9/8/15 I was excluded from PNC – unsearchable. That’s unheard of for somebody who had/s a record. Policemen who searched for me had a visit.
That’s enough now. It’s clear to me. You may need to reflect on it.
9/8/15 3.15am I would be pleased to make a sworn statement about this.
11/8/15 Please let me try to explain. I happened across it. It happened.
If we apply logic, nonces will make sure that those in the highest office to replace them are also nonces. They’ve got to appoint nonces to replaces them so that they will be safe. Doesn’t that make sense? Isn’t that logical?
You may find that those who are obviously lenient on nonces are either nonces or willing to overlook that to attain high office. …
later: But what’s happened now is that we’ve had a break. Current PM is there by a different route. I am tempted to call it a rupture – the point being that it is different to the previous path. Because of this ‘rupture’, the normal protection of establishment nonces is absent. Savile started it. Normal nonce control would have contained it.
later again edit: I hope that it is a rupture – that never again people will abuse children with impunity.
Knox Cunningham …
Cliff Richard …
Jeff Gannon …
Falconer …
Janner …
Blair to Janner “I shall do my best to get you there [the Lords]. It’s not just that I’m fond of you, which I am. It’s not just that you’ve helped me a lot, which you have. It’s because you deserve it.” (you paedo)
It’s as if it was electioneering … as though it was support me, I’m a paedo …
later: Blair’s message is safe hands because I’m a paedo too, I’ll look after you. Blair is safe hands for establishment paedos.
Which Blair minister intervened in supporting a paedo in Lambeth in adopting boys? Was it Blair? We want to know and we deserve to know. Please leak it (& also the Chilcot report).
later: to the Labour Party: He’s a paedo & it’s going to be catastrophic for you. It’s going to be factual. I tend to have a hateful regard of the Labour Party and you will have to deal with it or not. It’s yours. you c**ts. I fought back.
You useless c**ts – the Labour Party allowing a f***ing absolute psychopath to be do so much damage. I curse you with all my might. Get it?
The Labour Party, I salute you
So that there is no mistake, I am calling you classic original Fascist scum.
You’re all sh**s but there are some that I had contact with. That would be in Newport and Cardiff. Yes, you’re Labour sh**s that I had contact with, particularly that two-faced one in Newport.
So, if you defer to your authoritarian leader – ring his office for instructions, maybe get a little payback for your constituency. If you defer to your glorious, wonderful master does that make you a Fascist? Following orders, supporting the glorious leader. Does that make you a Fascist too? I think so.
Isn’t that what Fascism is? Deference to a glorious war leader? Isn’t that eXactly what you – and the wider Labour Party – did?
Twat Ian Blair with a gunTony Blair, apparent saviour but soon to be coffin-nail of the UK Labour Party (when exposed as a n***e)Cressida Dick, promoted to IPCC (to handle complaints …)
The Guardian: Questions over Labour peer’s letters to care home boy reports “Despite allegations about the peer, no action was taken and he was robustly defended by a number of politicians, including at least one prominent MP who has been openly critical of the government’s response to allegations of historical child abuse by MPs and peers.”
I find it strange that the Guardian was not willing to name Greville Janner. Hardly a secret is it?
No action was taken despite such a letter appearing in court. I wonder who that one prominent MP is.
Tony Blair Inc is doing fantastically well – being a conzultant to all the most repressive anti-democratic regimes that there are.
In 1997 Blair was elected with 418 MPs – which I find (edit: so) weird and makes me wonder if all so-called Western democracy is so corrupt.
9/11 He was awfully ‘lucky’ (lucky lucky – we know a song about that;)
He should be so lucky, lucky, lucky
Was it more than luck?
That the Blair was there at that opportune moment …
To stand shoulder to shoulder, to be there at that time … in front of the cameras … so all the rest of the world … could take a lead from …
Him
He was due to address the TUC congress, the organisation that represents UK unions and therefore the UK working class that Bliar as leader of the ‘Socilaist’ working-class was supposed to represent …
but …
all of sudden …
Bliar couldn’t address the TUC congress because there was an international crisis
That was ****ing lucky for Him cos they wanted his head on a spike for shi**ing on the unions and the working-class.
That was awfully lucky for Him
or was it …
arranged that way?
Blair on 9/11
Was it so fortunate that Bliar had a stage to abandon on 11 September, 2001? That he was the first World leader to frame the international response to 911? Was that fortunate or something else?
He was due to address the TUC. Television stations were there to transmit his speech. The World caught it. This is why Bliar is so successful. He is a terrorist.
He said
“This mass terrorism is the new evil in our world today. It is perpetrated by fanatics who are utterly indifferent to the sanctity of human life and we, the democracies of this world, are going to have to come together to fight it together and eradicate this evil completely from our world.”
By being the first to respond, He framed and constrained the response.
I can’t find the cnut addressing the TUC on 9/11. Can anyone find that? It should be available.
OK, I’ll continue with alleged UK/Blair complicity in 9/11
Don’t you think it’s weird that this lying cnut promoted it so much?
ed: The point I was trying to make – which I have probably failed to make so far – is that Tony Blair was made and has enriched Himself fantastically through His response to 911 and since. TBC. and that’s all
ed: that He’s a terrorist because that’s all that there is about him
… everything was in place for Blair to seize the moment; the planned live coverage of the speech meant that with a little advance warning other news networks around the world could easily link up to Brighton. Official reaction was sparse as governments scrambled to interpret what was going but the word went out that Blair was about to give Britain’s first response.
However tragic the circumstances Blair’s director of communications Alastair Campbell needed no guidance on how to respond: his task was to ensure that Blair’s authority was enhanced. The prepared text was abandoned and the Prime Minister’s instant attempt to address the challenges facing democratic nations could hardly be bettered:
“This mass terrorism is the new evil in our world today. It is perpetrated by fanatics who are utterly indifferent to the sanctity of human life and we, the democracies of the world, are going to have to come together to fight it together and eradicate this evil completely from our world.”
Later that evening on his return to Downing Street, Blair spoke again to reporters and reinforced his call for solidarity with the United Sates, a soundbite which was replayed time and again on American news channels:
“This is not a battle between the United States of America and terrorism, but between the free and democratic world and terrorism. We therefore here in Britain stand shoulder to shoulder with our American friends in this hour of tragedy. We, like them, will not rest until this evil is driven from our world.”
Right on cue images were supplied to illustrate the standing “shoulder to shoulder” soundbite. Next morning the pictures reinforced the message as the band of the Coldstream Guards performed the American national anthem the Star-Spangled Banner outside Buckingham Palace during the Changing of the Guard.
Campbell’s orchestration was a masterful demonstration of Blair’s understanding of the demands of the electronic news media and it is little wonder that their ability to exploit a global television audience became the envy of many other governments around the world. End Nicholas Jones 5.9.2011
“People’s Princess” (you know)
3.55 I have been trying to develop the theme that there is nothing more to Bliar than terrorism.
Terrorism made Blair.
Blair was there straight away, If it wasn’t for terrorism …
[I want it to be absolutely clear that is historical and absolutely not current]
edit: I am pulling attention to Clegg’s past associations. I do not intend to and I consider it unfair to extrapolate to his current associations.#
Further edit: In this context.
Further further edit: This post is about Nick Clegg being associated with Leon Brittan. Nick Clegg worked in Leon Brittan’s office. Nick Clegg has always been a Tory and was a member of Cambridge University Conservative Association.
Nick Clegg is very keen to not be associated with Leon Brittan … but didn’t he work in Leon Brittan’s office?
Is it more than Nick Clegg is a Conservative? I think that (it) is established – he was at (a Conservative at) University and there is the Blue ‘Yellow’ Orange Book.
Leon Brittan. I’m certainly forming the impression that She got a gang of very sexually predatory on young people around her deliberately. I am have also have a very strong impression (or more) that this continued into the Blair years and that it may well be the way of Westminster …
later: Leon Brittan is prominent in Barnes (and Private Eye ;)
Later: Leon Brittan – as Thatcher’s Home Secretary didn’t act against PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange. I don’t wonder why
edit: it may be worth thinking about how She protected them – there may be a pattern.
2am This may be about Nick Clegg and Leon Brittan.
Nick Clegg was a Tory at university and worked in Leon Brittans’ office afterwards. There’s more to it that that.
Nick Clegg hides the fact that he was a Tory and that he worked in the Tory office of Leon Brittan. Leon Brittan is very so obviously very suspect. FM just leave the kids alone.
Times have changed
er, but that’s no excuse for being a totally nasty bastard
Later: I am available to be employed as a consultant (conditions apply)
Later later: That’s a mistake, no? I did have a blanket last time I was in the cells – but shouldn’t everyone deserve a blanket without scabies and a cup of tea without pubes? Yes, even those protesters. Isn’t the point about democracy is that you can object? I think so. And I hate starting a sentence with and but lets consider the idea of democracy. [edit: I don’t think that makes sense but then it is nearing 3am and I am drunk.]
continuing .
We have general elections in UK every five years. The problem here is that they make promises, they are elected on the basis of those promises but they don’t then keep those promises.
For example, Cameron said no top down reorganisation of the NHS. He’s totally renaged on his pre-election promise / commitment there. I think that he lied. It’s for you to decide if he lied. But he did.
How are these people different from criminals?
3am The point about protesters/demonstrators is that everyone in a democratic society have and – I think – an absolute right to show their opposition to how they are governed. I think that this is central to a democracy – it’s more than that challenges should be heared and considered. It’s also about being denied any medium of expression apart from demonstrating.
I submit that demonstrations and protests should be facilitated in any democratic society and that it is a legitimate political expressions.
Further: I consider that demonstrations of all political persuasions (should be) are facilitated. Counter-demonstrations should have the same regard for their rights.
edit: I suggest that political expression of all sorts should be facilitated in a democratic society. That includes protest/demonstration and counter protest/demonstration
edit: This post was originally about Nick Clegg and his being a Tory from his University days, and that he served as a Tory in Leon Brittan’s office in URUP (Europe). It should be known that Nick Clegg was a Tory and worked in Leon Brittan’s office but he’s pretending otherwise. That’s a matter of fact that Nick Clegg is hiding.
This post has gone beyond that as they do on my blog. I suggest and submit that the political system in UK should facilitate demonstrations of discontent and such demonstrations should be regarded as an integral part of UK’s democratic system. I submit that protest is a part of any democratic society. It’s a shame and probably to their detriment that governments ignore protests.
The National Health Service is under attack as never before. In this feature, a GP from north-west England looks at the effect of a huge government push for privatisation while nurse Claire Job looks at the predatory actions of the pharmaceutical industry.
The NHS watchdog has accused a privately run urgent care centre of putting patients’ health at risk by using receptionists with minimal medical training to assess how unwell arrivals were.
A Care Quality Commission (CQC) report has criticised the operation of the urgent care centre at Croydon hospital in south London, which is run by Virgin Care. CQC inspectors found the centre was in breach of four basic standards of care and have told Virgin Care to outline by next week the remedial action it is taking.
The CQC’s report, based on inspections of the centre last July and September, concluded that “care and treatment was not planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people’s safety and welfare”.
MPs have come to despise 38 Degrees for clogging up their inboxes with emails from constituents. They need to get used to it – because this model of campaigning-by-email-bombardment isn’t going away.
For an organisation only set up in 2009, 38 Degrees has notched up its fair share of victories. It forced the coalition government’s first big U-turn, on the forests sell-off. It called for more free school meals – and Nick Clegg duly announced they were being rolled out for all infants. It raised enough cash to pay for the judicial review which successfully challenged health secretary Jeremy Hunt’s plans to shut down key services at Lewisham hospital.
“It’s not often you can say ‘I took the government to court and won’, but that’s what thousands of 38 Degrees members could say last year,” its executive director David Babbs tells me. We’re seated at a meeting table in the middle of the 38 Degrees office in central London. From here, the small team of around 15 staff coordinate the activities of its 2.2 million members. Compare that to the 193,000 members of the Labour party – and the 130,000 Tory party members – and you get a sense of the scale of the operation.
Two main political news stories from yesterday dominate today’s news: the Gibson report and the completion of the trial of the murderers of soldier Lee Rigby. There was also a ceiling collapse at the packed Apollo theatre in the Soho area of London.
Firstly, the Gibson report into UK involvement in torture and rendition was published. The report was paused while police investigations into torture and rendition were in progress so that the report should be considered incomplete and unfinished.
A further unfortunate consequence for Blair’s former cabinet and government is that cabinet ministers are jointly responsible according to UK law. The current UK Conservative-Liberal-Democrat (Conservative) coalition government is keen deal with this problem. It is likely that they would ideally like to postpone it indefinitely so that by the time it’s addressed Blair and his associated Fascist scum will be dead of old age. Accordingly they have broken commitments to appoint a judge-led inquiry and instead have referred it to the intelligence and security committee of selected MPs and peers, a body renowned for ignoring official crimes.
Secondly, the trial of the brutal murderers of soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, East London finished yesterday. Soldier Lee Rigby was first run over by a car before a meat cleaver was used to hack at his neck. Early news reports were wrong claiming that he had been decapitated.
An emergency meeting of Cobra was held because of the political nature of the murder. The murderers asked bystanders to film them explaining their purpose. It was both a brutal murder and a political protest. It was not terrorism because ordinary people were not the target.
Adebolajo actively sought out a witness with a camera phone to deliver what he saw as a 21st-century press conference. It was supposed to be his martyrdom video. But there were no satellite trucks or television crews, only a handful of bystanders armed with a smartphone.
“The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers,” said Adebolajo into the lens of a BlackBerry, his bloodied hands still holding the meat cleaver and butcher’s knife used to slaughter his victim. “By Allah, we swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone.”
…
The murderers were driven by Western invasions of Muslim countries claiming that they were soldiers attacking another soldier. I disagree with a psychiatrist’s decision that one of the defendants was not insane. The barbarity of the act shows that he was insane.
I am willing to discuss these issues in the comments.
