The Respectability of Torture
St Mary’s University College, Thurs 1st August, 7.30pm
Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, was a whistleblower who was removed from his ambassadorial post by Tony Blair for exposing the Tashkent regime‟s use of rape and systematic torture, including the boiling to death of political opponents. He has also spoken out against Central Asia‟s appalling dictatorships, regimes which are allies of the West, involved in torture and rendition, and was accused of threatening MI6‟s relationship with the CIA. Now a human rights activist, author and broadcaster, he outlines the dynamics of torture and the hypocrisy of incriminated Western governments.
My first public appearance for a while will be in Belfast on 1 August where I shall be giving a talk. Long term readers of this blog will recall that, while my focus is largely on international affairs, the domestic political achievements I most hope to see are a united Ireland and an independent Scotland.
‘ meant to say ‘sanity’.
Hi Jon!
I had difficulty making sense of the excessive royal baby coverage on the Beeb. Given that the Beeb’s staff are overwhelmingly of a soft-left persuasion, and probably republican, I would have thought, like you, that a lot of airtime could’ve been given to anti-monarchy campaigners.
My suspicion is that, given the duties of a public broadcaster, the only way the Beeb could get its message across was to saturate us with so much nauseating hype that we all felt thoroughly sick by the end of it. If you think about it, they had the whole country, monarchists and republicans alike, yelling at their TV sets, “Who the hell bloody well cares?!”
Now if that isn’t a broadcasting conspiracy, I don’t know what is.
“The evidence of BBC bias in favour of Israeli policy is clear for all to see.”
That’s a bit like saying “Everyone knows…”.
“Only a fool or liar or both would claim…”
Ditto.
Mark Golding says:
Come on the weltanschauung of an asinine product of dis-education cannot flex that far, you are living in the hopes of miracles.
Also Mark what is happening with Erik Prince these days, any news on him?
Mark asks:
“if you can extricate yourself from your left-right bubble”
Don’t pretend to be above it, Mark. You are a left-winger, espousing left-wing views on a left-wing blog.
Nevermind laments
“You will just have to live with your own views Anon”
Is this the best you can do in response to the points I addressed to you in my post of 1:18 pm.?
Anon, if I agreed with:
‘That’s a bit like saying “Everyone knows…”.
“Only a fool or liar or both would claim…”
Ditto.’
that would make two of us wrong. Quite clearly the BBC is owned by the Neocon/Zionists or it would give balanced reports rather than portraying Palestinians, Iraqis, or other predominantly Muslim people as aggressors and the real aggressors Israel and the US as goodies. When I was young at the matinee cinema cowboys were portrayed as goodies while indians (native Americans were portrayed as baddies. When the cavalry came an appreciative roar went up in the cinema. You need to grow up to learn that the indians were the goodies and the cowboys were stealing their land. The cowboys are still stealing the land of other countries with more powerful weapons. You are clearly on the cowboys side, and therefore need to grow up!
“Quite clearly…”
Ditto.
Don’t come that Anon. Quote the sentence.
Sorry you must know where Anon (aka Giles)is coming from, before engaging, otherwise you will end up talking yiddish too !
I don’t believe the sentence is correct. Anyone with half a brain can see its nonsense!
Anon. You accuse people of making wishy washy statements and make them yourself.
“Anyone with half a brain can see its nonsense!”
By the way not only is the sentence “correct” but the comment too!
Er, yes John. Well spotted.
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)
2 Aug, 2013 – 10:26 pm
To Doug Scorgie:
“YOU ARE WRONG; UNDER CURRENT LEGISLATION, OFFICIALS OF THE BORDER AGENCY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHAT THEY WERE DOING AT KENSAL GREEN”
What current legislation is that Habbabkuk? You don’t say for some reason.
Stop and question: police powers
A police officer has powers to stop you at any time and ask you:
• what you’re doing
• why you’re in an area and/or where you’re going
However, you don’t have to answer any questions the police officer asks you.
https://www.gov.uk/police-powers-to-stop-and-search-your-rights
“THAT IS CORRECT. BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OFFICIALS OF THE BORDER AGENCY HERE.”
Habbabkuk, the border agency officers have no more powers than the police.
IT WAS LEGAL AND I BELIEVE IT WAS PROPORTIONATE: FIRSTLY, THERE IS A GREATER CHANCE THAT YOU WILL FIND ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS IN AREAS LIKE KENSAL GREEN THAN, FOR EXAMPLE,IN THE LEAFY SPACES OF SURREY … SECONDLY, ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE DARK-SKINNED THAN WHITE – BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE FROM CERTAIN COUNTRIES THAN FROM OTHERS.
What you say there is racial profiling on the bases of random checks not on reasonable suspicion of wrong-doing. That is what makes it illegal.
The police and the Border Agents do not have the right to demand identification unless they suspect that someone is committing an offence or they believe they have committed an offence.
“I AGAIN REPEAT THAT THE OFFICIALS OF THE BORDER AGENCY WERE ACTING WITHIN THEIR POWERS…” What powers Habbabkuk? Inform us.
“SECONDLY, EVEN IF IT HAD BEEN THE POLICE, THEY WOULD HAVE ACTED ON THE BELIEF THAT THE PERSONS ASKED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES HAD COMMITTED AN OFFENCE, NAMELY THAT OF BEING IN THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY.”
Poppycock!
What would make the police believe that the people being asked to identify themselves had committed an offence? Being black? Is that what you call reasonable suspicion?
“CERTAIN FACILITIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC REQUIRE IDENTIFICATION.”
Yes but that does not include having to identify yourself to the police if they have no reasonable grounds to demand you do so.
“YES I DO BELIEVE IT IS A MATTER OR PUBLIC CONCERN”
So do I Habbabkuk, but you fail to answer what I said. Would it be the anti-immigrant propaganda by the government aided by the right-wing MSM that is making it a matter of public concern?
The Daily Mail: Propagating misinformation about immigrants.
Again.
On Monday 14 Feb, the front page of the Daily Mail pronounced: ‘Thousands of illegal workers claiming benefits: Loophole in the law costs taxpayers millions’. But by Thursday it became clear that this wasn´t a real expose of ‘welfare abuse’ rather another cynical attempt to propagate misinformation about immigrants.
THIS EXAMPLE IS A TRUE RED HERRING FROM YOU.
Don’t be stupid Habbabkuk. The above is merely one example of many that you can find regarding the negative attitude towards migrants in the MSM.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IMPLEMETING THE LAW OF THE LAND AND NOT WHAT THE DAILY MAIL – WHICH DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THE GOVT – IS SAYING.
Another scare headline for you Habbabkuk:
“350,000 Bulgarians and Romanians ‘looking for work in the UK”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10009654/350000-Bulgarians-and-Romanians-looking-for-work-in-the-UK.html
Even if they all turned up they would be legal immigrants obeying “the law of the land.”
“I DON’T THINK YOU HAVE ANSWERED MY QUESTION”
Yes I have: Electioneering ploys are by nature lies whether it be on the NHS or Trident or immigration. However there is deep seated racism among many white Brits and it is an emotive subject (like sectarianism) that can be manipulated by the state to divide and rule.
“WHO IS TRYING TO DIVIDE WHOM FROM WHOM AND TO WHAT PURPOSE?”
Why do you ask a question, the answer to which you must already know. In case you don’t know the answer:
divide and conquer/rule:
a way of keeping yourself in a position of power by making the people under you disagree with each other so that they are unable to join together and remove you from your position
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Divide+and+rule
Prevention is better than cure is it not. But job cuts to Customs, Coast Guards and the Border Agency have led to an increase in smuggling, whether of drugs or people. The gates have been left unattended to save money.
“NO, I DON’T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS TRUE…”
What do you not believe to be true? Prevention is better than cure or job cuts have had an adverse effect?
“ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS – AND THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE MONEY OUT OF GETTING INTO THE COUNTRY – ARE PRETTY DETERMINED AND CUNNING PEOPLE AND NO BORDER CONTROLS ARE 100% EFFECTIVE (UNFORTUNATELY)”
Yes, and the less staff to police the situation and the removal of funding has had a detrimental effect on border control.
“TO SAY THAT THE GATES ARE LEFT UNATTENDED IS A GROSS MISREPRESENTATION”
The gates have been left unattended was not meant to be taken literally as I’m sure you know.
“IT IS IN ANY EVENT SILLY TO TAKE A POSITION WHICH SAYS THAT IF SOMEONE GETS PAST BORDER CONTROL SUCCESSFULLY HE SHOULD BE LEFT IN PEACE THEREAFTER.”
I don’t hold that position and I didn’t imply that in my post. Please don’t misrepresent me.
“THERE YOU GO, MR SCORGIE, BONNE LECTURE ( I’M ASSUMING YOU WROTE AS THE SPOKESPERSON FOR OTHERS AND THAT THEREFORE NOBODY ELSE WILL STICK THEIR HEAD ABOVE THE PARAPET)”
I only speak for myself Habbabkuk.
Anon
Were there any examples of BBC bias in favour of Palestinians, that you’d like to share?
Or is it difficult to find such examples?
John, if you like I’ll find you an equally dotty site, though of a right-wing persuasion, where you will find lines like:
“Clearly the BBC is owned by the Leftists/Muslims or it would give balanced reports rather than portraying Americans, British or other predominantly Western people as aggressors.”
In fact, I am going to post that and let you know how many recommends it scores!
Herbie, the idea that the BBC is pro-Israel is a smoke-screen put about to cloud the reality – that the Beeb is not especially biased one way or the other, though individual journalists may slip up from time to time and reveal support for one side or the other. My contention is that the BBC is neither pro-Palestinian or pro-Israel, but don’t let that stop you making assumptions! And I use as evidence for my contention the fact that both sides accuse it of bias towards the other.
Anon, what you use as evidence is not evidence. Just because somebody says something does not make it right. Take a look at your butchering of a sentence of mine at 3.26 pm.
Stuck in a bog out East Passerby writing a memoir trying to change history. – dickhead!
Exactly, John. Claims that the BBC is pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian are just hot air. Loons on both sides just can’t tolerate the BBC not conforming with their view, hence ZBC / Al-Beebera.
For rent.
Driveway to accommodate two cars Monday to Friday when occupier is at work in Westminster. Near Brentwood town centre.
Not available August/September.
Rent negotiable.
Cash payment only.
Signed E.Pickles
~~~
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Pickles
Second Home
‘On 26 March 2009, Pickles appeared on the political debate programme Question Time in Newcastle upon Tyne. While discussing the controversy over Tony McNulty (who had recently admitted claiming expenses on a second home, occupied by his parents, only 8 miles away from his primary residence), Pickles admitted he claimed a second home allowance because he lived 37 miles from Westminster and needed to leave his constituency house in Brentwood at 5.30 am in order to get to Westminster for 9.30 am, given that he tended to get home at midnight or 1 am, although the standard time for commuters from this region is usually ninety minutes. He went on to say that it was “no fun” commuting into London from where he lived. In response to Pickles’s comments that he “had to be there [the House of Commons] on time”, Question Time host David Dimbleby, replied “Like a job, in other words?” prompting amusement amongst the audience.
There were also remarks from the audience about nurses and firemen etc. having to commute across London and get to their jobs on time and having to do without a second home.
Pickles was asked to pay back £300 following the MP’s expenses scandal, which he had claimed for cleaning.’
More laughter is heard from the back row.
This is an urgent message for Mark Golding.
Mark, my sources have confirmed that 100, 000 British troops are on the Israeli border with Syria, preparing for a full-scale land invasion. As they used to say when I was at Hereford, ‘Who Dares, Wins’, and it seems like the boys are up for it. I can confirm that this information is from a top-level source here in Dubai with whom I have established channels of communication by posing as a barman at the ******* Hotel (sorry for the redaction, Mark, but I can’t risk losing my sources). I will keep you updated as events proceed.
Repeat: 150, 000 American troops on Iraqi border with Syria.
Stay safe.
BravoTwoZero,
Dubai.
100,000 British troops, 150,000 American troops… ermm… which one is it?
Pickles used to claim £18k-£19k for ‘staying away from London costs’ 11-12 years ago. Now £4k+.
Interesting. Reined in. Perhaps he had abandoned the second home unless he is camping out on College Green.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/eric_pickles/brentwood_and_ongar#register
Too many players makes for a complicated game.
http://www.jpost.com/Defense/US-leaks-on-IAF-Syria-strikes-could-be-attempt-to-harm-Israels-interests-321874
“The American leaks have raised concerns among some observers in Israel that Syrian President Bashar Assad would be unable to refrain from responding to the attacks due to the embarrassment he would incur.
“The mere fact that such leaks happen often indicates that the Pentagon leadership does not have Israel’s interests at heart,” Prof. Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University, told The Jerusalem Post. “It is difficult to assess the motivation of such leaks.”
Inbar listed several possible motives, including the wish to prevent future Israeli action.
Other possibilities include an attempt by Pentagon sources to embarrass US President Barack Obama, by pointing out the “ease” with which Israel allegedly operates in Syria at a time that the White House says US intervention is too complex and risky.”
Anon “Claims that the BBC is pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian are just hot air.”
You live in another world from me. When Billy 16 pints called Israel’s response in killing something in the region of 1,000 Yemeni civilians as revenge for the killing of some 6 Israeli soldiers “disproportionate” Israeli sponsors withdrew donations to the Tory party to bring them, and their main propaganda station (the BBC), back into line. It’s been like that ever since.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/9740044/The-cowardice-at-the-heart-of-our-relationship-with-Israel.html
1, 000 Yemeni soldiers?
William Hague isn’t the BBC, John.
There is almost no mainstream outlets discussing Takfiri, other than Press TV. Google takfiri.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/30/316381/takfiri-ideology-benefits-us-israel/
“The Saudi-backed Takfiri ideology is designed to safeguard the interests of the United States and Israel by causing division in the Muslim world, a political analyst tells Press TV.
Massoud Shadjareh said on Tuesday that the Takfiri ideology is designed to “get Muslims” to fight and kill Muslims.
He pointed to bloodletting in Iraq since the US occupation in 2003, saying that the Takfiri ideology “was actually a deliberate policy to create this conflict, so the United States, as the occupier, will actually not be the main target and you will get this sort of internal fighting within Iraq.”
“Many think tanks in the United States … including the RAND (Research and Development) Corporation have been arguing that one of the ways to deal with the rise of political Islam is to, actually, have these different aspects of political Islam [to] fight one another,” Shadjareh pointed out.
B2Z civilians or soldiers – makes no difference to Israeli’s and Yanks. Yep, the government media outlet is the BBC. Don’t you guys ever watch it?