Leave of Absence 1692

I was invited to be on the Murnaghan programme on Sky News this morning – which I always find a great deal more intelligent than the Andrew Marr alternative on the BBC. I declined because I did not want to get up and get a 7.30am train from Ramsgate on a Sunday morning. I had a meeting until 11.30pm last night planning a conference on human rights in Balochistan [I still tend to say Baluchistan], and I have a newly crowned tooth that seems not to want to settle down. But I am still worried by my own lack of energy, which is uncharacteristic. Is this old age?

I also have some serious work to do on my Burnes book, and next week I shall be staying in London to be in the British Library reading room for every second of its opening hours. So there may be a bit of a posting hiatus. I have in mind a short post on an important subject on which I suspect that 99% of my readership – including the regular dissident commenters – will strongly disagree with me.

This is a peculiarly introspective post, perhaps because my tooth is hurting, but I seem to have this curmudgeonly spirit which wishes to react to the huge popularity of this blog by posting something genuinely held but unpopular; a genuine view but one I don’t normally trumpet. The base thought seems to be “You wouldn’t like me if you really knew me”.

Similarly when I wrote Murder in Samarkand I was being hailed as a hero by quite a lot of people for my refusal to go along with the whole neo-con disaster of illegal wars, extraordinary rendition and severe attacks on civil liberties, sacrificing my fast track diplomatic career as a result. My reaction to putative hero worship was to publish in Murder in Samarkand not just the political facts, but an exposure of my own worst and most unpleasant behaviour in my private life.

I am in a very poor position to judge, but I believe the result rather by accident turned out artistically compelling, if you don’t want to read the book you can get a good idea of that by clicking on David Tennant in the top right of this blog and listening to him playing me in David Hare’s radio adaptation.

Anyway, that’s enough musing. You won’t like my next post, whenever it comes. Promise.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

1,692 thoughts on “Leave of Absence

1 51 52 53 54 55 57
  • Clark

    Zoologist, that was me about the lizards. Sorry. But your foe does seem a bit non-human. I’ve also said you’re posting a lot of good factual stuff that needs to be seen more often.

  • Zoologist

    @ Clark
    I’m saying that the monopolistic corporations are the problem and the government are an irrelevance. Think “Yes, Prime Minister”. Art is often “truth”. They can set the tax rate at home but Foreign Policy is way above their pay grade. They are bureaucrats paid to carry out the policy of the state.

    I’m saying BP tells Cameron what to do, not the other way round. How could it be other? By what force could Cameron make BP do anything. They are Global. BP could however turn off the oil tap tomorrow.

    The Bank of England sets the LIBOR and Gold and Silver prices through its corrupt cabal of banks. They are untouchable in the City, which is why even the big American banks do their worst stuff in London.
    To whom do we owe this “National Debt”? Where does government get its money?

  • Zoologist

    “I used to say that Politics is the second oldest profession, but I have come to realize that it bears a gross similarity to the first.”

    Ronald Reagan

  • Zoologist

    The history of the last century shows, as we shall see later, that the advice given to governments by bankers, like the advice they gave to industrialists, was consistently good for bankers, but was often disastrous for governments, businessmen, and the people generally.

    In addition to their power over government based on government financing and personal influence, bankers could steer governments in ways they wished them to go by other pressures.

    “For the first time in its history, Western Civilization is in danger of being destroyed internally by a corrupt, criminal ruling cabal which is centered around the Rockefeller interests, which include elements from the Morgan, Brown, Rothschild, Du Pont, Harriman, Kuhn-Loeb, and other groupings as well. This junta took control of the political, financial, and cultural life of America in the first two decades of the twentieth century.”

    Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) Professor of International Relations, Georgetown University Foreign Service School, Washington, D.C.,
    Member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), mentor to Bill Clinton
    Source: Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (1966)

  • clark

    Zoologist, are you saying that governments are so irrelevant that they may as well not exist? That no form of political action is worthwhile?

  • Zoologist

    Law is essential. But we don’t really have a fair judicial system in UK even though it pretends it is.
    And we don’t have any real international law. Only for others. We pretty much ignore it.

    Randomly .. Just reading this.

    Venezuelan elections: It’s either Chávez or Washington! (Op-Ed)

    “If Venezuela falls into the hands of Capriles Radonski and the Global Power Masters supporting him, he will then join forces with Colombia, whose pro-US President Juan Manuel Santos is a member of David Rockefellers “Americas Society” and its mega bankers. He will join forces with pro-US/UK regimes as Peña Nieto’s in México and Piñera’s in Chile.”


  • Zoologist


    So what exactly is so bad about the United Nations Population Fund?

    Not only does the United Nations Population Fund support and fund the forced abortion and infanticide of China’s “one child” program, they also promote abortion, forced sterilization and brutal eugenics programs throughout the developing world.

    To learn much more about the United Nations Population Fund, please watch the four short videos below.  They will leave you absolutely stunned….

    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLkw01UaUes&feature=related

    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISj1d9lNi-E&feature=related

    Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V8oWHAh_yo&feature=related

    Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myITaeV3Q2o&feature=related

    The truth is that the United Nations Population Fund always has been and always will be about eugenics.

    And thanks to Barack Obama, it is being funded with millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars.

    But that wasn’t enough for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, so they have launched this new Global Health Initiative which will now be the “centerpiece” of U.S. foreign policy.

    63 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars will be spent over the next six years to promote abortion, sterilization and “family planning” around the globe.

    Sadly enough, there are people who are actually convinced that they will save the environment by reducing the population.  They think that while promoting abortion and sterilization may not be the most pleasant thing to do, it must be done for the good of the planet.

    Of course they are dead wrong, but the “true believers” do not understand this.  All they know is that they have to keep all of the brown and black women in other countries from having babies so that we can save the planet.

    We live in a world that is becoming more evil all the time.  Every person on this planet has a fundamental right to have as many children as they want, but the truth is that this right is being stripped away from an increasing number of people.

    We live at a time when even our most fundamental liberties as human beings are under attack.  Let us hope that America wakes up and starts saying “no” to these kinds of policies.

  • Clark


    “Let us hope that America wakes up and starts saying “no” to these kinds of policies.”

    Who or what do you mean by “America”? Why “America”? Why not the UN itself?

    What you’ve posted looks very bad, but you, Chris and Sunflower have been… alarmist. Yes, that word I haven’t been told off for using, whereas “denier” gets me criticised. But your “side” has been alarmist throughout.

    So maybe you’re exaggerating. But please answer my questions.

    I’m glad you haven’t abandoned law altogether.

  • Sunflower

    Relating to the previous discussion about free energy, this is a website with information about the pyramids in Bosnia.


    One of the interesting things relating to the findings in Bosnia is an energy beam coming out of the top of one of the pyramids. There is a short reference to it under the “News” section.

  • glenn

    Clark: It seems to me that Sunflower, Chris and especially Zoologist believe the business of GCC (which is what we were originally talking about, after SB brought it up), and vaccinations, the UN, population control, etc. etc. (which they subsequently introduced) are all part of a Grand Conspiracy. Not to mention medical science, cancer treatment, fluoridation, plastics – it’s all one mighty plot. Thanks to Alex Jones, they’re starting to see how fools like you and I have been duped. (Don’t forget to buy Alex Jones DVDs!)

    What we’ve been trying to do, you and I, is nail jelly to the wall. We can’t do it. Zoologist is trying to explain to us about Amerikan imperialism now, as if we were oblivious to the fact. Z thinks we just don’t get any of the little bits, let alone the Grand Picture.

    This is what Alex Jones does to people, which is why I pretty much detest him. AJ sticks a bunch of nasty facts on view as if he’d discovered all these things by himself, about Amerikan imperialism in particular. But then he puts in a load of conjecture and utter BS, presented with every bit as much urgency and sincerity. Then it’s all linked together as one grand master conspiracy, rather than what it all actually is – the metastasising stage of corporate capitalism.

    Frankly, people who’ve been hoovering up this Alex Jones junk for years needs a deep deprogramming session. AJ relies on a lack of scientific literacy, and and inability to place scattered news into context. I’ve asked again and again, where are the results of this decades long supposed “depopulation programme”? The population has more than doubled in under 50 years! Don’t expect a direct reply to points like that. Expect, instead, a slew of Youtube videos, spurious quotes, and tangental references.

  • A Node

    @glenn 7 Oct, 2012 – 1:36 pm

    You dismiss the opinions of “Sunflower, Chris and especially Zoologist” as “conspiracy theories” which they have adopted wholesale from Alex Jones. If you are right, then they are unable to distinguish “conjecture”, “utter BS”, and “junk” from reasoned argument. I have followed this thread since the beginning and I suggest to you that all three of them are plainly intelligent and have researched these subjects at length.

    Let me ask you a question. Is there anything you believe now which you once thought ridiculous? I’ll take as an example 911. If this is an inappropriate example, then please try and follow the general point I make – I’m sure there must be some issue on which you have changed your mind : ) If I understand your comment on 2 Oct, 2012 – 6:52 pm, then you believe 911 was an inside job. I imagine you would have been scornful of such a belief in the immediate aftermath, but became progressively persuaded by the evidence. It’s a conspiracy theory which you now believe to be true. Not all conspiracy theories are so amenable to such close examination but this deception was of necessity played out in the public gaze and relied upon media control to succeed. An intelligent person is able accumulate enough evidence to overturn the mainstream view, so in some instances at least, what seems ridiculous proves to be not so.

    It therefore seems prudent when encountering other examples of intelligent people making seemingly ridiculous claims to at least hold back from mocking them until you have studied the subject as much as they have. If you don’t wish to put in the time, that of course is your choice, but you must then forego the right to scathingly dismiss their views.

    None of this means that Sunflower, Chris and Zoologist are right, just that you should treat their opinions with more respect

  • Sunflower

    It’s arrogance A Node, deeply entrenched arrogance. Coming from a delusional misconception of superiority engraved in the mind since the cradle. It’s a clone of Theodore, devoid of all empathy and hell bent on destroying anything of virtue in society.

  • glenn

    A Node- I have to say, Sunflower has saved me from too much introspection. “Hell bend on destroying anything of virtue in society”, eh? Do I have to be particularly respectful to someone with that sort of frankly, biased attitude towards me, and are my pejoratives really so outrageous, given this underlying attitude all along?

    I’ll agree that they are not unintelligent, and have indeed researched these subjects – up to a point. They’ll research that which reinforces their notions. They will immerse themselves in the opinions of the like-minded. What Clark – and to a much lessor extent, myself – have done in just this thread, is try to look at some of the points presented objectively, and examine the sources. Every single time, they do not stand up to scrutiny, against the weight of peer reviewed and accepted science. The response has been not to reconsider, nor accept anything – but instead to throw up another dozen equally dubious references.

    It’s the pick-and-choose, seeing that scientific chicanery does take place, the conclusion is that they’re all crooks. Seeing some dollars can be extracted from the prospect of GCC, carbon credits etc. etc. – the conclusion is it’s all rigged, therefore the entire thing is a hoax. It doesn’t matter how long you try to confirm your opinions, the problem is – with the “denier” team – that they are doing it at all. And that’s all they do.


    You asked a question. Of course there are things I believe now, which I had hitherto considered ridiculous. And things I now consider ridiculous which I now believe. Actually, I was not scornful of an “inside job” theory immediately as it happened – I had no idea what the real situation was, but had no particular reason to doubt or believe the Official Story. Until that Official Story grew into military adventurism, upon which it looked to me as an excuse for something the administration wanted to do anyway. Perhaps the biggest “tell” was that they weren’t really interested in what had caused this terrorist attack in the first place, none of the supposed reactions were aimed in a direction that might have prevented more of the same.

    But this Grand Conspiracy of our correspondents here is not limited to one rather dubious event. Instead, we are talking about just about everything being a conspiracy – again – plastic, water, immunisation, birth control, the UN, Global Climate Change, Obama, Free Energy, weird beams from pyramids, food control, depopulation – these are things tossed out just in this thread. We’re supposed to take all this stuff as seriously as proven maths, physics and established science, during the course of a rational discuss among equals? Really?

  • Just In

    Well I’ve enjoyed reading this and I have learned stuff that I didn’t know. It seems to me that Glenn is the man who spends too much time scaring himself with Alex Jones movies.

    I haven’t read all the recommended books but I will do when I get time. I have read Economic Hitman which Glenn clearly hasn’t.

    Here’s a recommendation from me ..

    Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger et al, as well as the neo-con “thinkers,” owe their positions and good living standards to the largesse of the elite. This is an important point that must be kept in full view at all times. These thinkers and writers are on the payroll of the elite and work for them. In case someone has any doubts about such a statement, it might help to read the following quotes from Professor Peter Dale Scott’s comprehensively researched book

    The Road to 9/11 – Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America (University of California Press, 2007)

  • Zoologist

    Here’s a BBC docummentary that explains everything better than I can be bothered to.

    The Power of Nightmares, subtitled The Rise of the Politics of Fear, is a BBC documentary film series, written and produced by Adam Curtis. The series consists of three one-hour films, consisting mostly of a montage of archive footage with Curtis’s narration, which were first broadcast in the United Kingdom in late 2004 and have been subsequently aired in multiple countries and shown in several film festivals, including the 2005 Cannes Film Festival.

    The films compare the rise of the American Neo-Conservative movement and the radical Islamist movement, making comparisons on their origins and noting strong similarities between the two. More controversially, it argues that the threat of radical Islamism as a massive, sinister organised force of destruction, specifically in the form of al-Qaeda, is in fact a myth perpetrated by politicians in many countries—and particularly American Neo-Conservatives—in an attempt to unite and inspire their people following the failure of earlier, more utopian ideologies.

    Episodes included: Baby It’s Cold Outside, The Phantom Victory and The Shadows in the Cave.


  • Zoologist

    And here’s another award winning Adam Curtis documentary.

    Adam Curtis explores the psychological methods they have now massively introduced into politics. He also argues that the eventual outcome strongly resembles Edward Bernays vision for the “Democracity” during the 1939 New York World’s Fair. It is widely believed that the series was inspired and informed by a book written by the American historian, Stuart Ewen, “PR! A Social History of Spin”.

    This series is about how those in power have used Freud’s theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy. Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, changed the perception of the human mind and its workings profoundly.

    His influence on the 20th century is widely regarded as massive. The documentary describes the impact of Freud’s theories on the perception of the human mind, and the ways public relations agencies and politicians have used this during the last 100 years for their engineering of consent.

    Among the main characters are Freud himself and his nephew Edward Bernays, who was the first to use psychological techniques in advertising. He is often seen as the father of the public relations industry.


  • Zoologist

    The modern science of mass manipulation was born at Wellington House, London.

    The purpose of those at Wellington House was to effect a change in the opinions of British people who were adamantly opposed to war with Germany, a formidable task that was accomplished by “opinion making” through polling. The staff consisted of Arnold Toynbee, a future director of studies at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), Lord Northcliffe, and the Americans, Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays. Lord Northcliffe was related to the Rothschilds through marriage.

    Edward Louis Bernays (November 22, 1891 – March 9, 1995) was an Austrian-American pioneer in the field of public relations and propaganda.
    He was a nephew of Sigmund Freud, and developed the technique of “engineering consent.” When Sigmund Freud moved to Britain he also, secretly, became associated with this institute through the Tavistock Institute. According to Coleman, Bernays “pioneered the use of psychology and other social sciences to shape and form public opinion so that the public thought such manufactured opinions were their own.”

  • Zoologist

    The Tavistock Institute has a 6 billion dollar fund and 400 subsidiary organisations are under its control along with 3,000 think tanks, mostly in the USA. The Stanford Research Institute, the Hoover Institute, the Aspen Institute of Colorado, and many others, devoted to manipulation of US as well as global public opinion, are Tavistock offshoots. This helps explain why the US public, by and large, is so mesmerised as to be unable to see things clearly and to react.

    The Indian career diplomat M.K. Bhadrakumar: “The time is not far off before they begin to sense that ‘the war on terror’ is providing a convenient rubric under which the US is incrementally securing for itself a permanent abode in the highlands of Hindu Kush, the Pamirs, Central Asian steppes and the Caucasus that form the strategic hub overlooking Russia, China, India and Iran.”

  • glenn

    Zoologist : Do you actually think you’re telling us anything we don’t already know?

  • Chris Jones

    Clark – “Look, if you go to a website and it keeps going on about “wogs” and “White Power”, and it has all these brief excerpts that show Blacks and any non-whites to be inferior and prone to be criminals, are you going to believe what it says?”

    …That really is scraping the bottom of a non existent barrel Clark. I would be most grateful if you could show me where on that site there is refernce to ‘wogs’ and ‘white power’ – i fail to see how you can be taken seriously after an unfounded allegation like that

    Tens upon tens of different sites and links are mentioned here – why this obsession with Alex Jones? This information and these quotes can be found all over the place, on thousands of different sites. Who are the conspiracy nutcakes? Is it people that highlight the outlandish things these people are saying and trying to do,using their own actual quotes word for word, or is it the actual deranged elites themselves, who are actually carrying out the open conspiracy right in front of your very eyes. Suspension of belief has never been so plain to see

  • Clark

    Just scanned some comments here, and I don’t like the look of it, I’m keeping my head down.

    Chris, I didn’t mean that white power stuff was on that site. I meant, certain sites are obviously written for a particular audience. Like, there’s no debate or trying to work things out, the answer is known before the question is asked; everyone who visits already agree. You’d recognise that on a white power site, wouldn’t you? Well that place you linked is like that, but for the belief-set of the US Christian Right.

    Chris, you can make pretty much any message by stringing together quoted excerpts and simple suggestions; that’s how propaganda is made. But don’t take my word for it; make some of your own and prove it to yourself. If it’s convincing, you might get a job doing it. You could practice on “Republicans say families are in danger” or something like that. Or demonstrate something completely different with other sections from the same sources as the linked article.

    Anyway, I hope you lot can get on with each other. When the natural philosophers are fighting with the mystics, divide and rule is definitely winning.

    But I’m not up to the cut and thrust of this place at present.

  • Chris Jones

    Clark – “Chris, I didn’t mean that white power stuff was on that site. I meant, certain sites are obviously written for a particular audience. Like, there’s no debate or trying to work things out, the answer is known before the question is asked; everyone who visits already agree. You’d recognise that on a white power site, wouldn’t you? Well that place you linked is like that, but for the belief-set of the US Christian Right”

    ..Clark, i’m sorry but i really can’t take you seriously after all that and question your neutrality and motives – you can’t claim to be all for racial,political and religious tolerance yet try to smear all Americans who may choose to to be Christian or ‘on the right’ as white suprecmacists and racists. That is the worst kind of half baked sixth form snotty nosed reactionarism.

    And i’ve no idea why you still pick on only one site to misleadingly smear as the straw man against all that’s been outlined – like has been mentioned over and over, these quotes can be found all over the place as well as at their primary source, and are plain for all to see in all their totalatarianistic context. And if you want to look at real genuine, terrifying white Anglo Saxon racism and eugenic madness, that’s where to look.

  • Jon

    Chris, this thread has already gotten overheated a couple of times, and whilst Clark can look after himself, I don’t think your 8:10 post adds anything but aggression to the debate. I’ve not the time nor the inclination to see who cast the first stone, but I think it would be best if you could either disagree with civility, or leave it as an unresolvable point.

    I’ve read Clark’s last handful of messages, and they all seem to be perfectly civil. Recall, in any case, that the broad alternative belief system you and Zoologist subscribe to upset Clark quite understandably because of his friend’s illness. Furthermore, Clark was willing to listen to both sides in the recent immigration debate, and so he could hardly be accused of dismissing people as racist reflexively.

  • Chris Jones

    Disagreeing with civility sounds like a great plan for all Jon. I would suggest however that it doesn’t help any area of discussion when moderators make broad unfounded allegations and smear millions of people as racist supremacists based solely on their chosen faith or political beliefs. Nor is it of much use to polarize any alternative point of view as a conspiratorial belief system

  • glenn

    Chris – sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities, but American Christians who are “on the right” are very fairly categorised as racist nutjobs. The fact that they do less than nothing to denounce the white supremacists, race-baiters, Muslim haters and war mongers in their ranks tells an observer all they need to know. Muslims are always denounced (quite rightly) for not doing a hard enough job to root out the fanatics in their ranks, while the Christianists do everything they can to encourage their own crazies, and get a total pass on it. Every last right-wing Christian in America (and probably elsewhere) is a war-mongering fascist apologist, if not an eager participant. Their belief system is insane, and their goals genocidal at best, but probably apocalyptic.


    Clark – I’ve had it with the pretence of a civil discussion from these clowns, they’ve had plenty of opportunity. From dancing between aliases, mass-posting of irrelevant information, right down to this childish insistence that I haven’t read a book I’m well familiar with – this crosses the line into simply being deliberately, annoyingly, irritating in order to shut down a conversation.

    Newcomers wade in to complain about “insufficient respect” being paid to freaks who claim science is all evil and lies, that medical staff (that includes my wife) just want to kill everyone, that everything is a plot, that risible nonsense should be given as much consideration as proven fact.

    Sorry – this “on the one hand, and on the other” crapola is the Meeja’s job. They can say the truth is halfway between the word of an established, qualified, erudite and reputable scientist, and some swivel-eyed zealot, and then coyly proclaim they’ve done their job (of journalism!) and now the viewer can “decide for themselves.”

    Fuck that. I’ve had more than enough of playing these stupid games.

1 51 52 53 54 55 57

Comments are closed.