The Appalling Sir Daniel Bethlehem 101


This is Sir Daniel Bethlehem, a man who is to me an embodiment of the appalling moral vacuum at the heart of the British establishment.

Sir Daniel in a public international lawyer who has specialised in Middle eastern issues, and has always found it to be his genuine and considered legal opinion that the law supports the neo-conservative agenda for the Middle east.

Bethlehem first came to the attention of the general public as the man who advised the Israeli government that it was legal to build their “security” wall slicing through the West Bank and disrupting Palestinian communications and access to fields and water resources. Bethlehem was then the counsel to the Israeli government at the resulting case before the International Court of Justice.

The International Court of Justice – along with the vast majority of reputable international lawyers – disagreed with Daniel Bethlehem, and Bethlehem and the Israeli government lost the case. The Israeli government however disregarded the court’s judgement and continued its illegal activity.

Nowhere can I find evidence that Bethlehem has condemned the Israeli government for flouting the authority of the court before which he appeared. His commitment to the institutions of public international law appears somewhat partial.

The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office has a department of Legal Advisers who are closely integrated and involved in virtually everything the FCO does; I must have consulted them at least 60 tims in my own career. They are extremely distinguished individuals and a major source of scholarly articles on all aspects of public international law. They include some of the most respected experts in international law in the world.

The FCO legal advisers – of whom there are approximately 20 – agreed unanimously that the proposed war in Iraq would constitute an illegal war of aggression. As Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw’s response was to push for the removal of the chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood (the No. 2, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, resigned in disgust). Straw then, against all precedent, recruited a chief Legal Adviser from outside the FCO corps, one of the few public international lawyers in the UK prepared to argue that the Iraq invasion was legal.

Who did Straw choose? The Israeli Government’s trusty adviser, Daniel Bethlehem. Forget that his arguments for the Wall of Terror had been dismissed by the ICJ, the important thing for Straw was that Bethlehem was On the Right Side. He was prepared to argue the Iraq War was legal; that made him better qualified than any internal candidate.

Inside the FCO Bethlehem continued to be On the Right Side. This fascinating document contains the following extract of a minute from Matthew Gould, Private Secretary to Straw and Adam Werritty and Mossad’s point man in the FCO, to Daniel Bethlehem. The intention is to bolster Bethlehem’s attempt to keep from the UK courts the details of the torture by the CIA of Binyam Mohammed, and British complicity therewith.

Discussions of 12 May 2009
[Email note of meeting by Matthew Gould, Principal Private Secretary to the Foreign
Secretary, addressed to Daniel Bethlehem dated 13 and 14 May 2009. The note of 14 May
responded to a request for clarification.]
Note of 13 May 2009
“1. On 12 May the Foreign Secretary raised the Binyam Mohamed legal case with Hillary
Clinton. Clinton was accompanied by Dan Fried (Assistant Secretary, State Department)
and Tobin Bradley (NSC); the Foreign Secretary by Nigel Sheinwald, Ian Bond and me.
2. The Foreign Secretary said that the Court had questioned the continuing non-release of
the US documents in the case given (1) the arrival of the Obama Administration, and (2) the
release of the 4 DoJ memos. The Court had said it could not see how, in the light of the
publication of these memos, anything in the US papers could be regarded as sensitive.
3. The Foreign Secretary said that the British Government would continue to make the case
that it continued to be an inviolable principle of intelligence co-operation that we did not give
away other peoples secrets, and that doing so would cause serious harm to the UK/US
intelligence relationship.
4. Clinton (who was clearly well aware of the case and the associated issues) said that the
US position had not changed, and that the protection of intelligence went beyond party or
politics. The US remained opposed to the UK releasing these papers. If it did so it would
– 4 –
affect intelligence sharing. This would cause damage to the national security of both the US
and UK.
5. Bradley said that this was also the position of the White House. They appreciated that this
left the British Government in a difficult position…

It is worth noting that yet again Bethlehem advised that the law supported the perpetrators of the most vile abuses of human rights, and yet again the most senior courts were to disagree with him.

It comes therefore as no great surprise that, having now left the FCO, Bethlehem is currently Legal Adviser to the vicious despotism of Bahrain. Sir Daniel Bethlehem – pillar of the British Establishment and a serial servant of evil. Sir Daniel Bethlehem advises that the invasion of Iraq was legal, the cover-up of complicity in the torture of Binyam Mohammed was legal, the Israeli Wall was legal, and the repression in Bahrain is legal.

Young lawyers take note; if you want to have a sword rested on your shoulder by an odd horsey woman, make sure your view of legal right never supports the oppressed, never defends the victim. There is a fat living in evil.


101 thoughts on “The Appalling Sir Daniel Bethlehem

1 2 3 4
  • Mary

    Pleased I linked to him before on the Bahrain thread. One of nature’s ‘corpora vilia’ and immensely wealthy from his activities on behalf of the Zionist entity I should imagine and now Bahrain.

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

    His statement to the Chilcot theatrical/whitewash. http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/52471/bethlehem-statement-24-06-11.pdf

    I want to see Werritty hauled up. btw Foxy, Where is Werritty?

    Craig’s link now comes up fifth on a Google search for Daniel Bethelehem.

  • Mary

    A 16 year old boy has been killed there today in a protest to mark the anniversary of the uprising. He died from wounds to his abdomen. RIP young Ali Ahmed Ibrahim al-Jazeeri. Sadly you had a very short life. So unlike your self appointed and self proclaimed King who is now 63 and who graced us with his presence last year for lunch with our Queen, Mrs Elizabeth Windsor and family, on the occasion of her Diamond Jubilee.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/14/uk-bahrain-violence-idUKBRE91D0CF20130214

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

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-middleton-mingles-with-dictators-and-despots-839610

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    This is a challenge to the moderator.

    I have twice, in the last hour, posted a question asking whether Daniel Bethlehem is Jewish.

    I believe the answer to that question is of relevance to the man’s positions on various Middle East legal questions; it is as relevant as the knowledge that a totally unproportional number of the American neo-cons pushing for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were Jewish.

    Why then do my comments appear to have been deleted by the moderator?

    Is this political correctness gone crazy?

    I hope you will reploy to this comment rather than again deleting it.

  • Jon

    @Habbabkuk – not me, and I think Craig is the only other mod at the moment. In general, I tend to add a note that I’ve deleted something, unless there is a suspicion that doing so would cause friction.

  • Tom Welsh

    @Habbabkuk – Presumably your question is rhetorical. Nevertheless, I wonder if any other powerful nation has as many people whom it claims as citizens (some obvious, others far from it) holding positions of power and influence in other powerful nations?

  • Tom Welsh

    I believe that the USA, to pick an example completely at random, deems acceptance of a military commission or other senior rank in the service of any other nation to comprise giving up US citizenship. The reason are quite obvious.

  • nevermind

    Jimmy, the movement of the sword should have come from right to left, but horsey woman can’t stand the sight of blood.

    ‘Triumph of the will’ now twinned with ‘the Gate keepers’

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Tom Welsh : actually, my question was not rhetorical. Unusually, I’m unable to find this information on the net. The (German) Wikipedia entry for Daniel Bethlehem, while giving details of his education (eg, BA in South Africa) avoids any mention of his family or his religious affiliation. Having said that, I imagine he is Jewish and I was just hoping someone could confirm (or invalidate, for that matter).

    The point behind my question is of course one I believe I’ve made before : it is unwise to appoint certain people to certain posts, at least at certain times. At present, for example,I would not appoint a Jew to be UK ambassador to Israel (and would not, incidentally, appoint a Muslim to an Arab country). In 5, 10 or 20 years time it might not matter.

  • Mary

    Tonight at 22,45 BBC 1 Question Time from Leicester.

    Mary Creagh LW Shadow DEFRA Confident and she is competent
    Frazer Nelson RW Spectator editor with that strange Scottish accent
    Maria Miller RW DCMS Out of her depth
    George Galloway No description needed!
    Susan Kramer Ex LD MP now in the Lords *

    So the questions will probably be on horsemeat and the food chain, the Scottish referendum, Leveson and press freedom, the Eastleigh by election, what is laughingly called the economy, perhaps the Papacy, the NHS, the EU, Immigration + one of the others is bound to find an opportunity to jeer at GG in some way or another.

    * Her late husband also American was a Goldman Sachs executive director here. He died in 2006 aged 58. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/john-kramer-419833.html

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    So, it’s Question Time again tonight and George Galloway is on the panel again.

    I wonder who from this blog’s Eminences will be the first to post – directly or by reference to a link – that once again there was a dastardly conspiracy to shut Galloway up, to interupt him rudely, to question him over-aggressively and to traduce the great man’s words, deeds and thoughts?

    Should I open a book for the occasion?

    ******

    La vita è bella, life is good (when George is on Question Time)!

  • Mary

    I haven’t seen this Israeli assassination reported elsewhere.

    Suspected Israeli agents kill IRGC cmdr.in Syria

    Assassinated Iranian commander Hassan Shateri (file photo)
    Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:59AM GMT

    A senior commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has been assassinated by suspected Israeli agents on the way from the Syrian capital Damascus to Beirut.

    General Hassan Shateri was reportedly killed on Tuesday by unknown gunmen as he was traveling by road from Syria to Lebanon.

    Israeli elements have been blamed for the assassination of the IRGC general, who led the Iranian-financed reconstruction projects in the south of Lebanon.

    His funeral ceremony will be held in Tehran on Thursday. He will then be laid to rest in his birthplace, Semnan, on Friday.

    In 2006, Israel launched a war of aggression against Lebanon that lasted 33 days and devastated most of the infrastructure and buildings in southern Lebanon.

    Since then, Iran has played a leading role in reconstruction efforts there.

    MRS/MHB

    http://www.presstv.com/detail/288857.html

  • nevermind

    William billiard ball Hague says he will be holding the country to the highest standards of torture despite the regular outbreak of human rights.

    On the same day the two Saudi princes/ess worry about disclosure of their alcohol fuelled deeds. Surely by now we must be up to two supply deliveries per week to the Kingdom of Saud with the necessities of life behind curtains.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/feb/14/william-hague-pragmatism-repressive-regimes

    ‘Triumph of the will’ now twinned with ‘the Gate keepers’

  • Gari Sullivan

    Craig, I wonder if you and your readers are aware of Britam, a British military company at the centre of a propaganda scandal about chemical weapons in Syria.

    Britam admitted to having had their website hacked. After which, emails alleging their involvement in a proposed fake deployment of chemical weapons in Homs began to surface.

    The hack and the alleged emails have never been reported in western media.

    Britam Chemical Weapon Propaganda Scandal

  • nevermind

    Fascinating this report. Der Spiegel is reporting in support of an anti European groundswell and sees nothing wrong with amplifying the cat calls to the three, yes that’s 3 only, sorry, supporters of a future EU.

    Most likely, with Merkel and Cameron clammering for a US trading block, a la the Monroe doctrine, i.e we take everything away from those pesky Africans and pay a pittance for it, only to then make a buck or three from the consumers. We also raid their fishing grounds because most of them have no navy’s to protect these grounds.

    If the EU is turning out to be just another TPP partner in crime. advancing a fascist hegemony and a war against Muslims, then it is probably the right time for it to fail.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/lonely-group-battles-to-save-europe-in-britain-from-tabloid-lies-a-881679.html

    ‘Triumph of the will’ now happily twinned with
    ‘the Gate keepers’

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Craig,

    The sad truth is that the shit starts at the head of the stream and flows down.

    I make the foregoing, less than polite observation, with due regard for the domestic and international obligations of Her Majesty’s Government.

    One example of neglect and international bundling is the FCO’s total cock-up of its handling of the purported extradition attempts to bring the former Premier of the Turks and Caicos Islands back home to face justice.

    The context of the whole debacle flows upstream right back to London – Lord Michael Ashcroft. And therein lies the rub. Read below to get a glimpse….

    “Letter: The TCI’s shambolic judicial system
    Published on February 9, 2013

    Dear Sir:

    The TCI’s justice system has recently provoked an onslaught of public criticism. Most of the criticism is long overdue, fair, and reasonable. The attorney general and the president of the Bar Association, however, have come running to its defence, with less than subtle threats of fines and imprisonment. Those threats, in turn, have rightfully caused even wider public indignation.

    In a criminal justice system that is adversarial, with a prosecution and defence on opposite sides, an independent judiciary is critical, but at the top of most lists of criticisms are grave concerns about the independence of the local judiciary. There is a perception that there is little distinction between the FCO, the SIPT, the former legislature, the governor, the local judiciary, and that the criminal justice system has been compromised, having been sewn up to ensure convictions of the SIPT’s targets, regardless of the evidence of actual guilt or innocence.

    This is part of the case against the TCI’s criminal justice system:

    There has been a systematic and methodical overhaul of the law over the last three years, most notably the constitutional right to trial by a jury of one’s peers, to make specific convictions much easier.

    There has been constant tinkering with laws, in some cases immediately after a challenge reveals limitations on certain investigative powers. The changes that have been made erode our constitutional freedoms and rights in order to stack the deck in favour of the SIPT. Critics say it is like playing a board game against an opponent who has the ability to change the rules, mid game, and who frequently does so.

    Judges have apparently engaged in verbal exchanges with persons in the guest gallery in open court, answering complaints about the adequacy of seating arrangements with opinions about the extravagant and misplaced spending choices of local government and the merits of the complaints, eerily echoing sentiments frequently expressed by the governor.

    On certain SIPT applications the court has deferred its statutory obligation to keep proper records of its proceedings to the SIPT, presumably on the basis that the court’s staff cannot be trusted with the information. We know of no other jurisdiction where this happens, but in any event the clear casualty of that choice is the perception that the TCI has an independent and impartial judiciary.

    There are reports that the SIPT are misleading the judiciary on basic principles of law and on issues of fact and that the court is mindlessly and blindly accepting self-evidently false and material assertions of fact, dancing around what should be obvious.

    There are reports that the Governor’s Office has been speaking with the judiciary on sensitive political matters before the court, apparently only to get an update. Given the governor’s frequently expressed political opinions, critics argue that he should not be communicating with the judiciary at all on undecided cases, even for an update.

    What is interesting about the threats is that most of the public criticism has been the charge that there is no separation of powers and that the judiciary has become the handmaiden of the FCO. In a March 2011 speech, the chief justice of England and Wales championed freedom of the press as one of two fundamental institutions in a free and democratic society; the other being an “independent judiciary” separate from the executive or government. He said that both are interdependent, and that in the absence of a free press an independent judiciary is not likely to flourish or fulfill its true constitutional purpose. He insists that in a properly functioning liberal democracy both protect each other.

    I think there is merit to that view and, indeed, in the wake of recent and heavy criticism of the judiciary the very judge who engaged guests of the court in exchanges about the adequacy of seating and local government’s spending choices, echoing the frequently expressed sentiments of her boss the governor, finally discovered the fortitude to call out the SIPT on a request to ridiculously restrict the travel plans of one of its targets. Sometimes the obligation to apply the law without favour requires encouragement from a free press.

    Jonathan Gardiner”

    “The Turks and Caicos Islands Judiciary

    By: Courtenay Barnett
    Les Green, a senior police officer seconded from Scotland Yard in 2004 to Jamaica as Assistant Commissioner of Police, recalled in the ‘Daily Mail’ his experiences with Jamaica’s “backward police system” ( his words) – see: below
    He stated in a forthright manner his honestly held, though less than complimentary, views about the state of justice and policing in Jamaica.
    The Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) ,to rely on Green’s observations about Jamaica, is itself, but particularly its judiciary, “like stepping back in time” when one considers my experiences over a quarter century of practising law in the TCI.
    In the mid-1980s a professional colleague, Lloyd Rodney ( a cousin of the famed Walter Rodney), challenged ultra vires charges being imposed by the monopoly telecommunications giant, Cable and Wireless. The judiciary of the Supreme Court at the time was comprised of one judge, who was also automatically the Chief Justice of the TCI. Sadly, when the main case was argued we subsequently discovered that Sir Fredrick Smith, who presided, was the Chairman of the Board of directors and a shareholder of Cable and Wireless. On appeal we won the case and one thought that the Chief Justice would have resigned. Governor Michael Bradley renewed Chief Justice Smith’s contract, being then the Constitutionally designated person to appoint judges . The reality of having brought the justice system into disrepute, coupled with being unable to sit on any further Cable and Wireless cases did finally compel Smith to tender his resignation. The judiciary, it was to be expected, might now advance and function with more credibility.
    The next appointed Chief Justice in the TCI was Lindsey Worrell, a friend of Fredrick Smith, the former Chief Justice. There were problems with Worrell and Rodney petitioned, under the constitution, for his removal and his contract was not renewed. The judiciary, it was to be expected, might now advance and function with more credibility.
    The next appointed Chief Justice was Kipling Douglas, the brother-in-law of Fredrick Smith, the former Chief Justice. There were problems with Douglas about his competence and misbehavior on the Bench, so Rodney and myself both petitioned under the Constitution for his removal and he left after I also sued him in his personal capacity for publishing defamatory remarks about me. The newspaper formally apologised when the statement was established to have been untrue that the TCI government had condemned Rodney and me. The judiciary, it was to be expected, might now advance and function with more credibility.
    A Court of Appeal Bench resigned en bloc when an English Registrar informed the Caribbean President of the Court, Justice Astwood, that judicial pay would be docked, in an unprecedented manner, in circumstances where at the end of a Court session an emergency required Mr. Astwood to leave a day or two earlier than initially scheduled. The Chief Justice at the time, Richard Ground, is now a judge on the Court of Appeal. The judiciary, it was to be expected, might now advance and function with more credibility.
    At present, the sitting Supreme Court Chief Justice is Edwin Goldsbrough, and a group of lawyers led by the Advocates Legal Group, is on general strike ( see: 2 below). The judiciary, it was to be expected, might now advance and function with more credibility.
    In consequence of quite vociferous concerns expressed from various sections of civil society about the state of the judiciary in the Turks and Caicos Islands, the Attorney General issued a press release that those criticising the judiciary could run the risk of being prosecuted for contempt of court by way of scandalizing the court and be fined $50,000 or be imprisoned for two years if convicted. In consequence of his published threat, he was publicly responded to with a reminder that the offence he referred to was obsolete and abolished in England ( see: 3 below ).
    Thus, since the European Convention on Human Rights applies to the Turks and Caicos Islands and parity of rights for the subjects of the UK on the mainland and in HMG’s territories is intended, there should be equality of treatment within and outside the UK. As Les Green had observed in another context, at times dealing with these prevalent instances of judicial compromises in the Turks and Caicos Islands appears to be “like stepping back in time”. The judiciary, it was to be expected, might now advance and function with more credibility.
    The issues that impact the TCI judiciary have been publicly indicated and stated in some detail ( see: 4 below).
    The difficulty has been and remains, that with the exception of a few reasonable, diligent and principled Chief Justices, Gordon Ward who performed in a reasonable and acceptable manner and his immediate predecessor, Christopher Gardner, who noted administrative deficiencies in the dispensation of justice and implemented very helpful reforms, there has long been a pattern of arrogance, indifference, neglect and compromises which have plagued the TCI judiciary. The non-responsiveness to legitimate causes of concern openly and honestly expressed by the public is presently giving rise to serious concerns whether in the Judicial administration – it really is “like stepping back in time”.
    The Turks and Caicos Islands, as a British overseas territory, remain the lawful responsibility of Her Majesty’s Government. “Good governance” principles do bind Her Majesty’s Government. There is a need to address the manifest responsibilities (including suitable appointment of an Attorney General, competent Governors and responsible oversight of the judiciary) in respect of which duties HMG is bound by the provisions stipulated under the United Nations Charter (see: below 5).
    These duties do require much more than exoneration by affirmative statements merely expressing palatable political rhetoric in public fora, but more essentially require conduct which on an objective basis can be seen on the part of HMG as being effective and practical as distinct from being illusory, deceptive or theoretical. Then, perhaps, the judiciary might now advance and function with more credibility.
    1. Read: http://jamaica-gleaner.com/latest/article.php?id=42651
    2. Read: http://www.thedailyherald.com/regional/2-news/35025-tci-trial-lawyers-on-general-strike.html
    3. Read: http://tcipost.com/?p=27103
    4. Read: http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Letter:-Turks-and-Caicos-Consultative-Forum-got-it-right-3682.html
    5. Read: http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter11.shtml
    _____________________________________________________________________________________
    Courtenay Barnett is a graduate of London University. His areas of study were economics, political science and international law. He has been a practising lawyer in the Turks and Caicos Islands for over twenty five years. He has been arrested for defending his views, has faced a death threat and a threat of arson on his home. He has argued many public interest and human rights cases. Lloyd Rodney (deceased) and Courtenay Barnett are the only two persons or lawyers in the TCI who were ever arrested and convicted for scandalising the court when they on oath in affidavits pointed out substantial compromises of justice in the TCI and lodged two petitions calling for the removal of a Chief Justice alleged with facts stated on oath to be incompetent and to be misbehaving. Rodney was arrested, imprisoned and shackled while in his hospital bed, then on release he successfully sued and won. The last time that the offence of contempt by way of scandalising the court was successfully prosecuted in England was 1931.
    4th February,2013”

  • Courtenay Barnett

    ” Young lawyers take note; if you want to have a sword rested on your shoulder by an odd horsey woman, make sure your view of legal right never supports the oppressed, never defends the victim. There is a fat living in evil.”

    DAMN! – AND 30 PLUS YEARS AGO WHEN I FIRST STARTED IN LAW – WHY DID I MAKE THE “WRONG” DECISION?

  • mark golding

    Not rhetoric Tom, more intellectual emptiness in a puerile attempt to seed, propagandize and entangle, thus embroiling the contention that criticism of neoconservatism is often a euphemism for criticism of Jews.

    Pathetic flame.

  • Mary

    Gari Sullivan One of the directors of Britam Defence Ltd http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03301368#summary-tab

    is a Sir Michael Wilkes. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03301368#people-tab

    He is also s director of Heritage Oil which is an outfit belonging to Tony Buckingham and registered in Jersey. It explores for oil reserves –

    • The Group has producing properties in Oman and Russia and exploration
    projects in Uganda, the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (the “KRI”), the Democratic
    Republic of Congo (the “DRC”), Malta, Pakistan and Mali;
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/03/28/idUS62790+28-Mar-2008+RNS20080328

    Note Mali.

    General Sir Michael Wilkes, aged 67, Non-Executive Director
    General Sir Michael Wilkes KCB, CBE, retired from the British Army (the “Army”)
    in 1995 as Adjutant General and Middle East Adviser to the British Government.
    As Adjutant General, Sir Michael was the most senior administrative officer
    within the Army and a member of the Army Board. During his distinguished career,
    he has seen active service across the world while also commanding at every level
    from Platoon to Field Army including commanding 22 Special Air Service Regiment
    and serving as the Director of Special Forces. Sir Michael is the
    Non-Executive Chairman of Cyberview Technology Ltd and a Non-Executive director
    of the Stanley Gibbons Group, both of which are listed on AIM. In addition he
    holds non executive positions on a number of private companies including Britam
    Defence and Trico Ltd and chairs the Advisory Board of PegasusBridge Fund
    Management Limited, a homeland security company. He joined the Group on 18 March
    2008.

    An interesting CV for an ex Adjutant General I would think.

    ~~~
    The names Heritage Oil and Tony Buckingham are familiar to regular readers here!

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Nevermind (19h36) :

    “We also raid their {ie, African states’} fishing grounds because most of them have no navy’s (sic) to protect those grounds”

    This comment only has validity (and then only to a limited extent) if the word “raid” is being used figuratively.

    The EU recognises all coastal states’ 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zones and has therefore concluded fisheries agreements with a considerable number of African coastal states. The fisheries activities of EU member states’ vessels inside those African EEZs are regulated by those agreements and cannot be considered to be “raids”.

    If the word is being used figuratively, in the sense of “EU vessels are getting fishing opportunities too cheaply” then a case could be argued.

    *********

    Der Spiegel is considered a bit of a busted flush these days and I would tend to view its positions on a number of issues – inclusing the EU – with a degree of scepticism. But, of course, it’s up to every individual to choose, or, as some might prefer to put it, “Jedem das Seine”.

    ************

    La vita è bella, das Leben ist schoen !

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Potential US$100m claim – and – HMG has contingent liability….

    “CAICOS CONCH FARM PRESS RELEASE

    Lawyers for Trade Wind Industries Limited, owners & operators of the Caicos Conch Farm,
    appeared in the Providenciales courtroom of Judge Margaret Ramseay-Hale this week in
    the case of Trade Wind Industries Limited vs The Governor of The Turks & Caicos
    Islands and the Government of the Turks & Caicos Islands.

    The case involves allegations that the Governor (on behalf of the Crown) and the TCIG have
    failed to honor the terms and conditions of leases signed with TWI in 1985 and 1988 and
    a Development Agreement signed with TWI in 2010.

    Lawyers for The Governor and The Government had sought to compel TWI to “arbitrate” the
    legal issues in secret while TWI was intent on a civil trial in a courtroom that is open to the
    public.

    Judge Margaret Ramsaey -Hale ruled that many of the pertinent issues were not covered
    by the arbitration clause and directed that all the issues in the case should be heard in
    open court.

    The apparent incompetence of Attorney General Huw Sheppard and Governor Ric Todd in
    failing to honor the terms & conditions of the Development Agreement that was signed with
    TWI in 2010, coupled with the false and slanderous comments uttered by Governor Ric Todd
    regarding TWI, has now exposed The Governor and The TCIG to a public trial and a potential
    100 million dollar claim for breach of contract, malicious falsehoods, defamation and unlawful
    interference with TWI`s economic interests.

    The shareholders and employees of the Caicos Conch Farm look forward to hearing Governor
    Ric Todd and Attorney General Huw Sheppard explain their arbitrary and unlawful conduct from
    the confines of a witness stand while under oath where they cannot hide from the truth.

    The Caicos Conch Farm”

  • Mary

    I read your posts with interest Courtenay. The contents of your biographical notes shocked me. I didn’t know you had been arrested and had received a death threat. The influence and the tentacles of our ghastly empire extend a long way obviously.

    Could you briefly tell us what life is like for the average person there, is is a struggle to make a living, is the system completely corrupt and feudal and how are we in the UK viewed, if at all? Is the monarchy supported? As the government was suspended in 2009 who is running the show? Thank you in anticipation.

    I have been looking through the long Wikipedia page. I see you have invasions of American and Canadian tourists who outnumber your population.

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

  • Jay

    @nevermind

    Why would the fascist hedgedemonic overlords push for an open borde policy on European lands and yet instigate hatred and push for war?

    In a nutshell its colonialism in reverse.

  • doug scorgie

    Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)
    14 Feb, 2013 – 5:06 pm

    “I have twice, in the last hour, posted a question asking whether Daniel Bethlehem is Jewish.”

    Habbabkuk you have said that you are an intellectual supremo on this blog. So why did you feel the need to ask your ridiculous question?

    With a name like Daniel Bethlehem perhaps he is Jewish but why does that matter to you? And why can’t you find out the answer for yourself?

    Is he a Zionist would perhaps be a more appropriate question don’t you think?

    But then again what makes you ask your original question; is he Jewish?

    Perhaps he’s a Welsh nationalist with an unusual name (for a Welshman).

    We know you have an agenda.

  • doug scorgie

    Off topic I know but it matters

    Police investigating allegations that horsemeat was mislabelled as beef have arrested three men on suspicion of offences under the Fraud Act.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

    However no arrests have been made for miss-selling Payment Protection Insurance by Banks.

    No arrests have been made by the police investigating the Libor fraud.

  • Clark

    Habbabkuk, 14 Feb, 5:06 pm, as I think you know, I used to moderate here, but I stopped and my access was revoked. I’ll just confirm that I didn’t delete any comments of yours, and couldn’t any more in any case.

    However, I suspect that your comments were just being deleted on sight of your name, as so many of your comments have been pissing people off. I know that you claim to be merely challenging sloppy thinking, but I for one have often found your style needlessly abrasive and aggressive. I note that your comments on this thread, or at least those that remain, are much less so. Please keep it that way. You could also remove the “La vita è bella!” from your screen-name, considering that you explicitly stated that you added it deliberately to annoy people.

    Please don’t reply, as this is off-topic.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.