The Conservatives Will Be Protected From Their Election Fraud 257

It is hard to think of bigger news than that the Electoral Commission is taking the governing party to court over alleged fraud in its election accounts, with possible disqualifications that could cost the government its majority. Yet the issue has received remarkably little coverage apart from the very dogged work of Channel 4 News. Why is that?

There are a number of reasons. The first is that the media has a major pro-Tory bias and minimises bad news for the Tories as a matter of course. The most remarkable example of this is the continual playing down of divisions within the Conservative Party over Europe, which run to extreme levels of personal hatred and abuse. But you do not see that hatred and abuse reflected, whereas divisions within the Labour Party are reported daily in extreme detail.

If you doubt what I say, consider the fact that it is quite openly acknowledged that, under pressure from No.10, the media are organising the televised debates for the EU referendum so that Conservatives are never seen to be debating each other. That is the most extraordinary piece of media connivance, and even entails the media excluding the official Leave campaign from at least one national debate. What is deeply worrying is that the UK has become a country where nobody is surprised or concerned at this kind of blatant state propaganda manipulation.

Which leads me to the second reason for lack of mainstream prominence for the Tory electoral fraud. The entire political class realise that they are now floating atop a sea of massive popular resentment. There is a wariness of further laying bare the corruption of the system, and darkening the public mood still more. The Establishment wants the EU referendum to go through as smoothly as possible, with people voting how their betters instruct them; it is no time for Establishment dirty linen to be laundered in public. So they pretend that absolutely nothing is happening:

The Guardian briefly ran a story on the front page of their website – it was there only a few hours – explaining that legal restrictions made it impossible for them to publish. This is untrue, particularly when so much has been published by Channel 4. The Guardian also connived to make it appear that the only expenses in question were the costs of a bus. It is very much more than that.

The Ramsgate angle caught my eye because I used to live there, not far from the Royal Harbour Hotel which the Conservatives rented out for £14,000 to house activists bussed in to support their local candidate. You leave the money for your drinks in the Royal Harbour on the counter, it has an honesty bar – evidently as a door policy. The Conservatives did not declare this spending, which would have put their candidate far over his constituency spending limit. Having been rumbled, they claim it was a part of national spending.

I stood as an independent anti-war candidate against Jack Straw in Blackburn in 2005. One of the very many ways the system is fixed against independent candidates, is that while I had to keep spending within very tight limits, all the major commercial billboards in the city were plastered with massive “Vote Labour” posters. This did not count against Straw’s expenses because it was part of a national poster campaign, and his name did not appear on those huge billboards.

But there is a very definite difference between that, and the cost of bringing in workers who were actively canvassing and leafleting for a named candidate in the constituency. This must be constituency spending or the term is meaningless. There is no doubt that at least 14 Tory MPs whose campaigns ran this massive overspending (and that one undeclared hotel bill alone made the total overshoot the limit by 50%) ought to be disqualified.

But they will not be. The other reason that this has not been more of a story, is that everyone in the metropolitan political and media bubble knows that nobody will be disqualified. Because we only live in the illusion of a democracy, and threats to the Establishment are gently put to sleep.

When I stood against Jack Straw, he held specifically targeted “Muslims for Labour” rallies during the election campaign at which all the voters who came were given free food and drink. That is a specific criminal offence known as “Treating”. Jack Straw was foreign secretary at the time, and not only were the police aware of the treating, they were actually both inside the hall and guarding it from protestors outside.

In an effort to have the law of the land enforced, I gathered a number of sworn affidavits from voters who had been present, and gave them to the Police with my own sworn complaint. Here is one example of the affidavits:

1, I attended an event in Audley yesterday on Sunday 25 April 2010 at Jan’s Conference Centre in Blackburn.
2. I heard that Mohammad Sarwar MP and the ex Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir Sultan Mahmood were going to be present.
3. I can confirm that the people on the stage were Mohammed Sarwar MP, Barrister Sultan Mahmood, Jack Straw MP, the ex Mayor Salas Kiyani, Lord Adam Patel and others.
4. They all gave speeches to support and ask us to vote for Jack Straw in the MP elections.
5. We were given free food consisting of roti, meat curry, sweet rice and coke.
Affirmed this 26th day of April 2010
By the within named …… at
BLACKBURN in the County of Lancashire
Before me
M Wrendall,
Solicitor and Commissioner for Oaths”

This is the provision of the 1983 Representation of the People Act

114.-(1) A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he .
is guilty of treating.
(2) A person shall be guilty of treating if he corruptly, by
himself or by any other person, either before, during or after an
election, directly or indirectly gives or provides, or pays wholly
or in part the expense of giving or providing, any meat, drink,
entertainment or provision to or for any person-
(a) for the purpose of corruptly influencing that person or
any other person to vote or refrain from voting ; or
(b) on account of that person or any other person having
voted or refrained from voting, or being about to vote
or refrain from voting.
(3) Every elector or his proxy who corruptly accepts or takes
any such meat, drink, entertainment or provision shall also be
guilty of treating.

Blackburn police were obliged to investigate my complaint, and after interviewing witnesses a file was passed to the Crown Prosecution Service. I was told by Blackburn Police that the CPS had decided not to prosecute because it was an “old law”. While it is true that, like murder, it is an old offence, the crime had been included in the 1983 Representation of the People Act. I have no doubt whatsoever that Jack Straw was guilty of treating, ought to have been convicted, and was corruptly protected by the Crown Prosecution Service. Needless to say, the Director of Public Prosecutions at the time is now in the House of Lords. That folks is how the UK works.

The truth is that in this country, electoral law is not enforced against those in power. That is why there is not much publicity around the Tory electoral fraud in at least 14 of their constituencies. It will be made quietly to go away.

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>

257 thoughts on “The Conservatives Will Be Protected From Their Election Fraud

1 2 3
  • Mulga Mumblebrain

    It is interesting how the representatives of such an utterly corrupt system still manage to spew abuse at Russia, China and Iran because they do not approach the perfection of ‘Western Civilization’. And you are correct. The evil, morally corrupt, Rightwing psychopaths who rule the West have lately been acting more and more hysterically and in quite deranged fashion, indicative, I would say, of resort to Moshe Dayan’s ‘mad dog’ strategy, to appear so potentially dangerous and vicious that no-one will dare oppose you.

    • Alan

      ‘It is interesting how the representatives of such an utterly corrupt system still manage to spew abuse at Russia, China and Iran’

      Why don’t we ever admit the truth; Voting is just the slave’s suggestion box?

      • Mulga Mumblebrain

        Did you see the Gilens et al, Princeton and elsewhere study of US politics where they found that US politicians pay virtually no attention to the concerns of the proles, but pay avid and fruitful attention to the interests of the rich elite? Good to see it done scientific like, but it’s just the ‘bleedin’ obvious’, ain’t it?

  • bevin

    “Might I ask how much of that very long post is your words, Bevin, and how much from Counterpunch? And which is which?
    “It is difficult to tell since you have not used quotation marks except at the very end
    “Thank you.” wahHabbakkuk
    No thanks to you for your gratuitous and totally unfounded insolence.
    Had you any decency you would proffer evidence to sustain what would be, among decent people, a serious accusation of plagiarism. You do no such thing because your accusation is without foundation. I challenge you to produce any evidence at all that anything wrote remotely resembles anything in Counterpunch today or recently.
    You really are the most dishonest and slimy troll that I have ever come across in years of crossing swords with hasbara.

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      That’s an interesting outburst, “Bevin”.

      You present us with a long screed , without quotation marks until the very last couple of lines, and end ot with a link to Counterpunch. A question about how much of the screed was yours and how much Counterpunch’s seems entirely legitimate: to characterise the question as an accusation of plagiarism smacks of hysteria.

      The fact that you seem unable to answer calmly and succinctly – eg, by saying “none of it” or “this and this and this” is sllghtly curious, surely?

      Anyway, I hope you wake up feeling better. Have a good day!

      • Carl Olsen

        Most people know that if a person posts without quotes or attribution, then it is his or her own words. If he provides a hypothetical quote as an example, then he would place it in quotes. The provision of a link does not mean that he quoted from it, unless he states otherwise.

        But notice what Habbabkuk does here: He claims that it is difficult to tell ‘how much is your words, Bevin, and how much from Counterpunch? And which is which?”

        Of course that implies that Bevin has engaged in plagiarism, for there is nothing grammatically incorrect or confusing in his use of quotes if the comment is Bevin’s own words.

        So Habbabkuk makes a direct implication that Bevin engaged in plagiarism without giving a shred of evidence. Quite understandably, Bevin took offence. He clearly stated that Habbabkuk’s allegation was unfounded, and challenged him to provide evidence. But in a follow-up comment Habbakuk provided none. The reason for this is that he couldn’t because (and I read the linked article, and I’m sure Habbabkuk did too), Bevin has not quoted from it. But rather than retracting his allegation, Habbabkuk continues to smear Bevin by stating, “The fact that you seem unable to answer calmly and succinctly – eg, by saying “none of it” or “this and this and this” is sllghtly curious, surely?”

        Once again, this is after Bevin clearly stated, “your accusation is without foundation”.

        This is all part of a pattern of ugly attacks by this individual on Bevin, RoS and other regular commenters on Craig’s site. Frankly I’m at a loss why Craig hasn’t banned this disgusting troll.

        • glenn

          This is all part of a pattern of ugly attacks by this individual on Bevin, RoS and other regular commenters on Craig’s site. Frankly I’m at a loss why Craig hasn’t banned this disgusting troll.”

          In fairness, there have been posters on here who regularly reproduced the work of others wholesale, and didn’t attribute any of it to the original source. Not only that, but they deliberately mixed it up a little, to try to thwart a search for the original. Or took two original sources and interlaced them, changing just a few words or phrases, and pretended it was their original work. (I’ll name no names myself, but one notorious culprit was named by you just above, immediately after Bevin.)

          As for the disgusting trolling, the blog host holds great stock in the notion of free speech – up to a point, of course. Posts get deleted periodically for being out of order, but individual posters really have to work hard at taking the piss (if you’ll allow the phrase) before they get banned altogether. A few have managed it, all the same.

          • Carl Olsen

            No, it’s not at all fair to make accusations via sly innuendo because of what others have allegedly done. Habbabkuk needs to either provide evidence of plagiarism or apologize for his ridiculous demand to provide quotes for the ‘plagiarized’ parts (because that is precisely what he did), Of course he’ll do neither. In fact, despite Habbalkuk’s direct implication of plagiarism (what else is Bevin supposed to provide quotes for?) he claims that “to characterize the question as an accusation of plagiarism smacks of hysteria.” I’m all for free speech, but I’ve got no tolerance for sneaky personal attacks thinly disguised as innocent questions.

          • Dave Price (requests more stew in the lion's den)

            I agree with Carl. And if this is a deliberate ploy by Habbabkuk, it is potentially an insidious one. The unjustified comment remains, with the effect that someone browsing the comment history at a later date gets the impression there is some unanswered doubt about the original post when in fact there is none.

          • Dave Price

            (Apologies about the stew – I meant to reserve that just for Habbabkuk).

          • glenn

            Perhaps Habbabkuk will withdraw the accusation, then? I’m sure no insinuation was implied…. Habbabkuk?

            RoS, on the other hand, became quite belligerent after I outed him on his shameless and widespread plagiarism, together with his attempts to disguise the fact. There was absolutely no doubt about what was being done – it was far from a simple quoting while neglecting to mention the source.

            But far from being contrite, RoS has been on a campaign against me ever since – even stooping to making utterly baseless accusations that I personally am a drug abuser and so forth. This is what we can expect from low integrity posters.

          • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)


            Good to read your sane words.

            I’m afraid I won’t be withdrawing a word of the question (not accusation) I asked of “Bevin”.

            One really has to question the “logic” of implying that every question is an accusation.

            But of course I can understand why some of the Hangers-on here go in for that little trick – they don’t like being questioned.

            One has to wonder why…..

          • Republicofscotland


            I never for one second denied using certain paragraphs from other materials, indeed I openly admitted that I sometimes combined those paragraph with my own thoughts, though not recently.

            All info in here comes from outside sources, so any comments with info that does not include a link is indeed a form of plagiarism. But it would be on the brink of absurdity if everyone had to scurry around to find the links to something they read several days earlier that sounded interesting.

            I for one don’t mind Bevin or anyone else for that matter commenting using other materials written prior by someone else. No for me its the content that counts, not who the content belongs to.

            If the likes of Habb, (who’s only in here to disrupt and report anyway) doesn’t like it, so what.

            I doubt very much if you, or the establishment spy Habb, write professionally.

            Anyway Glenn, it’s good to see you’ve gotten over your huge put down by the establishment spy.

          • lysias

            Speaking as an American lawyer, lawyers plagiarize all the time, and, far from it being regarded as an offense, it is vitrtually a professional duty. If somebody else has made an argument in the best way, his argument should be imitated, and this is in fact done all the time. A lawyer’s duty is to his client, not to some ideal of originality.

            Which goes to show that plagiarism is only an offense where originality is expected. And I see no reason to expect it in blog posts.

          • Dave Price (requests more stew in the lion's den)

            Habbakkuk said:

            “Might I ask how much of that very long post is your words, Bevin, and how much from Counterpunch? And which is which?
            It is difficult to tell since you have not used quotation marks except at the very end”.

            Habbs, I for one am happy to believe you when you say that wasn’t an accusation. At the time you were clearly having difficulty understanding that a long comment entirely without quotations is the viewpoint of the commenter, and nobody else. Your question was a genuine cry for help.

          • John Spencer-Davis

            I disagree, Lysias. If I quote someone else’s words, I place them in quotation marks and give a source. Not to do so is plagiarism no matter what the medium is in which they are expressed. If I can’t remember the source, I say that these are not my words, and attribute as closely as possible.

            I don’t expect originality in blog posts, but I also don’t expect someone to copy and paste someone else’s work without attribution.

            If you stood up in court and gave a closing speech that was a word for word replica of some other lawyer’s closing speech, and they discovered the fact, I would rather expect them to ask you what the hell you meant by it. Wouldn’t you, if some other lawyer did that to you?

        • Macky

          The toleration of this offensive Troll is the most off-putting aspect of this Blog; Craig’s stubborn refusal to even consider him as a Troll, calls into question his ability to pass judgement on anything, and so unfortunately undermines his general credibility.

          • glenn

            Ah, Macky – I left you a note the other day, don’t know if you saw it.

            It seems there’s a lot more to the Clinton e-mail scandal than I appreciated, as you quite correctly were indicating at the time (and I incorrectly thought was of no great significance). Have you seen this:


            There’s a lot of information in there, should be right up your street.

          • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)


            In the six months or so you’re back on here – after having flounced off, vowing never to return (you were angry because Craig rebuked you a couple of times) – you have, unlike myself, not offered a single post of substance.

            Unless of course you consider insulting Craig and me to be substance.

            Most reasonable people wouldn’t.

            Are you reformable, I wonder?

          • Republicofscotland


            I think regarding Habb, the spy in the camp so to speak, I’d imagine for Craig it’s better the devil you know, if Craig banned him he’d probably just be replaced or arise again with a different name and e-mail.

          • Carl Olsen

            I agree Macky. I’m all for lively differences of opinion, but but not underhanded personal attacks. And even after being outed, he still stubbornly refuses to admit it. He says, “I’m afraid I won’t be withdrawing a word of the question (not accusation) I asked of “Bevin”. One really has to question the “logic” of implying that every question is an accusation.”

            Hear are his own words (Habbabkuk, May 17, 17:57): “It is difficult to tell since you have not used quotation marks except at the very end.”

            Difficult to tell what? The lack of quotation marks mean that they are all Bevin’s own words. So that accusation, which is a statement, not a question, directly implies that Habbabkuk believes Bevin is a plagiarist. And it doesn’t end there. Even though Bevin heatedly denied it, Habbabkuk’s follow-up comments show he obviously continues to believe that Bevin is a plagiarist. all without a shred of supporting evidence. Shameful and disgusting.

          • Habbabkuk (for insolence and ineffectual snobbery when posting)

            Macky, he’ll only come back under a different name, and it’ll take another few weeks to figure him out. It’s better to know where the bullshit is coming from.

  • giyane

    The free chicken was just a reminder for the free passports Jack Straw could obtain or deny in his Home Secretary position. The fact that the same criminal bastard was using Gaddaffi, Assad, and Karimov to torture their brother and sister Muslims has eventually expanded into the UK Asian Muslims supporting the wholesale genocide of the Syrian Muslims.

    Jack Straw’s crimes against humanity pale into significance against David Cameron’s in Syria Libya and Yemen.

    After the 2008 crash, if Saudi low-interest cash had not been available through the likes of Phillip Hammond turning a blind eye to Saudi head-chopping crimes for disagreeing with your government, then the bankers would have been bankrupted. Money would still have been printed to pay citizens.

    Much tho’ the Muslims and Fedup hate me saying it, the Muslims in this country are guilty of condoning and abetting UK government war crime. Pretending to finger-in-the-mouth innocent.

    Syria is not a noble revolution, it is a plot to subvert the peaceful religion of Islam to false doctrines of takfirism. I’m amazed that both politicians and UK Muslims think that pretending to be village idiots will excuse them in the long term.

    Kaffa billahi shaheeda. Sufficient is Allah as Witness to what they are doing.

  • Tom

    The media only target people who threaten their owners’ agendas. The idea that they are searching for the truth on behalf of their readers is merely a very cleverly constructed lie, created by both sides, which the internet age has laid bare. They are the PR arm of the establishment, which has been made even more ‘necessary’ for those involved, ironically, by the mainstream media’s declining influence and sales, and the increasing glimpses of reality being offered online about the government of the day. I never believed the Tories won the 2015 general election fair and square, so the news about election expenses is no surprise, but, in fact, I think it took more than illegal campaigning for them to do so. See also how the media all immediately blamed the polling companies for the result so that the naive wouldn’t think to ask any deeper questions.

  • fwl

    The Roger Waters (Pink Floyd) narrated film The Occupation of the American Mind about how Israel’s actions are presented in America looks interesting. I haven’t yet seen it reviewed in the mainstream media and in fact only found out about it because I followed Tony’s link to a story on deception false narratives and pay ops on the Clearing Site web house. Habbs suggested.that there are not really mass unreported movements, but funny thing is that Sir Richard Dearlove has noticed the stirrings of mass discontent (movements or no movements). What troubles me is Trump is such a clever phenomenon because he had the potential to act as an umbrella for all malcontents (because he speaks some truth) to gather them and then to use their collective force for whatever skullduggery he (or others who yank his strings) may have in mind.

    Curse of living in interesting timed?

    • fwl

      Can’t do links (on this device I’m using) and can barely use mini keyboard but worth checking out 1984 story on Zero Hedge (if you don’t like Zero’s barrage of financial doom and gloom ignore those stories). Ralph Nader and 1984 post is worth reading.In fact why not also re-read the novel, or if busy the wiki page is not bad. Where did Orwell get this from. Not his imagination sitting on a Scottish island surely.

      • Jim

        “Where did Orwell get this from?…” Stalin and the great terror I always presumed. Show trials etc.

        • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

          You err gravely, Jim.

          Most of the Eminences and their hangers-on on this blog cannot bear the idea that Orwell was writing about Soviet Russia.

          For them, it was all about the BBC.

          (Cue a couple of quotes from Orwell, quoted selectively and taken out of context of course, to dispute what I’e just said 🙂 )

  • nevermind

    Listening to suggestions that NATO should expand into Ukraine this morning and force a solution to their US inspired crisis is to talk up a nuclear exchange here in Europe.
    And with the next item of a rabid Boris, who should really shut up after all the electoral law breaking by their party machine, deliberately I hasten to add, comparing the EU to Hitlers third Reich expansionist’s, has really shown why he isn’t the right PM material. Mind, some might think that Britain is missing out on a talented, well educated man who has so many friends and is so popular, and blond….
    His Turkish heritage is coming through loud and clear, the man is rabble.
    The Tory’s should be suspended from all contests until this issue is solved, just as a failing doctor is suspended from his job.
    And thanks to bevin for keeping the banner swinging above our pet Habby’s empty head here, saying ‘establishment stooge’, he has no home, or family as such, we are all he has to sound off to, bless.

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      “His Turkish heritage is coming through loud and clear, the man is rabble.”

      That sounds like a racist comment to me.


      Disclaimer : I am not Turkish.

      • giyane


        Nevermind was commenting on Boris Johnsons anti-German racism which offended him because he is German. You surely don’t believe that Germans are prone to megalomania, do you.

        But my first father-n-law who had been imprisoned by them and fought them in spitfires did.
        He used to say that it was pointless trying to explain to my generation that had been raised in peacetime how determinedly megalomaniac the Germans were. Ask the Celts if you want a second opinion.

        Your favourite (French) psycho-analyst would agree with Boris, I’m afraid.

        Heseltine was bombed in Brighton by the same people the UK government created to destroy Northern Ireland. You’re supposed to be a false-flag. You’re just a piece of undigested cheese.

        There was no terrorism in Iraq before the Blair/ Bush invasion. Nor in Libya , nor in Syria.
        What is bonkers in my opinion is politicians thinking that they can support rabid terrorism in a country as close to us as Libya or Syria, within 4 hours family holiday flying time, and it will have no impact on us, their European neighbours who share the Mediterranean sea and a borderless, continuous land mass with them.

        • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

          “There was no terrorism in Iraq before the Blair/ Bush invasion. Nor in Libya , nor in Syria.”

          Apart from state terrorism I suppose you mean?

          • bevin

            “Apart from state terrorism I suppose you mean?”
            But what do you mean by ‘state terrorism’? Do you equate the powerful and often arbitrary actions of government, designed to maintain the status quo, with the terrorism that you supported in Iraq and Libya and applaud in Syria?
            Or is this just another smear, designed to justify the attacks on these countries? And to legitimise the killings which take place there every day and which are almost all attributable to the attacks carried out by the imperialists.

          • deepgreenpuddock

            I would have to agree that the iraqi Saddam regime was some particularly vicious variant of state terrorism. Anyone who is denies this, or excuses it, needs to reconsider. Apart from a great deal of reported and chilling evidence, I was once confronted by it personally, if obliquely.
            However the problem I have is that the evidence that the government of this country, primarily the Thatcher government (although i would not be surprised to find out that the Callaghan/predecessors government was also involved) was in some kind of active relationship with Saddam, intended to sustain and promote that state terrorism, and our government, is overwhelming. At the very least, they turned a blind eye for many years and almost certainly were complicit by endorsing and cooperating, in much of that state terrorism, for whatever strategic, economic and financial reasons there no doubt were.
            The Iraq war(s) were a disaster of mismanagement and (possibly) unintended (but foreseeable) adverse consequences and I am also quite certain that the
            motivations for the involvement of this country,(although one must recognise that the role of the this country was to act as an outriding facilitator and supporter of the US), whether from the point of view of the intended result (the end), or the methods and deceptions and political chicanery used to promote that disaster (the means), were utterly misguided, and these events have poisoned both domestic politics/democracy ad political accountability, and international relations, making the world a much more dangerous place. These are negative consequences that people should not dismiss lightly. We await Chilcott. I have a hunch that , although the language will be painfully judicious, there will be a considerable clamour that will arise from it, for some kind of political redress. Interesting times ahead.

    • nevermind

      Thanks for that snippet, Ba’al, another issue next to the electoral law breaking of the Tories which has eluded the great BBC maladministrators and anti-Semitism hunters focused on the labour party, only.

      I’m sure that this news of Sadiq Khans reverence to the Shoa business world wide is balanced with other business engagements.
      That he had to stand next to an increasingly haggard looking Regev, the apologist for IDF murders in international waters, and much more, is just to show that he can converse with all Semites.
      But its a hoot indeed, one wonders what the talk over tea was about.

      • nevermind

        Was it about London embassy access for recreational purposes, strictly regulate it so its visible on CCTV?
        or was it about circles and how things come round again? Once good people ignore the state of affairs it becomes worse, legitimised by a generally needy, politically blind and complacently engaged public. Why complacent? because the trivia that is drip feeding the minds of more than one generation is killing discourse, debate, physical exercise, intuition, and much more.
        That there is only a facile opposition to the TTIP is worrying, can people not understand that our interests do not lie in easier transatlantic junk food trades, or helping a fracked out US to usurp/control the ME, using terror proxies, currently establishing themselves to stay in Sirte,Libya.

        Young people in this country got the right idea, they look at the stagnating world economies and they want to be able to be mobile, try their luck anywhere they like. Thanks to the EU’s Erasmus program they can get a more rounded, interfered with, education in Europe. They also feel that it is their traditional home, Europe and Eurasia, were many of our dependencies lie, were much of our trade interests lie and were the vast resources Russia’s will determine the future for many more than just China. TTIP is not being forced on the SCO or BRIC countries, they are being undermined, just look at the concerted corporate/political/intelligence pressures that have ripped up Venezuela, no we do not have to belong to the Murders Inc. or share the dreams of powerful exploiters/finaciers who want to have it all in the world.

        That dream is over, time to organise a european identity within our geographical and future economic interest spheres. For that we do not have to place anti missile bases on Russia#’s front door, we do not have to use terror groups to undermine Assads/Putins resolve., we do not need to spend that money on NATO, we should spend these monies on EU peace and defence requirements.
        The EU must stop arming factions and countries in flux, with rogue Governments and with undeclared borders, Syria is bristling with them and our chancellor is sighing how this boom in arms sales looks on the books.

        young people want to have a future, they do not want war but to find acceptable affordable housing so they can develop their lives as they wish within the boundaries they choose, that is Europe and it is their future.

        Just sayin

        • giyane


          I walked away from a marriage with someone who had irreconcileable ideas to my own. You walked away from a country and crossed a sea, to get away from a country that had irreconcileable ideas with your own.

          Just because you may wish that Germany had not bankrupted Greece and master-minded the destruction of Syria, according to the link I provided, doesn’t mean that there doesn’t come a time when giving the benefit of the doubt has to end.

          You can then make a new relationship with people, the world is wide enough surely, whose inner vision is like your own.

          Just sayin.

        • Tony_0pmoc


          “That dream is over, time to organise a european identity within our geographical and future economic interest spheres”

          I agree with you. The problem is, that the EU, and virtually all European Leaders, are controlled from Washington, who themselves are very heavily influenced by both American and Israeli Religious and Political Fanatical Extremists.

          European Leaders are Not working for Europeans. That even applies to Merkel. She is not working for Germans. She is working for Americans.

          I do not fully understand all the methods by which European Leaders are controlled by Americans and Israeli’s, but the fact of the matter is that they are.

          There is virtually no resistance to this, because European media is heavily controlled by people with the same agenda. Although some people are well aware of what has been going on for a considerable time (The EU was designed in the USA after WWII), no one seems to have any idea what to do about it…

          The only likely near term option, that offers and hope of progress to a solution is if Britain Massively votes to LEAVE The EU. It will have to be a Massive Majority and quite obvious, as I am convinced there will be an enormous attempt to rig the vote to Stay In – as That is what the USA has ordered…and European Leaders do what the USA tells them to do.


    • Jim

      Well I don’t want to appear like a troll sympathising with Israel’s Iron Fist policy for the sake of annoying anybody, but Regev acquitted himself pretty well there I thought under fierce questioning.

      • fred

        Which has nothing to do with Tory election fraud.

        When you criticise others on forums you must be careful they can’t later accuse you of hypocrisy.

        • Jim

          Can’t tell if that’s directed at me or Baa’l Fred! Baa’l I think, but just wanted to make sure. ?

          • Ba'al Zevul

            Regev’s a slimy PO (PR)S. I note Jim steers smartly away from the electoral aspect (Sadiq Khan as his first act on election sharing a platform with the Israeli ambassador)) to a Regev interview on another topic, so it must be for you, Jim.

            In any case, O/T is permitted on page 2, I believe. And I’m not sure we’re confined to the Tories anyway.

            Inter alia:


            Personally I think that should be credited to the Labour account, it misfired so badly.

    • Jim

      That’s a bit disingenuous Ba’al…you posted the link specifically to draw attention to the clip didn’t you? The absurd headline to the piece (Regev the terrorist etc) could be construed as amusing I suppose. I’m not sure where the humour lies here, I suppose you mean there is some dark ironic humour to the shared platform or something? Anyway, I wasn’t trying to steer away from anything!

      • fwl

        Oh come on. Its v funny after all the pumped trolling of Kahn in the election. Where’s you sense of humour.

        • Jim

          Yep I think I see what you mean there…the Goldsmith slurs, then sharing a platform with the Israeli ambassador with a huge smile, that is pretty funny actually. Makes Goldsmith look even more of an arse. Is that what you’re getting at? Sorry if I’m a bit slow on the uptake.

    • Jim

      The language and tone of the piece is hysterical though (not in a humorous way), how do the petitioners expect to get a measured response? It just seems a bit self-defeating to me.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        Why did Sadiq Khan share a platform with a man who is an apologist for Israel’s terror and has been part of a Zionist regime which has terrorised so many Palestinians?

        Not sure how else you’d put that, if you were a Muslim organisation trying to counter institutional Islamophobia, and addressing a fellow-Muslim who has just collected much of your demographic’s vote. Is there a factual error I’m missing, there? Or bad grammar, perhaps?

        • Jim

          Emotive expressions such as terror apologist and Zionist in the same breath just seem self-defeating to me, but perhaps I’m wrong? Why can’t they tone down the rhetoric a bit, then there would be less room for the anti-Semitism accusations. I’m sure I’d be feeling a lot less sanguine if I was living in Gaza or the West Bank though.

  • giyane

    Good to see that Ba’al and Nevermind can see the incongruity and hence humour in the meeting of Regev and Khan.

    It’s like looking at photos of Thatcher and Savile together at Chequers. They each make sense as individuals, but seen together in a political context, knowing that politics is all lies, you wonder, mind-boggle even, what the pair of them are capable of concocting in unison..

  • giyane

    Habbabkuk always demands instant answers, but his routine GCHQ Monday morning meeting with his black forged-steel-bikinied, maso-thonged, bommy-knockered line manager, seems to be taking rather a long time …

    • giyane

      I agree with Jim: H acquitted himself pretty well there I thought under fierce questioning.

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      Not instant answers, Giyane, just answers.

      Strange how many on here are not prepared to give answers when questioned about their wilder claims and assertions.

      It’s as if they can’t back or even defend what they write.

      As for an apology when shown to be completely wrong, well……Pigs, wings, flying.


      Isn’t it time for your lie-down?

      • Loony

        Maybe you are suffering from cognitive dissonance. You express concern with “wild(er) claims and assertions” made by people contributing to a blog. People who, as far as I know, have hands that are nowhere near the levers of power and are simply seeking to express their opinions.

        You do not appear so keen to express concern with the extraordinarily dangerous opinions expressed by people such as General Sir Richard Shirreff. This is a man who claims the UK is “semi pacifist” – surely a claim so wild and counter to all evidence that not even the insane could find this credible.

        Of more concern is his position regarding Russia – which appears to be that if we fail to provoke a war with Russia in the near term then we will be obliged to provoke a war with Russia in the medium term. If this man, and those like him, are allowed to roam the corridors of power unimpeded then he will kill me as surely as he will kill you.

        Whilst you continue to harangue people with an endless stream of nugatory observations the real lunatics continue to consolidate their grip on power. Whilst you appear only too willing to run interference for such people perhaps you should bear in mind that they fully intend ending your life on the alter of their deranged ideology.

        • Jim

          I saw that earlier! Shirreff sounds like a ‘Jimmy’ character from the original Leonard Rossiter Reggie Perrin series ?

      • Republicofscotland

        “Strange how many on here are not prepared to give answers when questioned”



        Well you obviously have no shame, you’re quite prepared to ask the questions, and become all righteous like when no answers are forthcoming. But when questioned yourself, you point blankly refuse to answer.

        But then again we all know now, that you’re not at liberty to answer,.

      • giyane

        Lie down and die!

        Not today thanks .. can you tell your scantily dressed line manager I’m getting static off her uniform on my mobile’s microphone.

  • giyane


    Which has nothing to do with Tory election fraud.

    A little brainstorm for you Fred.

    A host of golden daffodils ==> Gold ==> Bankers ===. Saudi Money ==> 15,000,000 refugees ==> Muslims ==> Zionists ==> friends of Israel ==> corrupt politicians ==> electoral fraud ==> Nick Clegg ==> Yellow ==> golden daffodils

  • Tony_0pmoc

    In 2003 an American band had a hit record with a video which at the time I found hilarious. It contained the lyrics…

    “Let’s start a war
    Start a nuclear war
    At the gay bar”

    I don’t find it funny any more. Whoever is in control of NATO has literally gone insane. In fact its a form of Group Insanity, which is quite obvious simply by reading what NATO and Washington say and write. They actually believe their own fabricated reality.

    The problem is, even if they are not serious – and they do seem to be serious, both Russia and China are going to feel seriously threatened. From their point of view, it must feel that they are dealing with completely deranged mad dogs…

    And now we have this in the Independent…This is Not Good. If there is anyone sane, left in the US Military can they please attempt to arrest these lunatics including Hillary Clinton, or the General is right – and they will probably kill us all.


    “Nato risks a nuclear war with Russia ‘within a year’, senior general warns”

    • YouKnowMyName

      the 2016 Oscar nomination shortlisted DVD “Where to Invade next” is available next month (probably) from amazon point de

      The documentary gets rave reviews on RottenTomatoes with an audience score of a whopping 76% but then what do the voting people know! (vague eurovision/Tory crimes reference)

      This is an expansive, rib-tickling, and subversive comedy in which Moore, playing the role of “invader,” visits a host of nations to learn how the U.S. could improve its own prospects. The creator of Fahrenheit 9/11 and Bowling for Columbine is back with this hilarious and eye-opening call to arms. Turns out the solutions to America’s most entrenched problems already existed in the world – they’re just waiting to be co-opted

      The local amazon have it slated for an August UK release (probably)

      disclaimer: I went to college for a few years with the founder of, but apart from the odd email chat I profit not from the association with Simon. . . and many other good booksellers are available (probably)

      • Chris Rogers

        A bit behind the times, this Documentary has been available by Bittorrent for quite a while – Why pay Amazon when you can donate directly to Mr. Moore.

    • nevermind

      Thanks for that link Tony, I for one do not agree with gen. Shirreff’s scenario.
      He mentions a perceived weakness when the Baltic has seen numerous manoeuvres and NATO meetings over the last few years, a perception born out of what?
      Secondly, he does not mention that NATO’s mad provocative plans to allow the Kiev controlled part of the UKraine to foster a NATO base, invading Russia’s personal space so to speak, is a move the EU should/would stop in its tracks.
      Ukraine is not part of the EU yet, and it is in our future common interest to keep peace with Russia, nobody in Berlin or Paris wants war, this line is being pushed by a small amount of ultra right neocons who have not realised that they can’t stop the clock or the fast modern development that is happening in South east Asia and Eurasia, a war would not change this, a nuclear war would be utter madness and risks catastrophe world wide.
      I find that those who advance such rhetoric are more concerned with getting their way than with our safety. Naively I do not think that Europe will allow anyone to impose war here, and maybe it would be advisable for the politicians in the baltic states to open a dialogue between all EU states, Russia and those who just can’t let go of their expansionist NATO lags.

    • MJ

      “I don’t find it funny any more. Whoever is in control of NATO has literally gone insane”

      Insanity is the new sanity. It ought to be funny but it ain’t.

  • Manda

    Nice to see This Weeks Tweedledum and Tweedledee attempting to play dumb and looking decidedly shifty in the process. Exposed! A reminder of why I don’t watch the cringeworthy double act or hardly any BBC or TV anymore.

  • bevin

    I don’t wish to belabour the point, Habbabkkkuuk’s smears anger me because they are so regular. Like a snail he leaves a trail of slime, trailing it wherever he goes.
    There is no evidence that I copied anything without attributing it. Any fool could see that: I have a rather peculiar writing style and what I wrote is not the sort of stuff that Counterpunch publishes.

    The problem is that ever since he first appeared on this site and engaged in an obsessive campaign of trolling against a regular and valuable commentator, whom he eventually succeeded in driving her away (after, I suspect, wounding her considerably), he turned his attentions to others. His smear invariably begins by casting doubt, without evidence, on the motives and honesty of those whose views are not reactionary and conformist.

    For my own part I am all for his doing so, I have not the slightest interest in any of his insincere and cynical apologies, nor any of his other affected courtesies. Nor am I opposed to the nature of the arguments, sustaining such emblems of the status quo as the fascist government of Israel or the assault on poor and vulnerable people, being shown, on a regular basis , to be shallow, worthless and largely composed of smears and ad hominem assaults.
    My objection is to the fact that such behaviour is designed, quite cynically, to drive ordinary people, particularly those new to the sordid world of public controversy, away and to silence their thoughts and blast their ideas as they are being formed.

    Here, for, example, is just one small passage from one of his posts today, claiming that the burden of proving that I have not imposed plagiarisms on readers, lies with me. In fact as Habbabkkuk knows, it is most unlikely that I would even learn of his smear. None of us I suppose, re-reads all comments from the beginning to the end whenever revisiting the blog. I only came across his attack by chance. By making such ‘digs’ on a regular basis and doing so in a way that almost ensures that they will remain, on the record, unanswered, a false impression is easily created.

    This is what he did with Mary. And he has done to several others.
    He begins by suggesting that to ask someone which, of what he has presented as his own thoughts, is really his and what ought to be in quotation marks because it is cut and pasted without acknowledgement, is a simple and reasonable question. (Which makes me wonder whether he has stopped beating his wife,yet.)
    “…One really has to question the “logic” of implying that every question is an accusation.”
    He adds, clearly angry, at the reactions his dishonesty has produced in third parties,
    “But of course I can understand why some of the Hangers-on here go in for that little trick – they don’t like being questioned.”
    Which is, of course, 100% pure smearing, inferring, as it does that these respectable and, of course, completely independent agents are “hangers on” thus demeaning both them and me, while warning others who might be inclined to agree with me, that they too can be smeared as mere “hangers-on”. Adding, just for the hell of it, no doubt, that such people resent being questioned, no doubt because they have much to hide.

    The message from Habbabkkuk is thus, that he cannot help but smear. It is pretty well all that he does. He never makes a constructive suggestion. He never gives us information, he never gives us an honest opinion. It is all smearing and nit picking, varied only by the occasional attempt to stir up quarrels among other commentators.
    But we should be thankful for small mercies-such creatures cannot reproduce themselves, without radically changing their deeply ingrained habits.

    • Republicofscotland


      A word to the wise, just keep doing what your doing, don’t let them change your posting habits, if you do they’ve won.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        And then there’s ‘Habbabreak’ for breaking the habb-it of responding to the guy, wasting your own time, and filling the comments with wholly irrelevant argument, which is what he wants you to do.. On the ‘Habbabreak V2’ forum page. Recommended.

        • Republicofscotland


          Yes Baal, you are spot on, thankfuly more and more posters are beginning to see through Habbs little ruse. It wouldn’t even be so bad if he (Habb) posted comments with links then you could read them and engage with him, but he won’t post a link, except the one he did post, if I recall it was “stopfake” which sums him up really.?

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)


      “I don’t wish to belabour the point, Habbabkkkuuk’s smears anger me..”……… followed by 38 lines about me


      You have a strange way of showing that you don’t wish to labour the point, “Bevin”.

      I really don’t know why I bother about you. It must be the cogency of your “arguments”, your powers of reasoning, your strict avoidance of plagiarism ( 🙂 ), the originality of your “thought” that appeals to me. So I’ll carry on if it’s all the same to you. The solution is in your hands…..

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      There would be much to comment on in “Bevin”‘s somewhat intemperate post but I think I’ll let it stand on its own as a monument to foolishness, dishonesty and paranoia.

      But the following extract does interest me:

      “The problem is that ever since he first appeared on this site and engaged in an obsessive campaign of trolling against a regular and valuable commentator, whom he eventually succeeded in driving her away”

      Now that would appear to indicate you were on here before I arrived – you been on here for at least 3 years.

      Funnily enough, though, I don’t recall seeing any posts a couple of years ago signed “Bevin”: “Bevin” appears to have arrived relatively recently.

      So , if you have been around for years, is it possible you were posting under a different handle until relatively recently? That you might be one of those noisy regulars who suddenly disappeared off the radar a year or so ago?

      Jusr askin’, of course – not a smear, just a polite request for clarification.


      BTW, don’t come back and tell me “I was reading for several years but only started posting recently” because if you do I shall have to ask you “and what impelled you to start posting?”

    • Republicofscotland


      Re your 15.28pm comment, by the length of it and its content, I can clearly see the “charlatan one” is getting to you. Relax take a deep breath and get back to what your good at, ignore the malice and post interesting comments . ?

      Above all, no self-deprecation.

    • Chris Rogers


      I often find the word “fuck off” to be highly useful, particularly when denouncing the ARBITER of this site.

      Don’t hold your emotion back and do keep up the lengthy posts, which obviously take much thought and consideration.

      Further, you syntax always seems the same to me, so not sure what the Troll is implying after allegedly checking all your posts for a number of years – it would seem the ARBITER does not understand our posts and emotions are influenced by events and this is actually a rolling Blog, rather than a final word BIG Statement.

      • bevin

        Thanks for the advice, Chris.
        ‘Fuck Off’ is probably the greeting of choice on the cards that the troleen gets, when he gets them. It certainly springs to my lips whenever I see his dreaded name (he is now ‘accusing’ me of posting under multiple identities) and the fatuous slogans he puts beside it.

    • Resident Dissident

      I would have thought after my attack on my wife – I would have thought you would have had the sense of not accusing anyone of smears. I’m afraid those that deny the Holodomor and the Gulag and make increasingly hypocritical statements about not interfering in the affairs of foreign countries deserve all the get.

      It is also quite obvious from this post that you have been here quite a long time under a number of aliases.

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        you see, “Bevin”? My thought has occurred to at least one other regular..

        It would be very simple to say “no, I haven’t”. Three simple words. Why don’t you?

    • Chris Rogers


      I must say I really enjoyed this contribution and how pertinent it was to this Blogs ‘self anointed ARBITER’.

      I trust many of the “hanger-ons” have taken time out to read this post, and hopefully sum up the courage to stick the boot into the Troll.

      Now, personally speaking, one enjoys crossing swords with the ARBITER, but alas others find his posting behaviour reprehensible, if not outright obnoxious, but it’s a small price to pay as we ponder just how many twisted fools like the ARBITER actually exist – indeed, there are a legion of them posting on The Guardian, which would explain how unemployment allegedly continues to fall, and yet the UK witnesses no productivity gains. Well, now we know the answer, most are employed by Tory Central Office and GCHQ on Zero Hours Contracts to piss-off alleged malcontents prior to the new anti-extremism legislation becoming law, at which time all will be issued P45’s for their glorious services to our fascist state.

      • Resident Dissident

        Of course Mr Rogers never acts in the role of ARBITER appointed or otherwise. Any evidence to back up your accusations – or is it not possible to have views opposing your only extremely narrow mindset without having been paid to express them. Who is paying you Mr Rogers?

      • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

        Does it need “courage” to reply to someone on a blog (cf your second para)?

        I can think of better ways to demonstrate courage, Chris.

  • Republicofscotland

    Well we’ve had Boris Johnson say that Hitler tried to unify Europe with disastrous consequences. Not to be outdown, the head of the nasty party David Cameron has retorted with, claims that Daesh, and Putin would love Britain to exit the EU.

    The vote is still a few weeks away, so there’s plenty of time for both sides to mention the likes of Pol Pot, General Pinochet, Genghis Khan or even Joseph Stalin, and whether or not they’d have opted in or out.

  • N_

    Current DPP Alison Saunders will probably get a seat in the Lords too, after she helped the paedophile Greville Janner so sweetly, and her money-laundering husband Neil Saunders won’t get his collar felt either.

  • Republicofscotland

    While the world leaders gathered in Vienna on Tuesday, to try and propose some sort of peace deal for Syria. Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister was pushing “Plan-B” if Assad doesn’t step down.

    So we have the totally absurb situation of one dictator state backed by the West, proposing by the sounds of it, upping, military intervention in Syria.

    Obviously the Western ally Saudi Arabia aren’t content enough with killing women and children in Yemen with their bombing sorties.

  • Andrew MacGregor

    I met Jack Straw. A man who stated openly to me his dislike of Muslims and said “All extremist Muslims should be sent back to Pakistan” Chris Patten was aghast and hastily beat a retreat from the discussion. Straw is a vile little man and should have been in jail.

    • Republicofscotland

      Andrew MacGregor.

      According to Richard Morton Jack’s book “British Sleaze” Jack Straw then Foreign Secretary in 2004 met dictator Robert Mugabe, who’d just given a vigorous speech in New York denouncing Britain.

      Mr Straw also at the conference shook Mugabe’s hand and said in a pleasant manner “Nice to see you” his excuse when rumbled as to why he (Straw) engaged in a cosy handshake with murderous dictator Mugabe. Straw replied “It was dark and I couldn’t recognise who I was greeting.”

      • bevin

        What was Mugabe’s excuse, for shaking hands with a man with clear responsibility for the killing of more people than there are in Zimbabwe? And still going strong.

  • Macky

    @Glenn, Although it was obvious very early on just how serious the Clinton email scandal was/is, you only have to consider that Bush & Co were able to secured immunity for their crimes before they even left Office, and that here, Blair is still lauded by the MSM as sort of wise & respected Elder Statement, instead of being prosecuted, or even shunned for the vile blood-soaked mass murdering war-criminal that he is; so the chances of Clinton ever being held to account for anything seem rather remote, but I really hope that I’m proved wrong.

    @Carl, the Troll’s presence here is a real damaging blight for this Blog in many ways, and a damning indictment on Craig, who not only continues to allows this Clown to run riot, baiting, insulting, disrupting, but also actually encourages him, under the false pretext of Free Speech, an ironic mockery as the Troll’s only purpose on this Blog is to sabotaged Free Speech. His last posts to me contain nothing but complete lies & malicious misrepresentations, but to respond would be to aid him in his task of littering this Blog with pointless & boring to & fro exchanges.

    • Loony

      Clinton most certainly will not be held to account in the west. However it seems that the Russians are in possession of around 20,000 of her e-mails, National Security means record queues at US airports whilst simultaneously handing over swathes of confidential information to Putin who Clinton believes to be comparable to Hitler.

        • Loony

          I guess there is always a chance. Separately (but no doubt ultimately related) is the fact the together Mr and Mrs Clinton have “earned” some $55 million for speeches since 2013.

          What could they possibly have to say that is so valuable? – As they will not release the transcripts of these speeches we can only guess.

          • Manda

            “What could they possibly have to say that is so valuable?”

            I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine first?

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      “His last posts to me contain nothing but complete lies & malicious misrepresentations, ”

      Will you deny that you left this blog after telling us all you were leaving?

      Will you deny hat you squatted on (infested) Squonk’s blog for a few months, spending much of your time bad-mouthing Craig?

      Will you deny that Craig told you a couple of times you were talking rubbish and that you left very soon after that happened?

      Will you deny that there was a link between those two facts?

      Will you deny that you are still bad-mouthing Craig every tile you send a post here?

      And finally, will you deny that it would have been better for everyone – including yourself – if you had kept your promise to stay away from here?

      Admit all the above and then ask who is the liar.

  • Republicofscotland

    “The United States Senate has passed a legislation that would allow the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks to take legal action against the government of Saudi Arabia despite opposition by the White House.

    Obama said he’ll veto the act, but the Republican controlled upper house said that they’ll over-ride Obama’s decision.

    In my opinion, it sound all a bit to convenient, why would the US think about blaming Saudi Arabia? A Middle Eastern ally and long time creditor.

  • Runner77

    Bevin et al: Re. Habbacluck’s tiresome interventions: : As (most of the time) a lurker who’s been following this blog pretty much since it’s inception, I was an enthusiastic long-time user of Habbabreak, and at first I greatly missed it when it was withdrawn. I also share others’ bafflement about why Craig allows his blog to be sullied by this sort of nonsense. Very interested to hear that Habbabreak’s been resurrected, and will follow that up. But in its absence, I’ve developed a seamless and effortless alternative: an internalised version of Habbabreak. Whenever I see the offending name at the top of a post, I quite automatically scroll down to the next one. Given the amount of garbage produced by the offending entity, that saves a lot of time and emotional energy, and enables one to focus on what more informative posts say . . .
    Just a suggestion . . .

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      A long-winded way of saying “just scroll past”.

      Whoever said that originality was dead?

    • Republicofscotland


      Welcome, thank you for your thoughts, I look forward to reading more of them . ?

      • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

        No you don’t, RoS, you’re just getting in a dig at me, you little teaser 🙂

    • Manda

      “Whenever I see the offending name at the top of a post, I quite automatically scroll down to the next one.”

      I’m a fairly new reader (mostly) but adopted that tactic after about three visits. I developed the discipline elsewhere. I was loathe to do it as it felt disrespectful to another person but after a while and some trauma, I learned it was necessary to protect myself and others from the infection of intended chaos and not encourage it. Not reading removed the temptation to engage completely.

    • Ba'al Zevul

      I found Habbabreak very helpful in nullifying the tendency to reply to the obviously provocative and mischievous posts (as well as various other bores). It gradually became less of a challenge to ignore the smirking provocations without its aid. When Habbabreak 1 died, I’d already turned it off for some time. But the basic rule is Don’t Feed The Troll. Under any circumstances at all, ideally, and certainly for no more than one exchange. No-one ever wins on the Internet, remember. It also helps to imagine that you are being invited to hold a real conversation with this individual*, at a party, say. And realise that he is probably a bit touched, and wholly devoid of conversational skills. Would you carry on talking? I’d be heading for the buffet.

      This has been a public service message.

      * He looks like the guy on the left:

  • Doug Scorgie

    May 17, 2016 at 22:52

    “Why is this entitled ‘The Conservatives Will Be Protected From Their Election Fraud’ when you then go on to talk about Jack Straw?
    If you think the media are missing the Tory infighting how about…”

    I think you will find Alan that many Tory papers are pro Brexit (especially the Telegraph) and they want to use Brexit Tories like Boris Johnson to attack Cameron for their own purposes but when push comes to shove they are, after all, Tory papers.

    What you fail to accept is that Tory party splits are not reported by the MSM with the same enthusiasm and venom that is reserved for Labour party splits.

  • Doug Scorgie

    Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)
    May 18, 2016 at 13:56

    “One really has to question the “logic” of implying that every question is an accusation.”
    “But of course I can understand why some of the Hangers-on here go in for that little trick – they don’t like being questioned.”

    Your question Habbabkuk was what would be described in a court of law, a leading question and would be disallowed by the judge.

    • Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)

      Thank you for relmnding us that we are in a blog and not in a court of law, Mr Scorgie.

      I would expect nothing less from a solicitor.

  • bevin

    The Information Clearing House is, as most will know, back on form (and looking for donations), Tom Feeley having, it is to be hoped, recovered from his stroke. (No doubt wahHabbacrook posted a comment there.)

    Two articles from today’s edition are particularly useful
    Jonathan Cook on the extraordinary report by “Royall” on the Labour Party
    and Robert Parry lamenting the death of the Press

    Both are worth reading and act as a bracing tonic after ingesting the demented postings of the Troll called HabBandera.

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)


      I note that you are back but have avoided answering – or even commenting on – my questions about whether you have posted on here in the past under another handle. After all, you implied you’ve been on here for several years, whereas the handle “Bevin” only appeared relatively recently.

      That is significant, isn’t it?

      • Resident Dissident

        The ends always justify the means for these old Marxist Leninists.

    • Carl Olsen

      Habbabkuk construes Bevin’s lack of response (because who cares?) to Habbabkuk’s meaningless and typically unsupported allegation, yet I see Habbabkuk still hasn’t responded to my comment of 15:50, where I show that despite his earlier attempt to deny it, he directly implied that Bevin is a plagiarist without providing a shred of evidence. (The question I asked was. “Difficult to tell what? The lack of quotation marks mean that they are all Bevin’s own words.”)

      It seems that in Habbabkuk considers himself exempt from the demands he imposes on others. I’m beginning to suspect that Craig keeps him around merely to demonstrate how thoroughly objectionable establishment apologists can be. After all, it’s inconceivable that such reprehensible behaviour could possibly gain any converts to Habbabkuk’s pov.

      • Carl Olsen

        Oops! Meant to say, “Habbabkuk construes Bevin’s lack of response (because who cares?) to Habbabkuk’s meaningless and typically unsupported allegation as significant, yet I see…”

  • Doug Scorgie

    Habbabkuk (for accuracy and honesty when posting)
    May 18, 2016 at 14:05

    “Most of the Eminences and their hangers-on on this blog cannot bear the idea that Orwell was writing about Soviet Russia.”

    Habbabkuk, as you know, George Orwell’s 1984 was published in 1949 and was partly based on the one-party system of Russia.

    However, his book was a warning or “wake-up call” to complacent western democracies whose electorate can “sleepwalk” into state dictatorship – right or left.

    Perhaps you didn’t understand or your single-minded right-wing political religion prevented your brain from seeing the obvious in Orwell’s writing.

    • Resident Dissident

      Perhaps we might also have a conversation about all the obvious things in Orwell’s writings that you and the Eminences miss – somehow I don’t believe Orwell would be much of a fan of Castro, Ghadaffi, Assad and Saddam nor that he would define right and wrong in politics just by support or opposition for the US. Come on Doug lets have that debate if you dare.

      • giyane

        Orwell’s experiences of the Communists in Spain remind me of my experiences as a Muslim revert.
        They wanted him to sacrifice himself blindly to their cause, a cause which he quickly realised was probably more violent and rightwing than the dictatorship in power.

        In this comparison with Syria, communists = al Qaida, and Muslim Brotherhood = Franco.
        Who on earth would want to fight for a corporate dictator like Franco?
        People are looking for freedom in the Muslim Brotherhood which controls people with a spy network which is as comprehensive and brutal as Assad’s? No wonder Cameron can smell potential there.

      • RobG

        Maybe you would dare to talk about what’s going on in France right now? one of our closest neighbours and one of the most powerful nations in the world.

        God, I’d love to be a fly on the wall for what passes as a GCHQ brain-storming session.

        These people are seriously dumb, and all on tax payer’s money.

        • giyane


          I see certain stereotypes in France such as

          French female politician has to ask for legislation for political males not to consider political females as useful holes in which to express their policies.

          French, Arab-speaking Muslims are not so obsessed with money as UK Asian ones. They are kept in underprivileged housing and cross-fertilise ideas with the lower strata of the French class system.

          Here in the UK the imams hate of the indigenous people almost as much as the Tory political class hates them, while in France the imams have the respect of the working class.

          The French elite ( French word ) can always tell the people who want revolution ‘plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose’. The French will protest at this outrageous provocation.

          But here in the UK the elite uses divide and rule, i.e. playing one section of society against another. I think I prefer the French arrogance to British deviancy.

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

      “However, his book was a warning or “wake-up call” to complacent western democracies whose electorate can “sleepwalk” into state dictatorship – right or left.”

      You’re entitled to your point of view, Mr Scorgie, but it’s not one I’d agree with.

      Of course there are some – we know who they are – who would take that line (because they have it in for the West and are seeking ti recruit Orwell to their cause).

      But – as a matter of interest – is there any evidence from Orwell himself or from any of his contemporaries who knew him to back up your belief?

    • Habbabkuk (flush out fakes)

      I suppose one could note that all rituals are arcane to a greater or lesser extent – it’s in the nature of a ritual.

      As for “bizarre” – what are you comparing it with?

1 2 3

Comments are closed.