Opposition leader Ed Miliband said he agreed with the prime minister “that the Gibson inquiry must get to the bottom of the allegations”.
    .

    Jack Straw, who was UK Foreign Secretary between 2001 and 2006, told MPs he supported calls for an inquiry.
    .
    Mr Straw earlier told BBC Radio 4′s World at One programme he did not know whether allegations that UK security services were involved in the rendition of Libyan terror suspects were “credible”.
    .
    But he said the claims were a source of concern and “must be examined in very great detail” by the Gibson inquiry.
    .
    A statement from the Detainee Inquiry, to be chaired by Sir Peter Gibson, said that as part of its role of examining the extent of the government’s involvement in, or awareness of, improper treatment of detainees, it would “therefore, of course, be considering these allegations of UK involvement in rendition to Libya as part of our work”.
    .
    The commander of anti-government forces in Tripoli, Abdel Hakim Belhaj, said he was taken to Libya in a CIA and MI6 operation in 2004 after being arrested in Bangkok.
    .
    Mr Belhaj, then a terrorist suspect, said he was tortured in Libya.
    /…..
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14786924 (includes a comment from Frank I Was There Gardner)

  20. Blair as Godfather – in both senses of the word. The corruption of the journalist-politician nexus is a little bit more visible, which is a good thing.

  21. From Jack Straw’s statements and those of the Gaddafi regime and Abdel Hakim Belhadj it would appear Mark Allen and other MI6 agents kept the Libyan government much better informed than they did the foreign secretary. Am I missing something?

  22. None of what Straw says is credible. Nowadays, he is usually in thw ‘he doth protest too much’ mode.
    .
    Off topic but did anyone else see Nadine Dorries in the HoC earlier? She was holding forth for ages as if she owned the place when speaking to her amendment to the Health and Social Care Bill on abortion counselling. Quite funny when that other self publicist Louise Mensch intervened.

  23. massive conflict of interest for MI6 there – another example of the supposedly “national interest” actually being the interests of a small minority

  24. Writeon

    I’m reminded of the misrepresentation of a speech Milosevic made calling for ethnic harmony which was presented (again and again) as doing the precise opposite. I don’t have the references to hand. I’ll post them when I do.

    Now I see the criminal Cameron has said that Colonel Gadaffi should have no ‘pampered refuge’ (or some such term) but must ‘pay’ for his (supposed) actions. The problem when someone like Bomber Dave addresses only uncritical Daily-Mail-believers is that he loses all credibility and all possibility of influence with others. There is nothing Cameron could say to me now. When will he give up his pampered refuge and give himself up for trial for his part in, to pick one of many examples, the war crime of bombing Libyan TV?

  25. Guest, I’m almost sure Al Megrahi’s release was in some way connected with the oil deal. And I also believe with Dr Jim Swire that he had no part in the Lockerbie air disaster. If the second appeal had gone to court the “flimsy” evidence which convicted him would almost certainly have been thrown out (which casts much doubt on why the first appeal failed). Al Megrahi was dying and to knowingly let an innocent man die in prison looks bad on those who knew.
    .
    The big question is who was behind the Lockerbie plane crash. All the conspiracy documentaries are marginalised. I watched one at 2 a.m. a few years back. There is much more to Lockerbie than meets the eye. I’d like to see the real culprits punished, just as I would like to see Jack Straw punished for knowingly allowing “extraordinary rendition” while foreign secretary. Then I’d like to see him punished again for pretending not to know.

  26. @ Duncan McFarlane – You are spot on when you say “massive conflict of interest for MI6 there – another example of the supposedly “national interest” actually being the interests of a small minority”.
    #
    And when they go on to use their placed contacts in business, headhunters, accounting firms, banks, etc to deliberately spread career destroying lies about you (as happened in my case), you will understand just quite how evil these people are. As one honest PWC headhunter said about the slanders that circulated about me – They had to be believed because they came from all angles. When MI6 (or MI5) operate within normal businesses they are not behaving as an intelligence organization, but as a secret police and as such are a menace to any society that believes in democracy, or any business (obviously not BP) that relies on sanctity of contract and rule of law as a foundation for its business practices.

  27. On the whole, Sir Mark Allen seems like a good egg. He opposed the Iraq war, which may explain why he didn’t get the top job at MI6, and he persuaded Madhatti Gaddafi to give up his WMDs. In keeping with the policy of normalizing relations with Libya rather than bombing the shit out of them (77,000 tons of NATO bombs, I think we estimated here recently) he was prepared to exchange pleasant words with his opposite number in Libya.
    *
    As for the rendition of Libyan rebel Abdelhakim Belhadj, it seems that was the CIA’s doing, not Britain’s, so sir Mark’s talk of delivering this character into the hands of his enemy seems to have been little more than an empty verbiage. And note that Abdelhakim Belhadj was released from jail on the advice of Saif Gaddafi, so if his treatment was rough, it was tempered by a remarkable and, as now seems evident, foolish degree of magnanimity by the Libyan government.
    *
    It seems to me that BP are fortunate in having Mark Allen’s advice.

  28. KingofWelshNoir

    7 Sep, 2011 - 6:15 pm

    Baptism in the River jordan?
    .
    Didn’t he once say, ‘We don’t do God?’

  29. kingofwelshnoir

    That was campbell – blair is god.
    Mary, Dorries was indeed shocking. I actually had some sympathy for what her amendment was trying to do. But she just talked about herself, incessantly.

  30. It seems to me that saying “Such-and-such was done by MI5/MI6″ is not necessarily the same as saying “Such-and-such was done by the British state”. The cover of secrecy permits agents and groups to pursue independent agenda.
    .
    A systemic solution to this is required. Realistically, states require secret services, but relying upon vetting and personal integrity is hopelessly inadequate. The system should work to the good of the people without being reliant upon individual integrity.
    .
    My tentative idea is that some sort of declaration and verification system needs to be implemented. Objectives of missions should be declared in advance, and held in some secure way so that results can be checked against objectives in some well-defined timescale.
    .
    I feel sure that there is a good solution to this, related to and probably using the principles of public-key cryptography etc, but it would take someone clever at maths and logic to work out how to implement it.
    .
    Maybe an “adversarial” system could work. A monitoring organisation would be given clearance to follow all details of missions, but wouldn’t normally publish anything. They would constantly press the secret services to disclose as much as possible. If the secret services couldn’t satisfy the monitors of integrity, the monitors would publish.
    .
    At a very minimum, there should be time limits on how long the agencies can keep things secret, and the basic objective of all secret work should be towards eventual disclosure.

  31. Clark

    It doesn’t work in real life the way people think it does. MI6 is a very tame bureaucracy. The idea ministers don’t know what they are doing is absolute nonsense.

  32. conjunction

    7 Sep, 2011 - 7:11 pm

    Clark,

    Craig has made it clear, I think in one of his books, that Thatcher would never countenance the use of information gained from torture. This was clear at the time to the FO and presumably to secret aervices. Intelligence agencies are always going to be able to duck the radar to some degree, the issue is that government will always make them worry if they’re off message.

  33. Nadine Dorries had over an hour of Commons time. Her voice became louder and louder as she proceeded.
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/c_03.htm

  34. Craig, OK, maybe in the UK most of the blame lies with the government. It is certainly true that the people need better systems for checking on their ministers and MPs. Though in contradiction of your assertion, there was that plot to bring down Wilson’s government.
    .
    Whatever, I think a systematic approach should be developed. Just as we have the principles of, for instance, independence of the judiciary or the police, there should be a generally accepted system of regulating secret services that gives some degree of confidence, such that countries could be judged by how well they had implemented it.

  35. writeon
    I absolutely disagree with you over your view that Gaddafi wouldn’t have carried out a massacre. The basis of your argument seems to come from a speech Gaddafi made. It’d be much better to look at his actions in Benghazi in the past and other cities recently rather than words. Gaddafi has a particular hatred of Benghazi, which I think comes from fear. The city has never been compliant. I was there when his agents gunned down protesting students. I saw the gallows erected in the city centre. Most of the 1200 political prisoners massacred in Abu Salim came from Benghazi. More recently in the uprising Gaddafi troops used artillery fire on protestors including on a funeral procession. The streets were filled with shells and body parts. If the French hadn’t intervened, there would have been a massacre. The people in Benghazi including my son were in no doubt what Gaddafi had in store for them.

  36. What interests me about this particular speech in Febuary is that it was used as the basis, as “proof” that Gaddafi was publically boasting, brazenly, insanely, crowing about his intention to slaughter the population of Benghazi. This was the spin our politicians and media put on his speech. That he actually, and my arabic is not that wonderful, but even I can see that this is not what he said.

    Our propaganda used this speech to justify intervening in Libya and removing a tyrant from power, based once again on lies, distortion, and falsifications. In a war one cannot just accept the propaganda produced by the belligerents involved in the conflict.

    Given that Gaddafi knew that Nato was looking for any excuse to attack Libya and remove him from power and destroy his regime, the idea that Gaddafi would have massacred the population of Benghazi out of spite, and at the cost of losing the entire country, is fanciful. He may have been mad, but he wasn’t stupid. Attacking Benghazi would have been like cutting off his nose to spite his face. Dictators don’t last long that way, especially one’s who have lots of oil.

    And the NTC itself has recently stated that over 50,000 people have been killed in the civil war/revolution/coup, isn’t that equal to a massacre, if the figures are accurate? And what about the massive destruction caused by the bombing? What’s so special about the people in Benghazi, don’t the deaths of thousands of non-Benghazi Libyans count?

    And what’s going to happen now that Gaddafi is gone? The West wants Libya’s oil on the West’s terms. How will the Libyans react to the West’s demands? Did they really believe life was going to be better with Gaddafi gone, replaced by the new leaders reliant on the West? I think the future is going to be bloody, like Afghanistan and Iraq, part of the West’s strategy of Balkanisation of the Muslim world.

  37. The Dorries theatrical was allowed so as to be a media distraction I think.
    The vote for NHS privatisation
    NHS Privatisation Third Reading
    .
    Ayes:316
    Noes:251
    .
    The people won’t know the NHS as they know it has disappeared until the point when they need its services.
    .
    See the quote from Lord Howe. Most illuminating.
    ‘But the government’s cause was not helped by the choice of words of Health Minister Lord Howe or his boss, the prime minister.
    .
    By saying the overhaul presented private groups with “huge opportunities” and it did not matter “one jot” who provided NHS care, Lord Howe invited the wrath of the medical profession.
    .
    David Cameron’s claim that the reforms were now supported by a host of professional bodies did not help either – they still have a number of serious concerns.’
    .
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14829485

  38. The first step for Libyans was to remove Gaddafi. Without Western help that would’ve been impossible because he was armed to the hilt. If the new government doesn’t deliver they’ll be out. Libyans have suffered too much and have a duty to ensure that what so many died for is realised. They’re not afraid, they’re experienced now in fighting and of course armed. I don’t think the West will have the patience or time to wait for further disruption to their oil supplies and investments.

  39. Yes, Writeon, the propaganda and spin should stop. Let people make up their own minds.
    http://libya360.wordpress.com/2011/07/08/accurate-translation-of-gaddafis-speech-made-in-the-early-days-of-the-crisis/
    .
    I don’t know if that’s the speech you’re referring to, but he does stress a couple of times that he hadn’t (yet) authorised force. However, I’m not sure the people in Benghazi would feel very reassured.
    .
    “I haven’t yet given the order to use bullets. When the order is given to use force, we will be ready. Then everything will be burned.”

  40. ‘Given that Gaddafi knew that Nato was looking for any excuse to attack Libya and remove him from power and destroy his regime’

    I think Gaddafi felt reasonably secure at the beginning of the uprising because he had the support of the UK.

  41. I’ve just found this tool which looks useful. When you use it to cite a web page, it makes a snapshot copy. This would have been useful, for instance, when the Atlas Shrugs blog was edited after incriminating evidence was found there. Home page:
    .
    http://www.webcitation.org/index
    .
    Submissions:
    .
    http://www.webcitation.org/archive.php

  42. [Ruth]:
    *
    [Other mod: diminutive nickname corrected, offensive insinuations deleted.]
    *
    You say: “The first step for Libyans was to remove Gaddafi. Without Western help that would’ve been impossible because he was armed to the hilt.”
    *
    i.e., rebellion was futile without Western intervention. So the sequence was this. A western instigated and armed insurrection in Benghazi leading inevitably to Libyan government reaction leading to NATO intervention to prevent Gaddafi from “killing his own people,” i.e., the people Britain and other NATO countries had incited to armed rebellion.
    *
    (It will be interesting to know, when the history of this war is written, how many Libyans NATO has killed in its R2P mission. Based on the bomb load delivered, I would say at least as many as were killed by the Nazi blitz of Britain during WW2.)
    *
    As for your premise “The first step for Libyans was to remove Gaddafi”, you offer no justification, presumably because it is difficult to explain why people of the most developed nation in Africa would want to remove a government that was working to enrich the nation. Sure there were tribal rivalries and the Brits have a relative of the late King Idris, of the Senussi tribe as a puppet ready and waiting to go. But in what way will a puppet under Western control serve the Libyans better than Gaddafi? You didn’t bother to explain, because we can infer, you can’t.

  43. A government has a responsibility to keep control over its territory, and if it loses control over an area it has a responsibility to regain it. Any government would do it, and most, perhaps all, would use force.
    In preparing for that, it may make sense to issue threats on the lines of, if you give up we’ll be lenient, but if you don’t and we have to use force we’ll hit hard and crush you. The purpose is to demoralise the rebels and reduce their support. If done wrong it may backfire. I suppose.
    I haven’t yet read the speech cited by writeon, but I recall that Gadaffi also promised Benghazi $20bn of infrastructure improvements once the rebellion was over – about $30k per capita (Benghazi pop approx 600k). Any threats made are likely to have been in the category of ‘overblown rhetoric’. I’ve seen people with straight faces saying he would certainly have killed 1/4 of a million. It’s nonsense.
    Of course the real nonsense is NATO’s notion that they were protecting ‘civilians’ from reprisals, by prolonging the conflict for five months and more and thus providing five more months for reprisals to be carried out by both sides as territory changed hands.

  44. Canaspeccy,
    I think you’re wrong in ‘the people Britain and other NATO countries had incited to armed rebellion.’ I don’t believe the UK was involved in instigating the rebellion. I think it was France with US backing and it may have been the SAS who blew up the arms depot near Benghazi to stop the people of the city becoming stronger and help Gaddafi regain control.

    You say ‘… it is difficult to explain why people of the most developed nation in Africa would want to remove a government that was working to enrich the nation.’

    Take a few minutes and go through interviews of Libyan people saying what they want.

    The Libyan government worked to enrich itself and its lackeys not the majority of Libyan people, many who are exceedingly poor.

  45. Craig,
    The Medialens Editors have quoted you, your blog, in the latest of their brilliant Alerts.

    http://www.medialens.org

    I find them to be a beacon of intelligence and conscience, and ‘Craig Murray’ – a superb fascinating character…
    Thankyou for all your Posts.

  46. Ruth,
    *
    At least we agree the rebellion was instigated by outside powers. That the same powers then claimed a responsibility to protect the people they had incited to rebel is a piece of monstrous humbug.
    *
    Some Libyans may be poor, but Libya nevertheless had the highest human development index in Africa. By the time the war is over Libya will be a heap of wreckage, smashed by more than 8000 bombing raids to date, with plenty more still to come.
    *
    I see the rebels have given Gaddafi’s forces at Sirte another week to surrender. Then what? Napalm and white phosphorus as in Fallujah?

  47. In Iraq, private companies harvest the remains of missiles from previous conflicts. Not surprisingly, those who come in contact with the depleted uranium contract cancer and die. Not to mention innocent women and children.
    We in the West have been scarified by our governments for years by threats of dirty bombs in our inner cities, but this is in effect what we have subjected the populations of all the conflict zones.
    The psychological war on Muslim populations is equally appalling. Repressive regimes, including especially our own in the UK have made open discussion of politics an extremely dangerous occupation because our government has spent billions planting spies in the Muslim communities. I myself have not made any new friends from the mosque for nearly a decade, and the isolation has been killing me.
    The West bombards Muslim countries day and night with music, pornography and besuited political discussion. So if the temptation to speak out has failed to land you in trouble with the intelligence agencies, you are just as likely to be caught out by government-funded Islamists spying on who is watching pornography because their head is mashed up by not being able to express themselves to anyone.
    You may well laugh, but in the hands of a CIA agent like Belhaj, a list of naughty Muslims is more likely to be tortured than a list of Gaddafi activists. Laugh as much as you like, carry on, I don’t mind. The reality is that in traditional societies, small misdemeanors like this, not to mention being forced into sexual activity, are major crimes. One AlShabab girl who blew herself and her politician father up in Somalia, a totally unthinkable act in Islam, was highly likely in my mind to have been sexually compromised in order to be manipulated into committing this heinous crime.
    What you lot constantly ignore, because it does not affect you, because you have a choice under liberal democracy not to get involved, is that the religious mind of the Zionists has made itself particularly useful to the secular mind of Western governments by devising religious psychogical torture designed to persecute religious minds. A Muslim should be the first to speak out about injustice, but they are forced to live under stasi mind-control. A Muslim should be the last to look at what is haram, but they are kept idle and isolated until they turn to haram.

    The CIA has discovered the most effective tool for punishing Muslims the whole world over is to employ the services of Muslim so called Salafi zealots who enforce compliance with hard-core jihadi Islam while they themselves lie, cheat, extort, spy, and sell all and sundry to their dictator masters and their CIA M16 paymasters.
    I have contributed long enough to this blog to know that no-one ever comments on the vicissitudes of trying to practice Islam. Like my father, your opinion is just that if you choose to go the opposite direction to the rest of the world, you have only yourself to blame.
    But spare a minute for the victims of unseen radiation freely distributed by us in every conflict zone, and for the unseen psychological suffering the Zionists have devised for Muslims. These crimes and thought crimes, although not felt by you, are perpetrated by your governments in your name. God forbid that you should become the victims of unseen radiaion from a dirty bomb or victims like Roderick Russell or Craig of dirty, psychological mind crime.

  48. Let’s get this part straight at least. I am not a supporter of Gaddafi or his regime. I don’t live in Libya, and to be honest I don’t know enough about Libya’s internal politics to make a judgement about which side I’d be on, if I did live there. I would though be highly sceptical about the issue of a “genuine, people’s revolution” that could only succeed with the backing of Nato, and the consequences for Libya, especially after Aghanistan and Iraq, and especially because Libya has so much oil. Libya’s national interest is to exploit the oil as carefully and slowly as possible, with as much national control as possible, in a phrase, “resource nationalism.” This is in direct contrast to the wester, neo-conservative, economic and strategic agenda, that wants unfettered acess to Libya, a “free” market, and to rapidly ramp up production.

    The point is, from my perspective, that Gaddafi’s speeches were full of shit, and wild, emotional, rhetorical, flights; great ranting things in front of huge crowds in Tripoli. But in February 2011 when his troops were outside Benghazi, he didn’t threaten to slaughter the civilian population, or unleash a “genocide” like our politicians, media, and experts, said, over and over again, and used this as a moral justification for going to war on the rebel side to topple a regime we had become “dissatisfied” with.

    There’s an enormous difference between a brutal regime threatening to hunt down armed rebels and a regime that openly calls for “genocide” and massacres. But in a war one needs propaganda in order to sell the war to the people and get their suppport, or at least undermine the potential opposition to the UK intervening in Libya. So one chose to deliberately “re-edit” Gaddafi’s speech, and subsequent speeches, and offers to negotiate a peaceful transition, and instead opted for war and the total destruction of his regime, even though, ironically the NTC contains a swathe of former regime members.

    Was Gaddafi really as Bad as our leaders and their media painted him? I don’t know, though I suspect he wasn’t. In many ways the social security system in Libya is better than our own, with free healthcare and free education, massively subsidized basic foodstuffs, almost free energy and petrol. And in Africa Libya’s generous investments and loans made Gaddafi close to a hero, which our media chooses to ignore. Why do we think that we know more about what’s good for Africa than the Africans? Why did we reject out of hand the various peace proposals presented by South Africa and the African Union?

    If, in reality, our only real interest and concern in relation to Libya, is gaining free access to and controling their oil reserves for our benefit, and everything else is basically hypocracy and propaganda, then there is no “moral” basis for our attack on Libya, no legal basis at all, and it’s once again a western war of aggression aimed at another oil-rich, but weak, and vulnerable country.

  49. Nextus,

    All I’m saying is that there is a world of difference between what Gaddafi actually said, and what our politicians and media, said he said. In fact, we almost reveresed what he said 100%, and re-edited his February speech to present it in the worst possible version imaginable, that he was openly, insanely, brazenly, threatening the civilian population with “genocide”, andy that’s what Obama said, and in public. So there can be no doubt about how Gaddafi’s speech was spun in the propaganda war for our hearts and minds.

    Add this, which I find shocking; to the level of cynicism involved, the selective editing, the spin, the contempt for basic democratic principles, namely that our politicians should not lie to us, that our media should act as a watchdog and scrutinize our political system; to the wild stories about viagra handed out to soldiers so they could rape more successfully, thousands of invisible, African mercenaries, indiscriminate aerial attacks on civilian targets, mass rapes, massacres, exections on massive scale, and a clear pattern of war-propaganda emerges.

    These are the methods of a totalitarian state when it chooses to start a war of aggression, not a democracy that’s healthy and still functioning, and that’s why these dire methods don’t just have significance for Libya, but for the kind of country we live too.

  50. Ruth, well done, remaining rational despite Canspeccy’s insults.
    .
    Further to my comment above about British secret services being so secret that they may not be representative of the British state, consider the matter of the SAS and the arms dump, and Cameron’s simultaneous support for military action to support the rebels. These look contradictory. Consider the ridicule in the House of Commons when Hague made excuses for the actions of that SAS team. It looks to me as though “Britain” was playing for both sides, Gaddafi and the rebels.
    .
    That Hague was so quick with his speech of excuses suggests that this is a normal situation within the British establishment. Maybe what we’re seeing is not really politics at all, but the playing out of old Public School or Oxford college rivalries through the machinery of the British state.

  51. Nextus,

    Thank you for the link to the translation of Gaddafi’s speech. I’m not sure that it is the February speech I was talking about, or not. Because the “accurate translation” doesn’t give a date, and it’s been cropped and edited. It isn’t a translation of the whole speech, bits have been left out, and it’s been “cleaned up”, whereas other translations I read, and though my Arabic is far, far, from perfect, give a more confused and incoherent version of the speech, and much longer.

    Though this is all just blood under the brigde I suppose, who really cares anymore? On to Syria and Iran.

  52. p.s. The Qur’an categorically forbids casting aspersions on chaste, Mulsim women. But one of my friends who belongs to this class of political, lying, benefit cheating, people cheating, phone and computer hacking, so called Muslim leaders, who study Shari’ah to burden others, but who exempt themselves from its obedience, like the Rabbis of Jesus’ peace be upon him, time… recently called my wife a ‘bitch on heat’ while declaring him and his family as superior in religion to my wife and her clan.
    This is the ‘divide and rule’ strategy the West has unleashed on Islam. Devised by Zionists specifically to attack the unity of Islam. Even Birmingham boasts a handful of mosques where the majority of Muslims, maybe one million, are regarded as non-brothers and non-sisters, outsiders to Islam.
    Maybe Islam stands in need of rectification, but Western governments have changed this to sticking up your rectum, the hatred of the ‘whited sepulchres’ the rabbis who ‘strain a gnat out of the water’ but who ‘eat the money of widows and orphans’.
    I know you lot don’t give a damn. Laugh yourselves senseless for all I care. The West has devised a universally hated strand of hypocrisy, in the Muslim leaders of Deoband, of Saudi, and of Mossad’s Muslim Brotherhood, to cause division in Islam.
    God knows the people of the West saw enough hypocrisy in their time, without another batch arriving. When you look at the stupefying greed, betrayal, fraud, befriending of the enemies of Islam the very leaders of Blair and Cameron’s governments who constantly bombard the Muslims with their bombs, the English people rationally and sensibly believe that if this is Islam, they are better off without it. Don’t worry, indeed everything small and large is encompassed in the knowledge and power of God and He is watching them.
    I know for a fact that my comments on the sufferings of ordinary Muslims will be ignored on this site, but I am grateful to Craig for supplying an open forum for people to express their views.
    If the CIA MI6 sponsors of the self-appointed leaders of Islam were given power, like Belhaj has in Libya, they would never establish justice, or a benefit system, or free speech, or relinquish control over other people’s personal lives, their marriages or their personal freedoms.
    These self-appointed leaders of Islam usurp the seats of the pious and just believers and they make sajdah ( putting your forehead to the ground) to Allah for giving them the means and power to commit their crimes. I will never forget Chemical Ali’s response to the accusations of genocide in the Baghdad courts. ‘Alhamdulillah’ ‘Praise be to God for letting me commit these despicable crimes.’
    Go on, Have a good laugh at our expense. I hope the New World Order doesn’t test you with these sufferings, but maybe some of you realise what’s round the corner for non-conformers to Big Society clonism.

  53. Anno, thanks for your earlier comment. I do not attempt to practice Islam, but I hope that I do attempt to live a reasonably moral life, and I recognise the strain that you describe, though I would not ascribe it to the same source. For my part, I have banished TV from my life, and other media that impose their choices upon me. I may appreciate one program or article, but something offensive will be transmitted at me unless I maintain 100% vigilance, or a juicy but offensive article on the same page will keep distracting my eyes. So I come here.
    .
    I’m also sorry about the islamophobia. Sorry Anno, I don’t know what to write.

  54. @Crab the Medialens alert is excellent as you say.
    .
    http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=645:to-avert-a-bloodbath-libya-and-the-press-part-2-&catid=24:alerts-2011&Itemid=9
    .
    It is a thoroughgoing analysis and summation of the propaganda and lies that we have been fed by the corporate media.

  55. Eliza Manningham-Buller says: torture is never justified, the phrase “war on terror”‘ is unhelpful, the war on Iraq has increased the UK’s risk from terrorism, and the UK should negotiate with al-Qaeda:
    .
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14750998
    .
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14763864

  56. No disrespect Crab but just came across this on Medialens.
    .
    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-change-sees-giant-crabs-invade-the-antarctic-2350959.html
    .
    Real science fiction horror but real. Enough to make one hide under the duvet. One metre across!!!

  57. Jack Straw is implicated in torture and so is David milliband, but in their locality these issues are not aired much. Feel free to either contact
    Ian singleton editor of the Lancashire Telegraph and ask how long his allegiances to jack Straw will last, what hold has Jack got on the telegraph.

    Or you might want to contact Ummah channel Blackburn and raise the questions as to why Muslims in Blackburn are not told about their MP’s connections to torturing Muslims, as it was made clear at the last GE by Independent candidate Bushra Irfan.
    Concentrating on Maha Moussa’s treatment alone and the nasty british army will not do anymore.

    Finally there is the creature called Tom Mosely, he is feeding out of Jacks hands and will do his best to divert, deconstruct or hide anything that deflects negatively on Jack.

    lt_editorial@nqnw.co.uk
    info@ummahchannel.tv
    tom.moseley@lancashire.newsquest.co.uk

  58. And RIP Baha Mousa, Clark, as the final report into his torture and death is due out later.
    .
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14825889
    .
    PS Where is Suhayl?

  59. Highly intelligent crabs, too. Says the report:

    “A team led by Dr Craig Smith from the University of Hawaii at Manoa found the crabs using a remotely operated submersible. “

  60. The Baha Mousa inquiry has cleared the army of ‘systematic’ abuse. It’s like an earlier report clearing a police force of ‘institutional’ racism. We’re left to speculate on the meaning of these terms. Is Mousa inquiry telling us that abuse of prisoners is not widespread? If so, why not say so – or is it very widespread but not officially sanctioned and therefore not ‘systematic’? Clearly, we are to accept that if it’s not ‘systematic’ then it’s ok, so a definition would be welcome.

  61. Crab, good to see you here again.
    Vronsky, thanks for making me laugh.
    Mary, I don’t know, I’ll send Suhayl and e-mail.

  62. Vronsky Another illustration of ‘they can do nothing wrong’ here.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14833620
    .
    Schoolchildren lose police ‘kettling’ case
    Adam Castle said he was held on one of the coldest days of the year
    Related Stories
    Pupils ‘aged 11′ kettled at demo
    Pupils seek Met ‘kettling’ review
    .
    The Metropolitan Police acted lawfully when they “kettled” three teenagers during the tuition fee protests in London, the High Court has ruled.
    .
    Any bets on the outcome of the IPCC inquiry into Mark Duggan’s killing?

  63. To Anno and Clark both.
    .
    Said Anno, above:
    .
    > You may well laugh
    > …
    > Laugh as much as you like, carry on, I don’t mind.
    > …
    > What you lot constantly ignore, because it does not affect you
    > …
    > I have contributed long enough to this blog to know that no-one ever comments
    > on the vicissitudes of trying to practice Islam.
    > …
    > I know you lot don’t give a damn. Laugh yourselves senseless for all I care.
    > …
    > I know for a fact that my comments on the sufferings of ordinary Muslims will be ignored on this site
    > …
    > Go on, Have a good laugh at our expense.
    .
    Anno: You are determined to paint everyone here as unfeeling, uncaring, and unknowing about the plight of Muslims in foreign lands, and about the threat of surveillance and suspicion against Muslims in Britain. That is utter tripe, especially given that I spent a lot of effort on the other thread (Was Burnes Right?) showing you that liberals and leftists and others do, in the main, care about these things a great deal. You have employed your usual modus operandi of ignoring my points completely and repeating your baseless arguments on each successive thread.
    .
    On the one hand, this is extremely tiresome. You appear to be doing your level best to alienate people who genuinely feel empathy for your views. But I don’t, on the other hand, want to be too hard on you, since you have had your share of life’s difficulties, and you additionally feel the pain of your religious brothers and sisters in foreign lands, which is commendable. As trite as it sounds, I empathise with your discomfort and pain. The same things are making us angry.
    .
    > These crimes and thought crimes, although not felt by you, are perpetrated by
    > your governments in your name.
    .
    The government in power in Britain is also your government, Anno. You live in Birmingham, so they are your government as much as they are mine. You are, after all, a British citizen, right? (Or, at any rate, a British subject, like us all!)
    .
    > This is the ‘divide and rule’ strategy the West has unleashed on Islam. Devised
    > by Zionists specifically to attack the unity of Islam. Even Birmingham boasts a
    > handful of mosques where the majority of Muslims, maybe one million, are regarded
    > as non-brothers and non-sisters, outsiders to Islam.
    .
    That sounds like a sectarian problem solely within an Islamic community. I’d invite you to consider that not all problems can be blamed on “Zionists” or “the West”, as much as I hate the policies of both. The Catholics and the Church of England all have their own internal strife, say on female priests, or gay vicars, or whatever.
    .
    @Clark, I agree with you about Islamophobia – Anno experiences it, and you and I condemn it. I mentioned on the other thread that I have gone to Birmingham rallies to condemn it, or to combat the threat of English fascism. Perhaps I will see Anno at such a demo in the future.
    .
    But I think it is important for us not to give too much space to Anno’s stated view that commenters on this board all hate Islam, or don’t care about suffering in Iraq, Libya, Palestine, Afghanistan and Egypt. I don’t know what prompts him to repeat these things ad nauseum, without proof of any kind, but ultimately I feel a responsibility to correct it. For the small part, it is offensive to those of us who do care, but for the main part, Anno is left with an isolating view that no-one sees the problems that he does. In fact – as many of us know – most of the ordinary people of the world condemn violence and suffering of all kinds. Even though their voices, like ours, are rarely heeded by the controlling political elite, there is at least some psychological reassurance we can all take from that knowledge.
    .
    Anno: I hope in time to persuade you of the above. In the meantime, when people here, like Clark or Mary or Vronsky or KingOfWelshNoir say they are angry or disgusted about a particular military action, try considering the possibility that they say what they feel. Like meditation, sometimes just “entertaining” an idea that you find initially ridiculous, and thinking upon it for a while, can make it more palatable to the mind.

  64. Ha Vronsky, I had to parse that sentence a few times over at the Indie to see what they meant!

  65. Jon, as usual your reply misunderstands and ignores completely what I have actually written. I recently saw a Masonic compasses symbol synthesised with the peace symbol of a broken rifle, shown on satellite Iraqi T.V. as a symbol of Iraqi reconstruction.
    What more evidence does one need that the Iraqi war was fought at the behest of Zionists to redraw the map of the Middle East to suit their ends?
    Let me explain in words of one syllable what I mean.
    The Chosen people the Jews were cursed by Allah for not obeying the laws of their religion. Jesus pbuh said that the leaders betrayed their followers. ‘They had to key to Heaven, but they did not enter in themselves and they prevented others from entering in.’
    The Jews know the reasons for their losing their position as custodians of God’s religion of Tawheed, God’s Oneness, and they have created conditions in the Muslim world which will lead the Muslims to the same deviations and to suffering the same loss of God’s pleasure.

    The secular West that is indifferent to Islam, like Jon, has been hijacked by Zionists banking economic power, by financial blackmail, to attack Islam. By war, by persecution, by infiltration and by media.
    We know you are not against Islam yourself, but you do not seem able to comprehend that our government has many active strategies against Islam.

    They broke religious Christianity, then secular Communism. Now they are breaking religious Islam and NEXT they will break secular conscience as well.
    We Muslims are suffering now, but your turn, people of integrity who question the dealings of our political masters, is still to come.

  66. Anno, I am quite saddened that I can quote from you at length, and you carry on to say that I have “[ignored] completely what I have actually written”. I haven’t at all, as readers will observe on this thread and on the other one.
    .
    I am somewhat mollified to see however you have used the phrase “our government”. In your penultimate post you implied a blame for liberals who permit or acquiesce to state violence; now at least you can see that what is done by our government is not done in your name, nor mine. Neither of us have given our blessing for the violences we discuss here.
    .
    > but you do not seem able to comprehend that our government
    > has many active strategies against Islam.
    .
    You’re quite right; in fact, I disagree with the statement. The British government has no particular view on Islam, except as a propaganda vehicle for maintaining a vicious security state. Money and power are the reasons for the violence, as you and I have both said before.
    .
    > Let me explain in words of one syllable what I mean.
    .
    If you are of the view that I am unsympathetic to your views, why would you be openly rude and patronising towards me? Is that a good strategy, do you think? Would you similarly abuse the ordinary man in a British street, who is a good deal more susceptible in general to Islamophobia than I am?

  67. [Other Mod: deleted - abusive]

  68. must be lovely to be able to block everything you don’t agree with, Jon

  69. Third time lucky:

    ‘The British government has no particular view on Islam.
    Ha ha ha ha ha. I know brummies specialise in taking no notice, but you seem to take that to the extreme, Ha ha ha ha.

  70. [Other Mod: Deleted - duplicate content]
    .
    Amen.

  71. “The British government has no particular view on Islam.”
    .
    A particular case of a general theorem, as they say. The British government has no particular view on *anything*. Its sole preoccupation is its own survival – its behaviour is amoebic.

  72. Anno, please do not be rude to Jon. He disagrees with you, but he is not rude to you.
    .
    Anno, islamophobia is endemic. I remember experiencing it myself. When I started secondary school, it was a boys state grammar, but it soon began conversion to a comprehensive; as I entered my third year there, the first year intake included girls. One girl was so strange that she seemed almost alien. I will not assign any religion to a child, but she was of a Muslim family.
    .
    I had met people of Asian descent before. One friend in my form was of a Sikh family. But this girl, I had never met the like. I didn’t even know what it was, but this girl gave me a very strange, spooky kind of feeling.
    .
    I only recognised this emotion as islamophobia many years later when I went to stay with a friend in Bradford. He lived in an area where about 30% of the population were Muslim. My emotion returned, but more strongly. At first I was nervous, but as time passed I came to feel the peace, dedication and industriousness of these people. Eventually, by recognising that I had felt fear, I accepted that I suffered from prejudice, and this realisation permitted the fear and prejudice to ebb away.
    .
    The trouble with prejudice is that the person who has prejudice does not notice it as such; they just feel fear. No one wants to think of themselves as prejudiced. In reaction, their rational mind makes excuses for their feelings, it dreams up plausible reasons to justify them, and the person, if they are insufficiently self-reflective, comes to accept those rationalisations.
    .
    I had a friend who was an ex-policeman. He was older than me and he died recently. He suffered from fear of people of other races, and invented his justifications. He could be friends with and have respect for individuals of a different race, but when viewing “foreigners” en masse he was terrified of them, and responded with aggressive assertions about them (psychology – aggression is a response to perceived threat). Instead of facing and accepting his fear, he identified them as a source of danger. Do you see how this works?
    .
    The British government is made of many people. Many of them will be suffering from islamophobia to varying degrees. Others will be simply aggressive. A few will be downright manipulative, and will exploit the shortcomings of the others to their own ends. Similar arguments apply to people in the media.
    .
    I suspect that there are also other elements to this.
    .
    People naturally fear those that they abuse; specifically, they fear retribution, but they generally do not recognise their abusive behaviours; again, they rationalise. The more industrialised nations have abused the oil-producing nations of the Middle East for decades. We are all caught up in this, as our society is dependent upon liquid fuel to a literally frightening degree.
    .
    Blair’s first challenge, the lorry-drivers blockade of the oil depots, demonstrated this dependence very clearly. I do wonder how much influence that event had upon Blair. He watched the country he had been put in charge of brought to its knees in under a week by a small group of belligerent fat-sos armed with nothing but trucks. Five days, and the food started to run out, and Blair sent in the troops. That incident may have forged a mighty fear of interruption of the oil supply, and influenced Blair to conspire with oil-driller Bush to take Iraq by force of arms. Blair is now completely insane, of course, but that seems the fate of anyone who spends more than six months as the UK’s prime minister.
    .
    Anno, I urge you to consider the power of the unconscious parts of the Human psyche. This is the journey of self knowledge, which is essential for the understanding of others. All humanity face this challenge. At present, too many of us are making insufficient progress. Did Jesus not say that God is within us all, but that we have to look or we will not find?

  73. Anno, you wrote: “must be lovely to be able to block everything you don’t agree with, Jon”
    .
    It doesn’t work like that. We’re only moderators, not administrators. The software holds some comments in the queue rather than publishing them, apparently on its own whim. We approve the comment (usually), or spam it (if it’s spam), or delete it (rarely).
    .
    But I’ll delete offensiveness from you just the same as I will with our US-based troll. Jon didn’t delete anything of yours; I found it in the queue.

  74. Thanks Clarke. Nice piece of diplomacy.

    Are you able to detect from my contributions that the pigeon-holing by Muslims of Westerners as savages that can be lied to or stolen from is just as hard work for me as blanket racism against Muslims from Western irrational fears.
    ‘Tally-Ho, it’s international wog-bashing day. We’re going to drop 8000 tonnes of explosives on the wogs of Libya’
    or, to Mr CIA Salafi Belhaj
    ‘ and anyone who thinks these Libyan wogs’re unworthy enough to be called Muslims because they supported Gaddaffi in fear of their lives, is welcome to join us and round up the ones we missed, and torture them in jail or otherwie’.

    If CIA economic racism joins AlQaida religious racism + xenophobic European masses racism + Peime Minister panic at the food running out racism, all at the same time, do we still have to accept the dropping of 8000 tonnes of bombs on Muslims as if it was a kind of illegal fox-hunt to which the police turned a semi-blind eye.
    Even if they agree to an amnesty for Gaddafi supporters, what kind of basis for running a country is this toxic mix of racist poison?
    If International Law is fucked, what chance do we have of sleeping in our beds alive? The Salafi Muslims for want of a better word have joined the economic power gangsters in smashing non-Shariah Law for their own ends. The panicking prime ministers have joined the ignorant thugs of the EDL for popular appeal. The Zionist bankers are laughing their socks off because International lawlessness helps them to get away with interest ponzi fraud on us all.

    And the BBC cheers on the sidelines as if it was a nicely played cricket ball.

    I have not an atom of offensiveness for Jon or anybody else on this blog, but I am deeply offended as a Muslim myself that bastard Muslim AlQaida thugs discredit Islam with their dirty political crimes, and as an Englishman that pooper-scooper Cameron is running around doing Obama’s Africa invasion for him like Blair did for Bush in his time.

    I disagree that Blair had a panic moment about oil. He had a panic moment about being exposed as a paedophile and the possibility of the Zionist bankers closing the UK down with him at the helm. Cameron is scared of being exposed as a trader in illegal nuclear fuel. If he was at Eton he was probably the victim of sexual bullying as well.

  75. Only a tiny fraction of all this slaughter is about money and oil. Most of it is about evil men and women who want to control their fellow human beings for sado-masochistic ego boosting. If they wanted money, they would find that peace is more prosperous, but less satisfying to their egos than the destruction of human law.

  76. An instinct to conflict – smashing up neighbours and places like bad apes. Its known as ‘Alpha’ behaviour, a conviently simple psycho-tech narrative. Some say ‘asshole’, others say ‘badass’, my 4 year old nephew is in love with cartoon weaponry.

    My behaviour is primitive too, just beyond amoebic, yet like the british government my better resolutions are too transient. Lurking on blogs, reading alerts, about it all i dont know what to comment. There are no clean ends to tug on. The airspace is jammed, im mostly dumbstruck these days. Slainte folks’

  77. Hello Crab, it’s always good when you sidle in here. At least you’re an aware neuron in the emerging global consciousness. If we start smashing the smashers, maybe that’s not so good.

  78. Thanks mate :)

  79. MI6 is a basket filled with ‘good eggs’, like (according to Can Speccy) Mark Allen?
    .
    Hilarious chicken-and-egg situation.
    .
    No. Actually, MI6 is a box stuffed with hydrogen sulphide. All the evils of the world are in there. Pandora closed the box before Hope could escape.

  80. This is a big subject for Daily Mail, Sky, Wall Street Journal etc. All Murdoch’s media. What is the reason of this, why Murdoch attacks to Blair now? I just wonder..

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos