Born Kneeling 1248

What comes out to me from the “Black Spider letter” correspondence of Prince Charles published today is how utterly obsequious Tony Blair and New Labour ministers were to him. No sign whatsoever of radicalism from the former “People’s Party” as they fell over to ingratiate themselves with the heir to the throne. I rather enjoyed Charles quite sharp tone to Blair.

I am fundamentally opposed to the existence of the monarchy. It will hopefully be replaced by a better system, but no human system is perfect. Given that we have a monarchy at present, you will perhaps be surprised to learn that I do not see anything wrong in Charles’ letters, which put forward views which are much what we would have expected him to hold. Of course there is interaction between the monarchy and government, and of course we should get rid of this hereditary element. But Charles’ lobbying is hugely less damaging and pernicious than the corporate lobbying I witnessed throughout my Whitehall career. At least Charles is not lobbying them for corporate advantage and giving large political donations at the same time.

While in my view he did nothing wrong in writing the letters, he and government are both very wrong in arguing they should be private. It is when it is secret that such attempts to wield influence between two branches of government – and monarchy is a branch of government – can be most simply perverted to ill ends. That such publication will not occur again because government has legislated to keep it secret, is an example of the privileged arrogance that prevents this from being a genuine democracy.

Altogether not that big a story and it gives Rusbridger and the Guardian the chance to pose as radical. I find the fact that what is published is so anodyne and unobjectionable rather suspicious – what has not been published? Rusbridger is of course the editor who complied enthusiastically with a GCHQ instruction to smash the Snowden hard drives. The existence of other copies does not justify this any more than it justifies book-burning.

By coincidence, a very worthwhile article by Michael Gillard that had been excised from the net has recently been republished, setting out how Rusbridger in 2002 conspired with Andy Hayman of the Met to bury an investigation into police corruption, including the burglary of the Stephen Lawrence inquiry. By a further coincidence I was having a pint with Laurie Flynn in Sandy Bell’s four days ago.

Hayman went on to be the promoter of the stream of lies about the murder of Jean Charles De Menezes and the publicist of numerous fake terrorist plots, before having to resign in a scandal involving nubile police officers at public expense in tropical islands.

Rusbridger and his extraordinary wig go on and on as a pretend opposition outlet, their reputation much dented by recent hysterical unionist output which exceeds the Daily Express. But Rusbridger’s continued usefulness to the establishment is not in doubt. The pose of publishing the most harmless of Prince Charles’ letters does little to help a threadbare disguise.

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>

1,248 thoughts on “Born Kneeling

1 40 41 42
  • ------------·´`·.¸¸.¸¸.··.¸¸Node

    Daniel 24 May, 2015 – 1:34 am : “A memo stating that Nicola Sturgeon told the French Ambassador that she would “rather see” David Cameron win the election was “recorded accurately” and not politically motivated, an official inquiry has found.”

    That was a misleading and biased summary of what the report actually said, ie :

    “The Cabinet Secretary has concluded that there is no reason to doubt that he recorded accurately what he thought he had heard.”

    Here’s another summary, biased in the other direction, and probably slightly nearer the truth than yours :

    “”In the cabinet secretary’s opinion, it cannot be proved that the civil servant deliberately falsified the memo although he may have made a mistake.”

  • John Spencer-Davis

    24/05/2015 11:55am

    In which case, we will never know, will we? The whole thing then boils down to what one wants to believe.

    As far as I know, none of the rest of the memo has been challenged for accuracy, so if we believe the civil servant is lying and falsifying, then he (I think it was a he?) wrote down a reasonably accurate summary of what he was told and in the middle of it deliberately inserted a false and damaging accusation, which was well invented to square with the second half of the sentence, which has not been challenged for accuracy.

    That is certainly possible, but it is at least equally possible that it was a genuine mistake.

    Kind regards,


  • Mark Golding

    In early September 1941, the SS experimented at Auschwitz I (main camp) with using the poison gas Zyklon B for mass extermination of human beings.

    The victims were 600 Soviet prisoners of war and 250 sick prisoners. The first gas chamber was set up in a room that was part of the crematorium; known as the “mortuary,” it was located in the main camp.

    In Auschwitz-Birkenau, as of January and June 1942, respectively, two converted farm shacks (called Bunkers 1 and 2) first were used for gassing Jews deported to Auschwitz and other inmates. In March and June 1943, with the participation of the Erfurt firm Topf & Söhne, four large crematoriums in Birkenau became operational. In part they were equipped with underground rooms for undressing and gas chambers disguised as shower rooms, into which the SS pushed around 2,000 prisoners at a time. To sustain the deception of the victims and carry out the mass killing with maximum efficiency, the SS instructed the suppliers to provide Zyklon B without the warning agent.


    October, 1943


    It is now time for the Chilcot Report and consecutive conference to assert with honor that the architects of the illegal Iraq War will be brought back to the scene of their crimes and judged on the spot by the peoples whom they have outraged.

  • ------------·´`·.¸¸.¸¸.··.¸¸Node

    I’m not claiming he was lying. I’m pointing out that the enquiry issued a very carefully worded statement that did NOT say the memo was recorded accurately.

    Furthermore, I don’t buy this whistleblower guff. A government minister ought to be able to have a frank discussion with a foreign ambassador without it being leaked. I would not expect that minister to say the same things in private as in public, and to claim that it is in the national interest to expose such trivial “dishonesty” ignores the detrimental effect of hamstringing our representatives in matters of national diplomacy.

    Furtherfurthermore, to claim the entire episode is not politically motivated is, in my opinion, naive or disingenuous.

  • ------------·´`·.¸¸.¸¸.··.¸¸Node

    Sorry, my above comment directed at John S-D.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    24/05/2015 12:54pm

    Thanks, Node. I don’t think I claimed anywhere that the episode was not politically motivated. Certainly the leak was. Whether or not the civil servant’s memo was, I don’t know.

    Kind regards,


  • Mary

    Becky Cohen I agree with what you say about the Russian song but not with any of the rest of your comment.

  • technicolour

    “Eichmann was the poor earnest sap who wanted to send the Jews off to their proper homeland, Zion. He burned with remorse over slapping a Jew in his youth. Eichmann helped funnel refugees into Palestine”

    But how strange, the part where he started to ship Jewish adults and children off to the death camps seems to have been omitted. Not pleasant Sunday reading, I agree.

  • Eichmann's list

    Eichmann was the perfect Zionist – go along to get along. His boss got canned because repatriation was too slow and you can’t fail upward as in Britain! So he jumped on the next bandwagon, which was concentration camps. Now that the Zionazis have made Palestine the world’s biggest concentration camp, you are of course going to shitcan the two-state solution and go along with the new wave. See how it works?

  • Republicofscotland

    @Fred, thank you for your link to the torygraph, unfortunately I do not click on links to newspapers which enable liars like Carmichael to spread their filth.”

    Indeed Calgacus,unfortunately there are folk who still believe the propaganda emitted by the Telegraph.

  • Republicofscotland

    “And you Prick were talking about what a lady is?

    You’re a heel and you’re allowed to lick my Prada Jodhpurs.

    Btw you sure you don’t double up as Really? He seems to clock on just as you clock-off and loves his commas just the way you do!?”

    Oh dear it would appear Villager has retorted in a hissy fit,then again,no one could ever accuse him of producing bons mots.

  • doug scorgie

    24 May, 2015 – 1:34 am

    From your link Daniel:

    “The Cabinet Secretary has concluded that there is no reason to doubt that he recorded accurately what he THOUGHT he had heard.”

    It is now accepted that what the civil servant THOUGHT he heard was wrong i.e. untrue!

    So, if you accept the civil servant’s word, then the memo itself has not been deliberately falsified but the contents of the memo turn out to be a false representation of what was actually said.

    In other words the civil servant did NOT record what was actually said.

    Brick wall and head FFS!

  • Anon1

    [mods-cm-org – sent to Spam at 16:13 on 23 May]


    “Another disgusting Anti-Semite ?!

    “Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.” – Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres.


    Stone the crows! A fabricated quote from a jew-obsessed loony site? You do surpass yourself, Macky, in your efforts to ‘prove’ that the Jews control the world, you anti-semitic turd.

  • Mary

    Republic of Scotland yesterday 2.26pm

    I think you could say, as they say in boxing circles, he ‘retired hurt’.

    He will no doubt crop up again at an opportune moment.

  • Mary

    Has Anon1 heard that Mr Omlet is sentenced to spend some time in an Israeli jail. Better conditions for Israelis compared to those for Palestinians guaranteed, if he ever serves the sentence that is.

    ‘Israel ex-PM Ehud Olmert given prison sentence

    This is the second jail sentence for Israel’s former leader

    A court in Jerusalem has sentenced the former Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, to eight months in prison for fraud and breach of trust.

    He was convicted at a retrial in March of accepting illegal payments from an American businessman while he served as mayor of Jerusalem and trade minister.

    Last year, he was sentenced to six years in prison for accepting bribes.

    Olmert has denied any wrongdoing and will remain free until his appeals against both convictions are heard.

    A Supreme Court decision on the first appeal is expected in the next couple of months. If he is unsuccessful OImert will become the first former head of government in Israel to be jailed.’

    As you see he is appealing. Not appealing to me btw 🙂

1 40 41 42

Comments are closed.