Damaged Blair nuclear nonsense

Blair, yet again, against what may turn out to be a phoney backdrop of manipulated fossil fuel prices, and political global warming mania wants to reignite a shelved nuclear industry.

Amid protests from Greenpeace, Blair said, shockingly "nuclear power was a difficult issue but should be settled by open debate, not protests to stop free speech" (?!?!?!)

Everyone and their dog knows it has already been 'settled' as far as the regime sees it:

"IN A clear sign that the UK is gearing up to build more nuclear power stations, a £6.1 million research programme has been launched to investigate reactor design" (12/11/2005) ^{New Scientist}

A forthcoming new energy report is announced, only 2 years since an enormous energy review was already conducted as it didn't come up with the desired political answers, so it's time to create a new one that does. Obviously this will undo the last report to set out the case and cost wonders for nuclear and have every moron out there, including many MPs, chasing around after yet another false inquiry, the conclusion to which has already been written.

One leading protagonist of the nuclear case within the New Labour camp is not surprisingly, another political minion, Blair's head 'scientist' Sir David King ¹, who enlightened the world in January 2004 by saying:

"Climate change is a far greater threat to the world than international terrorism" ^BBC and in July 2004 followed it with "London could be among the first cities to go if global warming causes the planet's ice to melt" ^BBC

Clearly this guy has quite a track record as useful idiot, where he can be added to the list of those already sufficiently warped to be utilized by the regime. King was talking up winter energy anxieties even before the summer, 'coincidentally' just three weeks after Blair created plans to revive the nuclear industry, where King thereafter started dropping hints about 'just one more generation of plants'. Some scientist.

More recently, the winter fuel propaganda was picked up again by a nuclear-hungry CBI to start a new fear mongering campaign about shortages, despite the fact that nuclear won't make an overall energy difference for 15+ years according to leading environmentalists, and won't make any difference at all to gas consumption. Digby Jones' operation to spread panic was subject to a 'withering attack' by British Gas who described it as 'irresponsible scaremongering'.

Meanwhile other environmentalists have recognized that King, despite his 'concern' about global warming is a regime puppet, that, shock and horror, had his 'arm twisted over the political decision on nuclear' too,

"A memo sent by Blair's private secretary, Ivan Rogers, a month after King's article was published in Science, instructed him to stop criticising the Bush administration on the grounds that it "does not help us achieve our wider policy aims". Mock interviews King conducted with his political minders, which were found by a journalist on a disk dropped by his press secretary, show him learning to recite the government's line."

Are we seeing a pattern here ? Ian Blair, the security services, David King. There's apparently no shortage of regime lackies out there wanting a slice of the depraved Blair pie.



Now interestingly enough, both the science and politics of this latest scheme may well be out-of-whack according to the Sunday Times who report:

"Given that a typical nuclear power station would produce about 2% of the nation’s electricity, Britain would need to build a new plant every year just to keep pace with demand. Even if we built at twice that rate, the savings in greenhouse gases would be small when compared with the surging emissions from industry and transport, especially aviation"

And then, to the horror of global warming theory advocates, Nirex say current reactors and waste sites themselves risk eventually flooding anyway if rising sea levels manifest:

"When a nuclear power station is submerged by sea-water, the contamination is literally unfathomable. It would make Chernobyl look like a central heating problem. No-one knows when, exactly, the seas might rise and engulf these plants...Yet the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management is expected to recommend soon the long-term storage of future nuclear waste at the existing Sellafield site in Cumbria. " ^Herald

And what does that mean ? Inland sites for new reactors near major populations as the Herald article points out, although they also feel that just ain't gonna happen as no city in their right mind wants that on top of them.

Somehow nuclear power hardly seems an answer to the proposition of man-made climate change that is now being wielded as a stick to force it onto the table.

Also Gordon Brown has said he won't pay for these new reactors, and that means, as Tom Burke writes in the Guardian,

"The government is planning to use stealth support. This will take many forms. First, the electricity market will be rigged for the next 30 years to guarantee a return for nuclear investors."

Add to that, it has been noted that the UK itself doesn't even have the inhouse technology or staff to make and run the reactors itself.

So what do we have, apart from yet another bad New Labour political decision, out of control and all over the place, duplicitiously propped up by business cronies, puppet scientists of the regime and sexed-up false inquiries and evidence ? Nothing.

Backtracking a little to the 22nd November and Blair's Commons committee meeting, he said "controversial and difficult" decisions will have to be taken over the need for nuclear power to tackle the UK energy crisis"

Ironically though, the 'difficult decision' will not affect Blair, or the widely-despised sick little nutpots like John Birt who he surrounds himself with, who won't be living next to a nuclear reactor or dump, the waste of which was, in 2002, described to be 'on the verge of exploding':

"Almost 90 per cent of Britain's hazardous nuclear waste stockpile is so badly stored it could explode or leak with devastating results at any time. An alarming government report into Britain's beleaguered nuclear industry - obtained by The Observer - reveals that medium-level radioactive waste with the equivalent mass to 725 double-decker buses is being stored in a dangerous state.

The Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee found that 88 per cent of Britain's intermediate-level nuclear waste had not been treated for safe storage at up to 24 UK locations. Experts last night warned the potentially volatile waste represented a toxic time-bomb and warned of a 'disaster waiting to happen'" ^Observer

The plants themselves have cost £56 billion to clean up according to Charles Kennedy (other sources say £60bn), while ex-Environment Minister and prominent 9/11-official-story skeptic Michael Meacher said they were not necessary and said the nuclear option had almost been ruled out in the government review in 2003 ^BBC, the one they now wish to hastily rewrite to come up with a different conclusion.

Inevitably, one thing that set the stage recently for any 'debates' about energy (which, again, means it has already been decided) was the public panic about gas, which even the Times described as "contrived", and now an investigation is taking place into that,

"An urgent inquiry has been ordered into the gas supply crisis. It will focus on claims that major suppliers are rigging the market to inflate prices and boost their profits. Wholesale prices have soared in recent weeks, driven by panic over possible shortages and forecasts of a cold winter. It says it wants to make sure that recent price movements "reflect changing supply and demand factors and are not the result of market abuse or distortion"." ^{Daily Mail}

Ever the conduit of malpractice and always the eternal perverter, Blair is now seeking to give the neglected nuclear industry a shot in the arm and rewire the entire energy market in doing so, where, just like the 90 days detention, and using politicized cronies, he has shamelessly wrapped it up in the greenhouse gas concern and fed it back to the public saying 'look you know, I'm saving the planet, why are you trying to stop me ?'

In exchanging the lesser (not zero) CO₂ cost of nuclear (never mind the enormous cost of building new plants), Blair presumbably wants you to accept his regime's already-made 'difficult choice decision' of having a nuclear reactor next door to you, and for you to put that out of your little pleb mind, pay for it and the enormous and unmanageable environmental problem of nuclear waste and all the long-term health issues it will cause. And whatever they have spent 60bn cleaning up so far, the rad-waste from the previous generation of reactors hasn't um...actually gone anywhere...

"Sellafield holds 98% of the country's most deadly nuclear waste and more than 50% of intermediate level waste - enough to fill more than 1,000 double decker buses. Drigg, some 6km south of Sellafield, contains tonnes more low-level waste from nuclear facilities, universities and hospitals" ^BBC

"It is the issue which just about every politician would like to wish away; but there is no sign yet of any magic wand which can make 10,000 tonnes of radioactive waste simply disappear" ^BBC

"Highly radioactive waste was pumped into the sea and evidence of the pollution was covered up by managers who had a “reckless” disregard for public health, according to Herbie Lyall, a health physics surveyor at the Dounreay plant in Caithness for 30 years. They come as the plant’s owner, the UK Atomic Energy Authority, is facing a possible criminal prosecution over a series of radioactive leaks. The latest find was on Friday when a stone contaminated with caesium-137 was recovered from another beach 20 miles from Dounreay. The authority has admitted that “at least several hundreds of thousands” of plutonium and uranium particles, each the size of a grain of sand, have been released from Dounreay." ^Times

"The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is considering burning thousands of tonnes of radioactive graphite - the health impact could be huge" ^{New Scientist}

Despite the fact Britain wastes 'more than half the power it produces through generation and transmission losses in the National Grid', and better, way more acceptable alternatives are available ³, another plot has been concocted and packaged, the repercussions of which could well be felt for decades or longer.

Blair's judgement and ethics are non-existent which should come as no shock, as he is little more than a puppet for rancid globalist policy himself, where his sociopathic, whore and con artist skills come in handy to decieve the British people that the meltdown of reality they are watching is a 'tough choice' in the name of progress/reform/whatever. Every week another scandal seems to emerge with an identical pattern from within the New Labour sanctum, reminding us all, that as tough choices go, permitting Blair to remain in office was one that the UK is still paying for dearly and will for a very long time to come past his demise. Perhaps we are to take it then, that the nuclear policy, despite whatever domestic energy forecasts cited, has come from somewhere else, before it was adopted by the NL regime.

Whatever the scientific arguments for atomic energy or about global warming (which may well be a globalist scam), Blair's personal advocacy for nuclear is about as worthwhile as his one for WMD in Iraq, a parallel, I was relieved to discover, that many newspapers are also making, including the Sunday Times, who have said the new 'report' will be a dodgy dossier on the subject:

"There is something strangely familiar about the tactics being used to turn the financial basket case that is the nuclear industry into the shining new hope of Britain’s energy sector. [...]

Tom Burke, the veteran environmentalist and opponent of nuclear energy, believes that, as with the Iraq war, the public is being misled about the choices."

If Blair's plan went ahead, one can only pity that poor British soul and his family, who presumbably, will have to make the 'tough choice' of living next to a new crater of rotting exploding radioactive slops and forcibly endure a whopping rigged energy levy to pay for that privilege to boot.

Tony Blair Nuclear David King energy New Labour CBI gas atomic

Sky is dark for Sir Ian Blair

"Ian Blair's future as head of the Metropolitan police came under renewed pressure yesterday with the announcement of an inquiry into his conduct after the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is to consider whether Sir Ian misled the public after the Brazilian electrician was shot dead by police at Stockwell Tube station on July 22.

The inquiry was prompted by a complaint from the Menezes family. The commission is due to report on a separate inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the shooting to the Crown Prosecution Service this year.

The service will decide if there are grounds for a criminal prosecution of the police officers who mistook the27-year-old Brazilian for a suicide bomber.

In an interview with the FT yesterday, Sir Ian said the terror threat continued. "The sky is very dark. London is a major target for al-Qaeda and its affiliates and could face another attack." ^FT

Note well that the sky is now "very dark", as opposed to just "dark"

Ah who needs Al-Qaeda with a soiled wretched radicalized mentally-ill useless sick pathetic puppet like Ian Blair around ?

Ian Blair

Operation Skim Iraq: U.S. tried to plant WMDs

"Nelda Rogers, 28, a veteran de-briefer for the Department of defense (DOD), revealed on Al Martin Raw.com, an online subscriber-based news/analysis service which provides "Political, Economic and Financial Intelligence, that: “A U.S. covert operation team had attempted to plant weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”

The team was later lost as they were killed by friendly fire. The operation included 100 people and was “manned” by ex-military personnel.

"Ms.Rogers is number two in the chain of command within this DoD special intelligence office. This is a ten-person debriefing unit within the central debriefing office for the Department of Defense.

The information that is being leaked out is information "obtained while she was in Germany heading up the debriefing of returning service personnel, involved in intelligence work in Iraq for the Department of Defense and/or the Central Intelligence Agency." ^Al-Jazeera

'killed by friendly fire' we know what that really means in this context.

Also:

"A "trophy" video appearing to show security guards in Baghdad randomly shooting Iraqi civilians has sparked two investigations after it was posted on the internet, the Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

The video has sparked concern that private security companies, which are not subject to any form of regulation either in Britain or in Iraq, could be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent Iraqis.

The video, which first appeared on a website that has been linked unofficially to Aegis Defence Services, contained four separate clips, in which security guards open fire with automatic rifles at civilian cars. All of the shooting incidents apparently took place on "route Irish", a road that links the airport to Baghdad." ^Telegraph

Video here

Blair approval plummets: wheels coming off

"Few adults in Britain express satisfaction with the administration headed by Tony Blair, according to a poll by YouGov published in the Daily Telegraph. 30 per cent of respondents approve of the government’s record to date, down three points since October.

In May, British voters renewed the House of Commons. The governing Labour party secured 356 seats, followed by the Conservatives with 197 and the Liberal Democrats with 62. Blair has served as Britain’s prime minister since 1997.

On Nov. 9, the Labour government’s anti-terrorism bill was defeated in the House of Commons after a 322-291 vote. A revised version of the legislation—which allows for a 28-day detention period for suspected terrorists instead of the 90-day period Blair sought—was introduced and passed immediately following the conclusion of the first vote.

In an interview with BBC Radio 4, former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson—who in July 2003 wrote an op-ed in the New York Times that severely criticized the Bush administration for its claim that Saddam Hussein’s regime had sought to purchase uranium from Niger—said the White House "hyped the nuclear case" in order to gain Blair’s support before the war in Iraq. Wilson added, "(Blair) was double-crossed by the regime change crowd in Washington."

64 per cent of respondents believe the "wheels are starting to fall off" Blair’s government." ^{Angus Reid Consultants via Prison Planet}

Iraq: abuse 'as bad as Saddam era'

"The former Iraqi prime minister, Iyad Allawi, has called for immediate action against human rights abuses.

Such abuses are as bad today as they were under Saddam Hussein, Mr Allawi told Britain's Observer newspaper.

His comments come two weeks after 170 detainees were found at an interior ministry centre, some allegedly suffering from abuse and starvation.

"People are doing the same as (in) Saddam Hussein's time and worse," Mr Allawi told the newspaper." ^BBC

The ID Slave World part 2: Hyper Dominion

There are so many aspects to pull to pieces with the ID slavery plot that often it is difficult to know what to choose, but a couple of nights ago I realised that there are a few massive concepts about all this that haven't really even been touched upon:

• the absolute enormity of this entire scheme
• the unending and infinite grip it would put you in
• the new state of existence that would result
• the totally new universe it automatically creates

We'll start off by going over some other issues first surrounding this as we build up to this colossal new world pandemonium.

The peripheral debate: cost

The government want you to be obsessed about the cost of what they call 'ID cards', lest the shame of what they are actually engineering becomes apparent. Now having said that I have no doubt, whatever cost is being cited today, will grotesquely explode if the rolling out this monumental new way of life were actually allowed to unfold.

They don't want you to be talking about that for obvious reasons, and you get the impression they want you to be chewing on the price as if it is the only grounds to be appalled by this plan.

Cost largely serves as a diversionary debate, one which has been left to fester in the public domain, suiting the government both as exit-strategy and more importantly, by obscuring the new level of subjugation and a totally new condition of being that would result if the plot were allowed to be deployed.


ID Cards: The wrong name



"...shall we have an ID card ? Does the UK need an ID card ?, What do polls say about ID cards ?"

'ID cards' is the fraudulent name given to the pivotal and entire human/data-thralldom strategy and for a new existence by New Labour, who permanently live in a state of denial about what they are doing. The press are, not surprisingly, generally too moronic to look beyond, or reject the 'ID cards' misnomer. Similarly, they are too stupid to question the modern world lie that has been spoon-fed to them by goverment press releases (often which pertain to politically interesting misdemeanors) to see the unipolar biometric slave-grid actuality that New Labour want to insert you into.

One wonders that, at best, this bill and their wider strategy is delinquent 'blue-sky' thinking, written down while still at the blue-sky stage, at worst it is a deliberate attempt to entirely rewrite society from the top down, by sociopathic criminal elements, who hope no one will notice if they keep calling it by the wrong name.

To try to deliberately and conciously herd an entire population into this slave-vortex, then to knowningly try and pass the whole thing off as a debate about 'ID cards', to blame the EU, to point the finger at the US is a deliberately manufactured set of lies.

It would be cute to just assume we are watching gray-haired old men attach themselves to some 'modern' buzzword like biometrics, or old always-rejected ones like 'id cards' as a kind of political viagra, re, the warwhore-on-terror. Unfortunately the calculation of this plan is so vast in its malevolence and scope, the new set of circumstances and environment it would produce so enormous, that observation can be safely disregarded. Whatever strings are pulled, or ear New Labour is listening to either within the civil service or with various think-tanks or from the security-industrial-complex, the buck stops with those actually creating and voting for this nightmare.

What do you call an entirely new, untested serfdom with boundless, global omnipresent governance in your life, with no precedent and no restraint whatsoever, that if implimented and played along with, would mean the muffled end of life as we know it ?


Hyper-Dominion: The new way of being

A precedent for this plan doesn't even exist; this is more than a reshaping of liberty and privacy, and freedom from interference and personal-espionage from government.

If enacted, this would mean an entirely new state of being in the UK; rewriting the full premise and structure of society, to which even that would be but a tiny beginning, as the governmental permutations are endless, and if, like flies round dog mess, a lot of big private business starts taking an unhealthy interest, which some have said they would do.

If RFID comes into this then we are talking several orders of magnitude above that.

"Under Secretary of State Andy Burnham, dictates that it will need to use ICAO standard RFID contactless reader technology, while use of chip and PIN would allow it to be compatible with banking and retail systems." ^Register

When you consider the totality of concepts that New Labour masturbate themselves over which include wide data sharing, data convergence and sharing of different goverment departments within the ID database and human authorization collections gleaned from public and private services, other initiatives like medical record uploading, arbitrary public DNA stockpiling, absurd terror laws, data retention directives and so on, then you need to realise this government is laying the foundations for the current world to be removed and replaced by something else.

The dystopia being set out isn't defined by the card, or even the database, or the biometrics in isolation, but their combination in addition to the legislation which wraps them up. This would amount to a total remolding of life as we know it into something entirely different. So different, I honestly don't think we can even guess many of the implications, because the situation it creates is literally limitless.

This can best be described as creating the strategic framework for boundless, unending governance, in every direction, where everyone is a biometric detainee, the totality of their day-to-day living, a new 'thing' to both possess and occupy.

Additionally, this hyper-governance will begin with a coalition of your elected politicians, their cronies and massive multinational corporations who will be dispensing this pre-emptive, non-linear, shapeless, morphing mega-state, dipping into, disseminating, analyzing and retaining your life while configuring, adding to it and endlessly reshaping it themselves from all angles.

Already it becomes clear then, that cursory ideas about the "change between individual and state" can be dismissed as both a mammoth misunderstanding, and catastrophic trivialization when this gratuitous and wanton redefinition, reinvention and disfigurement of life, with infinite potential for new forms of governance, locked, as you would be as a captive to that, into the structure of the biometric slave grid, are understood.

The condition of this full-time, unending ever-expanding exploitation and suppression can only be summarized as a state of Hyper-Dominion, a new reality of absolute subjugation and ownership, infinite, with no boundaries that has simply never existed on the planet before. This would be a never-ending, always expanding mass-directional ultra-dominance of both person and the entire fabric of what was society.

What struck me like a brick the other night when thinking about this, was that this plan is so enormous in it's scope, the machinery of it's implimentation so vast, it's remit so sweeping, that whatever the horrendous intention of it, one would also be automatically creating an entire new axis, a kind of new platform that has simply never existed before.



The more I thought about this, the more I realized that on top of everything else including this new domination, the ID serf-matrix system would be destined to create a kind of totally uncontrollable and unstoppable big-bang event that will form a new universe of its own possibilities and results, a borderless canvas, that has no limit whatsoever. Trying to get one's mind round this is difficult, because, as we know, there is no precedent to refer, but what is not being considered is, once released, this big-bang is unlimitedly destined to create a new amoral cosmos with an uncontrollable evolution and velocity all of it's own.

Any so called 'safegaurds' in the bill would about as effective at curtailing this big bang, as a shopping list on a piece of paper is, for controlling the internet.

Indeed, what this means is beyond Orwellian, this is the reckless, selfish and calculated destruction of reality into a limitless, freefall mega-tsunami of authority and industry with no comparison that will forever shape, rule, record and surmise your life, as well as ever expanding as it voraciously finds new ways to fill the void that was once due process, seperation, privacy, value, liberty, truth, reality and the human condition.

Yet there will be no painless, easy means of opting out of this maelstrom, where society will be wired for this 'thing' that government will call your 'identity'. In effect, if you play along with this scheme, you will be a captive of any flavor of government, no matter how malevolent, or illegitimate in a way that there is simply no precedent for.

In fact you won't even be able to leave unmolested because New Labour have tried to glue the ID card ball and chain directly into acquiring a passport, whereby you cannot have one without the ID card. Furthermore, if they get their way, your UK ID card and biometric passport will be not only for Britain but electronically 'valid' across the world (something IBM, and the UK via the EU (then blaming the EU) are calling for too).

By definition then, global biometric standards in addition to this explosion in technological biometric hyper-governance mean your tag/identity/thing will be subject to global authority as well, whereby your slavery can be trafficked out abroad, and foreign politicians and bureaucracies will automatically constitute a new ruling class to preside over, and supervise what will be called your 'identity'. Something New Labour have been totally casual about,

"The Government last week confirmed that the UK's planned ID card is intended to operate as a 'passport lite' that could be used for travel within the European Union. [...] The UK's call for common standards to "ensure that data stored on Identity Cards is appropriately protected but can be read by other Member States" ^Register

And:

"EU could share ID databases

CONFIDENTIAL personal information about British citizens could be shared with governments and police across Europe under proposals put forward by Brussels yesterday.

In a strategy paper to combat terrorism and serious crime that is likely to be strongly opposed by civil liberties groups, the European Commission challenged governments to set up pan-European databases to collect and share information. " ^Times


The Hyper Dominion reality

The scheme would amount to a massive industrialized civil supression and wanton fathomless exploitation, securing unprecidented, unbounded and infinite dominion via the systematic infiltration of the British public for eternity.

It amounts to kind of technological, infinite violent conquering of the populace, enthused we are to guess, from an unofficial haze of various interest groups including the New Labour elite, the security-industrial-complex, rogue elements within the civil service and massive multinationals who want to exploit this to the full.

Additionally, in doing so, it would create an exploding new infinite universe of anything and everything that is simply mind-boggling and cannot easily be speculated.

The peripheral debate about cost is an insult to be ignored, when the actuality of this hasn't even started to be fully recognized yet. Similarly, they want you to be fixated on the plastic worthless card bit as if that were the totallity of what they are proposing. But that is another falsehood, which can be added to what most regard as the already bulging database of New Labour's mendacity.

Obviously, this becomes far more than resisting an ID card, this is about defying a massively hazzardous, totally unpredictable, infinite new world, the raw matter for which is being consructed into a bomb, with intention to be detonated on the entire population.

It has been well recognized by political pundits that 'ID cards' have always been a solution looking for a problem, but again it's worth restating, with this scheme we are not dealing with ID cards. We are dealing the entire restructuring and redefinition of society and the massive unending explosion of domestic, international and multinational-corporate governance, the hyper-domininon condition that will ensue, and indeed the massive criminal exploitation opportunities it will also create.

This plot is about the premeditated industrialized meltdown of real identity.

ID cards ID database New Labour slavery NIR Blair privacy

The ID database slavery plot and Labour lies

Yesterday on the Guardian's site, a lost lonely attempt to explain the ID database plot was made by Andy Burnham, New Labour regime ID minister. Its apologetic title, "The other side of the ID cards story" illustrates just how much of a diabolical ugly mess this story is.

In his article, Burnham identifies the 'real problems' as:

"How do we help people secure their identity in the modern world? How do we protect ourselves from fraud and criminal activity that relies on false identities? How do we respond to international requirements for more secure travel documents?"

Before we go into each of his points, it is worth remembering that this echoes the way New Labour treat data generally, which is as if it were a 'problem' that needs 'solving'. For New Labour, data needs managing, 'regulating' and opening up to government scrutiny and sharing and compiling and tying into a biometrically backed up serial number, otherwise the world will fall to pieces.

They treat data from an angle that somehow the status quo is never enough, and if only government could just do this, upload that, store this, share that then society will be just that bit better for you and doing so actually isn't that big a deal at all.

But that is a falsehood. The reality is they have got themselves embroiled in a policy that is duplicitous, dangerous, distinctly un-British and spiralling out of control on all fronts.

This is not a policy 'for the people', it is a policy for the NL/corporatist government alone, who seek to reshape via the most megalomaniacal system, what liberty and privacy mean in the UK.


"The Modern World"

Let's start with the 'Modern World' that Burnham talks about. Their ID database policy, and New Labour's wider ideology for abolishing privacy in the United Kingdom are like picking at a scab; it just keeps getting worse and worse and you wish you hadn't.

Inevitably, it is always the fault of the modern world, the catch-all soundbyte deployed to condone every kind of intrusive technology and practice like CCTV, RFID, ID Cards, implanted microchips, DRM, face scanning, 'mind' scanning, medical record uploading and sharing, pre-emptive health screening, data retention of internet surfing etc.

Yet what is never explained or explored is why this 'modern world' always means giving up yet more of your personal data to government and multination corporations. Where, exactly is the modernity in that? The answer is of course, nowhere.

There is absolutely nothing in the real modern world that requires you to be biometrically branded like a cattle on a government database just for being a person.

There is absolutely nothing in the real modern world that requires an ID card you always carry to be tied into one government database that records your life, and it doesn't matter how much New Labour ministers yell 'the modern world', it just ain't so.

Indeed the modern world would be infinitely better off without a single-point-of-failure database that is verified through a piece of worthless plastic you will ever be coerced to carry around with you like a ball and chain, oh...and protect from damage, thievery, misuse etc.

The modern world is blamed, misleadingly, for every type of intrusion under the sun. In reality it is because the modern world enables things like an ID scheme, not because the modern world needs things like an ID scheme, and for what New Labour are trying to do, we are lightyears out of the orbit of the 'modern world' argument, into one, exclusively, of political choices.

As for securing your identity ?

First off, they are not actually proposing to secure your identity (which is in itself a dodgy thing that governments shouldn't be trying to do anyway), they are trying to establish a new kind of shared-government asset; a mass-surveillance database and a new 'thing' for that, which will be called an 'identity' for everyone.

Their plan is to biometrically glue you into a serial number under which all events in your life are recorded, the data from which can then be shared on a whim with whatever government deptartment wants it. Anyone with access to the database will have access to that 'identity'. Additionally if your card is stolen or damaged you won't have access to the identity the government have bestowed upon you. Furthermore, keeping so much and everyone on one single database is about the least secure thing you could ever do, and pretty much every tech company including ones that could financially benefit from this virtual prision you will be paying for, are screaming at the government don't do it.

Read the bill. See if you think it is about 'securing' your identity. The bill is about creating a new database and a set of arbitrary penalties for not contributing to it. Your identity is about as insecure as it could possibly be with this scheme. It was never about empowering you with another means of proving who you are, which by the way is not an id card, or serial number, or blob of data.


"Fraud and criminal activity that relies on false identities"

What to do about over-population?
Some people feel it is a potential global problem and there just won't be enough food and resources to sustain everyone. But actually accepting that as a massive problem and then dealing with it in a reasonable time frame, some have actually suggested organized genocides through famine, war or disease and long term sterilization.

In terms of intensity, this is much like the ID scheme is to fraud and criminal activity, it is a new extreme that goes way way too far, smashes any moral compass, and punishes everyone, except unlike the mass de-population plot it won't actually work at all.

There will be always be criminals and there will always be fraud, there will be in a post-ID scheme world too, actually way more. However, we simply don't rewrite and re-wire society to try to deal with those kinds of issues.

To put it another way, perhaps a better analogy, it is like the government having a permanent record of all your sexual partners as their solution to rape. Additionally, to have sex at all you will have to get permission from the government each time who will make a note of it.


"How do we respond to international requirements for more secure travel documents?" (Global ID)

New Labour, taking advantage of a post 9/11 mania, have come up with their 'Final Solution' to privacy in the ID Scheme, where, because privacy is basically invisible until it goes wrong, it kind of doesn't exist at all. It is an outdated concept along with precaution and seperation and due process, and you won't notice it has gone because you are more interested in whatever the government tells you to be interested in like schools and hospitals etc.

The EU and the US, and the 'modern world' are blamed for the ID scheme 'necessity', but in reality, what New Labour have done is massively exploit a tiny biometric passport wish (a photo on a chip), into a mass, human-tagging, surveillence and data-slavery brave-new-world that displays the same (or far worse) level of industrialized contempt and outright danger for the population as witnessed in Nazi Germany. Any government trying to seriously propose this shouldn't be a government to put it mildly, but then would you really expect less from the overlords that thought the pre-arranged Iraq War was a good idea, or think torture is pretty cool ?

Burnham whimpered, "Opinion polls still show public support for ID cards"

Suuuuuuuuure they do. Oh you mean those 'other' polls. Don't forget the 90-days, death penalty etc. Thing is, MPs are supposed to protect people from silly crap as well. Actually I wonder what the numbers would be if you called it what it really is, 'The UK surveillance and data-slavery database'

"And I doubt I am the only Guardian reader who has always supported a British ID card in line with our European counterparts. This is an important issue and I suspect you may have a few more readers who would like to hear a little more of the other side of the story."

But there is no other side to the story, the ID database plot has been dressed up in 'ID cards' as a kind of nudge-nudge wink-wink; this will sort those illegal immigrants, terrorists and criminals out, yet is actually designed to do nothing of the sort. It has been fraudulently mis-sold as, ironically, a kind of nationalist 'ticket' that will cure several ills, but in reality it is a social-data gathering experiment turned acromegaly, that provides New Labour with a Brave New World to administer, and gives you absolutely nothing in return, save this nouveau-slavery masquerading as tough on terror/crime bullshit.

Even if, for some misled warped reason, you were in favour of ID cards, this plan isn't actually it.

So the answer is no Burnham. This crap needed to die a death ages ago. End this scheme now or it will be killed for you.

ID cards ID database Andy Burnham New Labour slavery NIR Blair privacy

Iran 'magic death ray'

A couple of days old but it's just too good:

"WASHINGTON – The threat posed to the national security of the United States by Iran was likened only to the one posed by Nazi Germany in the 1930s, by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who suggested Tehran could be planning for a pre-emptive nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on America that would turn a third or more of the country "back to a 19th century level of development.[...]

Gingrich concluded that Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world and the "single most urgent threat to American national security."

The entire article is here on World Net Daily.

Iran EMP weapon Death Ray

al-Zarqawi killed again

"Iraq is checking reports that the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi may have been killed during fighting in northern Iraq, the foreign minister, Hoshiyar Zebari, said yesterday. Mr Zebari said senior militants were at a house in the city of Mosul when US and Iraqi forces stormed it on Sunday, causing some of those inside to blow themselves up, but it could not yet be determined whether Zarqawi was among those killed. [...] However, the White House spokesman Trent Duffy, who was travelling with the US production, George Bush, in Asia, said it was "highly unlikely and not credible" that Zarqawi was among the dead in Mosul." (November 22, 2005) ^Guardian

"Al-Qaida's leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is dead but Washington continues to use him as a bogeyman to justify a prolonged military occupation, an Iraqi Shia cleric says in an interview. Sheikh Jawad al-Kalesi, the imam of the al-Kadhimiyah mosque in Baghdad, told France's Le Monde newspaper on Friday: "I don't think that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi exists as such. He's simply an invention by the occupiers to divide the people." (17 September 2005) ^al-Jazeera

"The Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is "serious injured, possibly dead" according to Colonel Fouad Hani Hassan, commander of the fifth division of the Iraqi armed forces, cited by 'Elaph', a popular website in the Arab world. Al-Zarqawi, considered al-Qaeda's leader in Iraq, is believed to have been injured in the major offensive US-led forces have been carrying out in the western Anbar province over the last few days." (May 11, 2005) ^AKI

"Abu Mus'ab Al Zarqawi, on whom the U.S. put a bounty of US$10 million, has been arrested in the Iraqi city of Baakuba, the Emirate newspaper al-Bayane reported on Tuesday citing Kurdish media. According to Al-Bayane’s correspondent in Iraq, the report on Al Zarqawi’s arrest was also reported by the Kurdish media, the first to announce Saddam’s seizure. " (1/5/2005) ^al-Jazeera

"BAGHDAD: A suicide bomber from Saudi Arabia, who survived a failed attempt to blow up the Jordanian mission Baghdad in December, alleges that Iraqi police may have captured, and then released, the most wanted terrorist in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, two months ago. Both U.S. and Iraqi officials could not confirm the claims made by the suicide bomber." (January 30, 2005) ^{Voice of America}

"Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, head of the group suspected of beheading two Bulgarian hostages, has reportedly been arrested in Western Iraq. Al-Zarqawi has been arrested by Iraqi police and US military close to the border with Syria, Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported, citing information posted on the Internet." (29 July 2004) ^{Sofia News}

"Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in the Sulaimaniyah mountains of northern Iraq "during the American bombing there," according to the eight-page leaflet circulated this week in Fallujah, a city 30 miles west of Baghdad that is a hotbed of anti-U.S. insurgency activity." ( March 4, 2004) ^{Washington Post}

and so on....

al-Zarqawi Iraq

Murdoch's global whore-on-terror

This is from a few days ago:

"For the past 10 days, Australian media outlets have bombarded the public with lurid headlines and reports designed to justify last week’s massive raids by state and federal police and intelligence agencies on homes in Sydney and Melbourne.

On the basis of unsubstantiated police leaks and prosecution allegations, the media—with Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers in the lead—have accused the 18 men arrested in the two cities of “stockpiling” weapons and explosives, training in remote locations, planning “violent jihad to cause maximum damage” and discussing “dying for holy war”. [...]

The purpose of the media coverage goes far beyond demonising the accused, whose prospects of anything resembling a fair trial have been severely compromised. Its aim is, rather, to smother criticism of last week’s politically motivated raids, and to silence opposition to the unprecedented anti-terrorism bills currently being pushed through federal and state parliaments.[...]

Led by Murdoch’s outlets, but also joined by the Herald and other Fairfax papers, the media then began selectively quoting from the police allegations and presenting them as facts. It is impossible to verify any of these claims, or predict whether they will stand scrutiny in court, but there have been, at the very least, definite distortions of the truth.[...]

Whatever the exact truth behind the latest claims of a terrorist network, there is no doubt about the political motivations of the highly-orchestrated media campaign. It plays directly into the hands of Prime Minister John Howard and the state Labor leaders." ^WSWS

A mirror of what is happening in the US and the UK. Considering that every single one of Murdoch's global portfolio of 175 newspapers were for the Iraq War, I guess that is no shock.

Murdoch

John Stevens goes nuts, be alarmed

"The former head of the Metropolitan Police has called for the death penalty to be reinstated for police killers following the murder of rookie officer Sharon Beshenivsky.

Lord John Stevens says the killer of Pc Beshenivsky should lose his life as a punishment in spite of having always opposed capital punishment. Writing in the News of the World newspaper, the former Scotland Yard commissioner said: "All my life I've been against the death penalty. But after the cold-blooded murder of policewoman Sharon Beshenivsky, I've changed my mind.

"I genuinely never thought I'd say this, but I am now convinced that the monster who executed this young woman in cold blood should, in turn, be killed as punishment for his crime.

"For the first time in my life, despite 40 years at the sharp end of policing, I finally see no alternative.

"Such an extreme act of pure evil can only be met by the most extreme of responses - and that can only be death." ^Scotsman

Stevens, who has a penchant for killing people, after 40 years of the 'sharp end of policing' dealing with countless deaths, suddenly now is converted into this enlightenment.

Bullshit.

It's a shame for the UK that Stevens is just another nut-job puppet like Ian Blair, or paid asset...like...well, like Ian Blair.

You know what death we need Stevens ? Seriously ? Death to this crackpot world of political police chiefs, Rupert Murdoch-multinational-run, cronyist, corporatist, dictatorial extracurricular government.

And you Stevens as placed lobby-boy puppet peer for the ID database and part-time Murdoch-marionette are very much part of that.

There is something very convenient about the policing/political capital that is being extracted out of this poor woman's death, right off the back of Ian Blair's dubious speech about policing, and arms, off the back of his facing an investigation, off the back of the rampant politicization of the police.

I know lets all forget Jean Charles de Menezes. Look, now the police are victims too, they are good now and can go round shooting people again.

I wonder how many more police deaths will be required by Rupert Murdoch for Stevens to get his master's wish ?

And yes it is very sad, it is an enormous tragedy but it also can clearly be a very dangerous job and I am sick-to-fucking-death of these perverted politicians, and politicized masonic "Order out of Chaos" police entities trying to endlessly 'solve' some new 'crisis' with some with new policy that is only designed to enslave and hurt more people.

Stevens, if anyone should be put out of their misery it is you, you corrupt, treacherous, worthless piece of Murdoch-owned crap.

'Lord' John Stevens police shooting Bradford

Ian Blair faces de Menezes investigation

"The police watchdog has asked for an investigation into London's chief officer over the shooting dead of Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes. Home Secretary Charles Clarke said he would reply "shortly" to the request regarding Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair.

Under legislation, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has to ask the home secretary to appoint the senior investigator if a complaint relates to either the Commissioner, or a Deputy Commissioner, of the Met.

Patricia da Silva Armani, a cousin of Mr de Menezes, said: "This is a great step forward in our campaign for justice.

"I am so happy, we all are so happy, it's the best news."

Another of his cousins, Alex Pereira, said: "I hope this new investigation into his behaviour brings out the truth."

The de Menezes family have also lodged an official complaint about the length of time it took for police to inform them of the 27-year-old's shooting, at Stockwell station. This will be looked at as part of the main IPCC investigation, which is expected to be concluded by the end of the year. The report will then be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service, which will decide whether to bring charges against any of the officers involved." ^BBC

Cheney: Vice President for Torture

"A former director of America's intelligence agency has branded the country's deputy leader a "vice president for torture".

Admiral Stansfield Turner, who was in charge of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the 1970s, said Dick Cheney was overseeing torture policies of possible terrorist suspects and was damaging America's reputation by doing so.

President George Bush and other leading members of the his administration have consistently denied that detainees suspected of belonging to al Qaida were tortured for information. But his opponents and human rights campaigners have claimed that many men taken captive in Iraq and Afghanistan by the US have been subjected to torture in order to extract information.

Speaking on ITV news Admiral Turner said: "We have crossed the line into dangerous territory.

"I am embarrassed that the USA has a vice president for torture. I think it is just reprehensible." ^Scotsman

Ex-MI5 boss: "ID cards useless"

"The House of Lords voted to reject the ID cards bill yesterday. The second house wants the draft legislation amended so that restrictions are placed on who would be allowed to use the cards to check a person's identity.

Peers were also unhappy that Home Office ministers said that they could not reveal the full cost of the plans. Baroness Scotland did reveal that the scheme will cost the Home Office £584m a year.
Click Here

The defeat came as ex-MI5 chief Stella Rimington said that ID cards will be of no use in the fight against terror.

Speaking at the Association of Colleges annual conference in Birmingham, she said ID cards would not make us any safer:

"ID cards have possibly some purpose," the BBC quotes her as saying. "But I don't think that anybody in the intelligence services, particularly in my former service, would be pressing for ID cards." ^Register

Ian Blair given political platform

Quite why the BBC have given a platform to Sir Ian Blair is a question, but via their 'Dimbleby lecture' they have done just that.

It seems staggering to put Ian Blair on a such a podium, someone who only days ago was deeply embroiled in an insidious and reckless political campaign, someone who only weeks ago was talking about quitting.

Ian Blair looked strangely refreshed, as if he thinks questions over his own competence and integrity are something of the past, unfortunately, as with Ian Blair generally, he couldn't be further from reality.

Quite early on in his lecture he said:

"Tonight - unbeknown to me until a couple of days ago - the BBC is broadcasting a major and moving documentary about the bombs of 7th July. It begins with a clip of the 2012 announcement" ^BBC

But that statement cannot be quite accurate, as Ian Blair himself was in that very documentary, where he said, grinning, about the July 7th attacks, and I paraphrase:

"I turned on Sky to see what was going on"

I almost fell off my chair when I heard him say this though:

"Equally importantly, this policing business is serious: we need the best brains and the most balanced characters to undertake the breadth of the task, to steer through the moral questions, to face the challenges of modern policing." ^BBC

What is "balanced" about Sir Ian Blair ?

During his lecture he dropped many hints about his alliance to New Labour by talking about 'the welfare state', 'Labour's policing goals' etc. He also used his time to recruit and talk up this much hyped idea of a national police force, and various other arguments to which he seeks to draw his audience into a false debate over, the outcome to which has already been established by his political masters.

You know, I am sick and tired of talking about Ian Blair, but it is beyond obscene for this guy to do what he did in this lecture. What I found particularly offensive, was how Ian Blair used, surfed off the back of, and enriched himself with, the brutal killing of Jean Charles de Menezes as a kind of curious talking point to which he is but a passive observer or well intentioned arbitrator. But this attitude is staggering and I think it is worth just refeshing ourselves a little bit about Ian Blair's recent history:

"Senior police officers say the inquiry into the operation will reveal a “horror story” when it is completed before Christmas. One senior insider said: “He (Blair) has obviously been damaged. His own self-confidence has been damaged. You can see that he looks visibly older.” ^Times

"His [Ian Blair's] insistence that the Met is a spin-free zone puzzled many journalists. In the 48 hours after the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, many of them received a series of telephone calls from senior police officers. They gave detailed, off-the-record briefings about the events leading up to the shooting of the 27-year-old Brazilian." ^Telegraph

"On the day the Brazilian electrician was shot dead by police, Sir Ian wrote to Home Office Permanent Secretary Sir John Gieve saying he should be able to suspend as he saw fit a legal requirement to give material to the Independent Police Complaints Commission." ^ITN

"The loudest cheer may yet come from the Met's rank and file - who rightly or wrongly still believe that their Commissioner is far more interested in placating his political masters and conforming to the dictates of political correctness than standing up for them." ^Telegraph

In the lecture Ian Blair said:

"The silence can no longer continue. The citizens of Britain now have to articulate what kind of police service they want"

Well we haven't been silent here.

Ian Blair police BBC

US Mil: White Phosphorus used in Iraq

"The Pentagon has confirmed that US troops used white phosphorus during last year's offensive in the Iraqi city of Falluja.

"It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants," spokesman Lt Col Barry Venable told the BBC - though not against civilians, he said.

The US earlier denied it had been used in Falluja at all.[...]

Col Venable said a statement by the US state department that white phosphorus had not been used was based on "poor information"

The BBC's defence correspondent Paul Wood says having to retract its denial has been a public relations disaster for the US military.[...]

When an Italian TV documentary revealing the use of white phosphorus in Iraq was broadcast on 8 November, it sparked fury among Italian anti-war protesters, who demonstrated outside the US embassy in Rome. " ^BBC

Iraq Falluja US Military Bush White Phosphorus WMD

New Labour: be scanned before being nuked

The Guardian reports that New Labour, via their plank Alistair Darling, want to start scanning people on the railways (despite that fact it was the Underground targeted):

"Randomly selected passengers will walk through body scanners on platforms so that security staff can check for objects hidden underneath their clothes. They could also have their bags passed through x-ray machines or searched by sniffer dogs after trials begin in the new year.

"Mr Darling said it was impossible to truly replicate airport-style security on the railways, but he believed the government was making it more difficult for terrorists to mount another attack.

"It seems to me to make sense that if we can use things like selective screening, where that's appropriate, or new types of CCTV (?) or other actions ... then we ought to do that because our objective all the time is to reduce the risk of terrorist attacks.

Mr Darling encouraged people to continue to visit London after the July 7 bombings killed 52 people. "There is absolutely no reason at all why people should not be coming into London or any other place for their Christmas shopping, and indeed millions will," he told Sky News."*

But slow down a sec Darling, It was only over the last couple of weeks, during your Murdoch-led 90 days campaign, we were told by your 'sympathetic' Richard Dearlove that "Nuclear and genetic terrorism were 'in prospect'. Add to that the prospect of a highly politicized police force shooting you on the tube then suddenly you have to wonder how appetising a prospect London is.

Seems that New Labour want to have their cake and eat it, first it's give us your freedoms, 'the sky is dark', nukes and genetic terror imminent, then at the same time 'oh don't stop your Christmas shopping in London'.

So which one is it Darling ? I smell a rat.

*This section has curiously vanished from an updated version of the Guardian article

London New Labour terrorism

Bruce Willis: $1mn to catch Bin Laden

"Action superstar Bruce Willis is offering $1 million to any civilian who gives information to help capture terrorists Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. According to New York Post, Willis announced the bounty on MSNBC's "Rita Cosby: Live and Direct".

Complaining about the media coverage of war, Willis said: "I am baffled to understand why the things that I saw happening in Iraq, really good things happening in Iraq, are not being reported on." ^newKerala

This would seem well timed with the Republican party memo, which calls for a new event to help revive a flagging President Bush such as new terror attacks or catching Bin Laden.

Oddly enough, Bin Laden doesn't even seem to be number one on the FBI's most wanted list, who have long offered $25 million (+$2 million offered by 2 air associations) for information leading to his arrest. Meanwhile the CIA have said they don't want to catch him and many suspect he is either being looked after by the CIA somewhere or long since dead. Like al-Zawahiri, who the emphasis had shifted to recently, and al-Zarqawi, Bin Laden has a habit of being captured or killed repeatedly.

However with Bush in trouble now, the CIA may reluctantly have to give up their asset and 'reel him in'. Perhaps we are to expect another stage-managed Saddam 'in a hole' job for those appreciative audiences.

One may feel some sympathy, with those neocon sycophants, who keep getting manipulated over and over and over again by this stuff.

Osama Bin Laden Bruce Willis Bush neocon

Human slave grids: BT & Verwaayen/IBM

Even though BT's customer base and share price continues to take a battering under the control of rampant Dutch globalist Ben Verwaayen, who similarly drove Lucent into decline, they remain dizzy with power and ambition since their puppet standards organization Ofcom has ok'ed RFID everywhere with zero debate:

"Privacy advocates are still worried by the implications of tracking chips embedded in products, but RFID's progress seems inevitable." ^PCAdvisor

"Ian Neild, disruptive futurist ¹ at BT Research Labs, said that the anti-RFID lobby wasn't anything to worry about and wouldn't impact the rollout of the technology in the long-term.

"I don't think people are that bothered about it. I think it's a small minority of people using the power of the Internet to make a lot of noise which the press like," he said. "I am not worried what these people do — we have always had Luddites," Neild said.

One solution offered by the telco was that some items would be available without RFID tags in the future but consumers would have to pay extra for such goods. "These people will be able to buy non-tagged gear but it will cost a lot more," he said. You won't lose that much money from those people." ^PrisonPlanet

Meanwhile IBM are overtly calling for a 'global ID standards body' (funny, just like Charles Clarke some months back) . Old habits die hard, just like in the Holocaust that IBM is described as helping to engineer through their punch card computers which enabled efficient identification of people, they want everyone to have a unique global serial number tied into biometric identifying data that is managed by a global body. They are calling for governments to create such a body, because the status quo is "too piecemeal and someone might need to access your medical records in an emergency if you are away from home".

The funny thing is, not so long ago, BT's Verwaayen said exactly the same sort of thing in an interview with BBC News 24's Hardtalk, to which the interviewer looked genuinely aghast. (That interview has mysterious vanished from their site)

In the ZDNet via Infowars article IBM said, "Governments have a huge part to play in this, because they have ultimate responsibility for their citizens, and depending on the country, they may have ultimate responsibility for the businesses and e-commerce as well,"

IBM have tried to soften their stuffy old image over the years, to become a generally pro-Linux and patent-fluffy organization which has helped them to be seen as anti-Microsoft. Their PowerPC chips in Macs won them many fans. But all of that remains trivial in the bigger picture, where IBM's global identification ambition remain something enormous to fear:

"The precision, speed and reliability of IBM's machines," the Swiss judge ruled, "especially related to the censuses of the German population and racial biology by the Nazis, were praised in the publications of Dehomag itself, the branch of respondent IBM. It does not thus seem unreasonable to deduce that IBM's technical assistance facilitated the tasks of the Nazis in the commission of their crimes against humanity, acts also involving accountancy and classification by IBM machines and utilized in the concentration camps themselves." ^{Jewish Virtual Library}

Those luddites stopping progress. I dunno...

BT Ben Verwaayen RFID IBM id cards global id multinationals

More on politicization of police

"...the manner in which the campaign was conducted in recent days is unprecedented and raises profound questions about the relationship between policing and party politics.

The former deputy chief constable of Nottinghamshire, Tom Williamson, said he was surprised that the Met's Andy Hayman had met a group of wavering Labour MPs at the Commons in the presence of the home secretary and one of his ministers.

"This was stepping over the line which should divide the police from politicians," he said. "

But other developments this year have also caused disquiet. Comments on terrorism made by Met Commissioner Sir Ian Blair during the general election campaign led to accusations that he was espousing a government line. And the Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire, Steve Green, was criticised for writing a national newspaper article during the campaign complaining about a lack of resources.

Privately, some chief constables believe they are under greater political pressure than ever before as Britain moves steadily closer to a national police force.

Twenty years ago, the police were castigated for getting too close to the government of the day in their handling of the miners' strike. A number of senior officers argued that that should never be allowed to happen again." ^BBC

"Charles Kennedy has said Met Police chief Sir Ian Blair "overstepped the mark" with his support for proposals to hold terrorist suspects for 90 days.

"When the chief of the Metropolitan Police takes such a high profile...over a specific amendment to a piece of legislation questions have to be asked". He said Sir Ian Blair should appear before a Commons Select Committee to explain what happened in the run-up to the vote.

"When the chief of the Metropolitan Police takes such a high profile, as he did, over a specific amendment to a piece of government legislation questions have to be asked, I think it's overstepping the mark"

The Tories have called for an inquiry into alleged lobbying of MPs by chief constables in the days before the vote. [..] Michael Howard has asked the prime minister if police need authorisation from the home secretary before appearing in the media. The letter came in response to remarks made by Mr Reid on BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Saturday, which appeared to suggest that every interview now needed specific approval." ^BBC

Ian Blair police Tony Blair New Labour

9/11: Able danger intelligence, covered up?

"Rep. Weldon Alleges Massive 'Cover-up' of Pre-9/11 Intel Pentagon's 'Able Danger' could have prevented USS Cole bombing and 9/11
CNN Reports on Weldon's Claim: 'Most Important Story of Our Lifetime'.

While we are not certain of Representative Weldon's motives, he does manage to keep the "Able Danger" story in the news. In this interview with CNN's Lou Dobbs, Weldon asserts that intelligence from the "Able Danger" group could have prevented the bombing of the USS Cole and the attacks that took place on September 11, 2001." ^Bradblog

Video here

9/11 Able Danger

Gordon Brown rebukes Blair

"Mr Blair had made the 90-day plan a personal crusade and ignored Home Secretary Charles Clarke's advice to seek a compromise with Labour backbench rebels and opposition parties.

And yesterday Chancellor Gordon Brown - back in the Middle East, after flying home for Wednesday's vote - called on him to stop trying to force policies through against the Labour Party's will.

In a further blow to the PM's authority, the Home Office's own taskforce set up after the 7/7 London terror attacks, blamed Britain's role in Iraq for Muslim extremism." ^Mirror

Gordon Brown Tony Blair

Memo: terror attacks could help us revive Bush

Found on WRH from Capitol Hill Blue:

"A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

The closely-guarded memo lays out a list of scenarios to bring the Republican party back from the political brink, including a devastating attack by terrorists that could “validate” the President’s war on terror and allow Bush to “unite the country” in a “time of national shock and sorrow.”

The memo says such a reversal in the President's fortunes could keep the party from losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections."

I wonder if there some juicy confidential memos along the same lines for Blair ?

Bush terrorism Tony Blair

9/11: Physics expert says explosives

Another academic, Steven E Jones, seems to follow in David Ray Griffin's and other's footsteps which endorses the widely held concern that the Twin Towers were actually brought down by explosives, in this case based on the sheer physics of the scenario.

"They're sticking with this one hypothesis. Its almost like they have blinders on – and its got to be fires and damage,” says Jones. Jones is a 20-year physics professor at BYU, who's penned an academic paper raising another hypothesis – explosives may have been pre-positioned in the buildings.

“Notice how it's straight down,” Jones says referring to the fall of one of the buildings. Especially intriguing to Jones was the destruction of 7 World Trade Center, damaged and ablaze from tower debris but never hit by a plane. (actually I believe debris hitting WTC7 is contested- WTC7 was demolished -j)

Jones said that models conducted in tests since 9/11 have not been able to duplicate what happened to the buildings. He is not saying this is a proven theory, but rather a hypothesis. He wants a fresh new independent investigation." ^KUTV

Additional info here

9/11

New Labour use police as lobbyists

The Telegraph tells us what we all already know:

"Former Cabinet ministers said that Labour was using the police in the same way that Mr Blair used the intelligence and security services three years ago to provide "evidence" that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

The police chiefs' venture into politics backfired when the Commons rejected 90 days and voted for a maximum 28-day detention period, defeating Mr Blair for the first time since he came to power in 1997.

Senior police officers around the country were asked last week by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) to telephone and write to MPs, urging them to back the 90-day proposal. The move followed a request from Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, for support in making the Government's case after it became clear that MPs were likely to vote against the measure.

Letters from the chief constables of Wiltshire, West Mercia, Cheshire and Surrey, which have been passed to The Daily Telegraph, all make similar arguments in favour of 90 days.

David Maclean, the Conservative chief whip, said he had launched a full investigation into police conduct. He was concerned at the "blatant political lobbying" to which MPs had been subjected by some senior police officers. He has asked Tory MPs to submit details of letters, telephone calls and e-mails they received from chief constables before Wednesday's vote.

Mr Maclean said that lobbying MPs apparently at the behest of ministers was a breach of the traditional political neutrality of the police service.

Two former Tory Cabinet ministers, Stephen Dorrell and Peter Lilley, tabled a Commons motion deploring the Government's attempts to embroil public servants in political controversy. The motion claimed that some chief constables had "acquiesced" to the demands for them to endorse the 90 days policy because they would shortly be up for re-selection as a result of the Government's plans to merge police forces. Mr Dorrell said that in 26 years as an MP he had never known such a campaign by chief police officers."

Tony Blair New Labour police terror laws Ian Blair

Damaged Blair axis-of-terror defeated

"In the biggest reverse for a government on a whipped vote since James Callaghan's administration, Mr Blair was defeated comprehensively by 322 to 291, with 49 Labour backbenchers, including 11 (BBC say 12) former ministers, defying a three-line whip. Thirteen others abstained." ^Guardian

Even a post-Hutton BBC describes Blair as "Severely damaged", and pretty much every paper is asking when he is going to leave.

Nearly 50 Labour MPs rebelled including 12 of Blair's own former ministers. Blair's mind police dragged back Brown from Israel, Jack Straw from Moscow and Ian McCartney was yanked off his sick bed after triple heart-bypass surgery. But it was to no avail.

Blair, once again, tried to use terror to bolster his position, and it's something he has a track record of doing. He did it after 9/11, he did it after 7/7, and this time, he did it on the back of a ridiculous public campaign that unsurprisingly, and rightly, blew up in his face:

It's left a wonky sociopathic Ian Blair-Met yet more exposed as little more than bidding political pawns.

It's left the Home Office similarly exposed as a malevolent, bungling agent of dictatorial political policy and spin campaigns led by Rupert Murdoch.

And it's left Blair himself exposed and dangling as a personally ridiculous entity with his duplicitous plot unveiled. Apparently he still thought he had his 'landslide' 1997 majority, unfortunately his judgement, leadership and integrity were long since gone. (Iraq)

Now every media outlet (apart from The Sun who are getting more and more irrational and fanatical, and a slightly more restrained Murdoch Times) are now wanting to know when he is going to resign.

To try to secure one's position by hiding behind the likes of ally Rupert Murdoch's 'fear of terror' media machine is absolutely disgusting, but the real issue was never just about Blair's personal authority, although it actually became that through this ill-conceived plan.

In many ways that was a false debate or at least a different one. It's not about Blair not having the authority on this to carry it through, it's about having the lack of judgement, sheer arrogance and malevolence to come up with such a diabolical scheme in the first place, then, when it and Blair run into trouble, using the police, the civil service and Murdoch to try to spin it so.

You can't make laws just to appease Murdoch and Daily Express* sentiments within the press and the public. Otherwise what do we have ? Terrorists creating crazy laws in every country they detonate a bomb in and even those they don't, like Australia. It's a double whammy, kill many and get legal terrorism, constitutional terrorism out of it as well.

*(who ironically pretty much say Diana was killed by MI6)

Yet a defeated Blair blames the 28 days as 'being plucked out of thin air" by rebel MPs (these heroes described as 'traitors' by Blair's spinners), but at the same time the police, at Ian Blair's own admission did exactly the same with 90 days, Ian Blair going on to confess 'there was no magic number, in effect no limit'

Curiously, Tony Blair, Murdoch, Ian Blair and others in that axis failed to express that it doesn't really matter what length of time you intern someone for, or what political punishments you push out there, you cannot even begin to suggest, let alone guarantee, that, or similar x,y or z proposal, is in itself, going to stop the next terrorist act.

It is the most stupid, irresponsible dangerous garbage (from Blair and Murdoch) to bascially suggest that 'well if we don't get this particular thing through then that is why the next big atrocity will happen and you are all going to die. If you don't support this then you're helping terrorists'.

But while it sounds impressive, "I'm saving the country, can't you see?", it is a flawed argument, a logical fallacy tied to yet another political falsehood. Blair has now paid for that lie. He used beguiling language of absolutes, much as in the build up to Iraq, and he brought in his soiled political police-chief buddies to justify it, and it failed.

I worried yesterday after seeing Murdoch's and other's campaigns to push public opinion, but by the afternoon I suddenly realised, this had to die. You can push public polls all day long, but that doesn't mean the public is right. After all, how many idiots say yes to the death penalty when asked ? Reality and what is correct had to kick in somewhere.

Tellingly, it seems that even before that, the impending Blair-axis defeat was all too much from some, including New Labour toad, lickspittle, Iraq war fan and possible rotten-borough drunkard Jim Dowd who started attacking one of the rebels after Dowd was aptly described as a faggot.

But for a change, real democracy came through, with Parliament delivering the right verdict against enormous and repulsive pressure from the Murdochs of this world. As for Blair, who has dug himself into a hole in the ground with his own spin, manipulation and shocking deceit and opportunism, whilst simultaneously exposing his own plot for the world to see, ironically there can be little doubt now that it is all unraveling:

"As the impact on the prime minister's authority sunk in, MPs then voted by 323 to 290 to support detention without charge for only 28 days, the position advocated by the Liberal Democrats and the Tories. The scale of the defeat rocked Labour whips, raising questions about Mr Blair's political judgment of late and suggesting that he now has a permanent cadre of irreconcilable backbenchers who neither listen to nor respect his views, leaving him in charge of an effective minority administration on controversial issues.

The former cabinet minister Clare Short said the defeat presaged further revolts. "It would be good for him, and certainly the Labour administration, if he moved on quickly," she said. Another former minister, Frank Dobson, predicted bigger revolts on Mr Blair's plans for schools.

Michael Howard, the Conservative leader, said: "Mr Blair has been engaged in the most appaling distortion of the arguments. Mr Blair's authority has been diminished almost to vanishing point. This vote shows he is no longer able to carry his own party with him. He must now consider his position." ^Guardian

Tony Blair terror laws Murdoch