Jultra Truth. Freedom. Oh and the end of New Labour and Tony Blair, Ian Blair, ID cards, terror laws and the NWO and their lies

Monday, July 31, 2006

9/11 on C-SPAN

Perhaps more for any US readers out there, but not necessarily. There was a bit of a breakthrough recently when C-SPAN aired the 9/11 Panel discussion organised by Alex Jones. For Americans there is currently something of an effort underway to inform others that on Tuesday August 1, C-SPAN will re-air this 9-11 discussion at 6:10 pm EDT.

I don't think we have an equivalent of C-SPAN here, which is a shame. It's a kind of a non-profit (yet not government funded) fulltime 'The Daily Politics' (without the nonsense) mixed with BBC Parliament as it's own network but from what I've seen of it, rather better than either.

Previously C-SPAN's Book TV aired a speech by David Ray Griffin on responses to 9/11 and the American Empire.

This streaming video of the new Alex Jones conference is available on the C-SPAN site, although it didn't seem to work when I tried, but you can download it here.

Also for any newbies on this subject (if there's any remaining) here is a brief synopsis from a radio show last year by David Ray Griffin on why people should be concerned about 9/11. This was recorded before the work of Stephen E. Jones was published and before the release of the oral histories.

'If only Blair could change'

In the Guardian's Comment is Free section, within which neocons propagandizing for World War 3 like Newt Gingrich can find a home, regular columnist Mary Riddell yesterday talked about the complexity of the issues within the Lebanon/Israel crisis and asks that is some of the reaction becoming contempt of Israel itself ? Well maybe some people will find a debate there but that's not actually what I want to talk about, instead I want to discuss her conclusion:

"When politicians lose their compass, citizens can become the steersmen. That is why British protesters of all creeds and opinions must stay united to press for better diplomacy, better intelligence-gathering and a foreign policy not designed to alienate half the world. But critics losing faith in an obdurate Prime Minister may also have to question their own certitudes"

The problem here is that people have already long last faith in Blair. Questions over Blair's judgement, his motivation, his ideology have hardly been confined to Israel/Lebanon, which he is said to be out of step with even some of his own moronic cabinet of hand-picked, hand-shuffled, Blairite, career asslickers.

And more broadly as far as the UK at home and abroad goes, it's not so much a steersman needed but a mutiny to take over the ship before it crashes into the rocks and sinks to the bottom of the ocean.

Clearly, the certitude of a political leader can never be regarded as measurement of how 'correct', or how in the national interest, a particular stance or decision is. No doubt Hitler's actions, Chairman Mao's, Stalin's were all deployed with ample conviction. Blair's messianic belief on Iraq was very strong. Blair's conviction on the human ID slave grid (which thankfully even Rupert Murdoch seems to be hinting at needs to die a death urgently) was very strong, as it has been on a myriad of disastrous policies. Of course if we measure Israel/Lebanon in terms of world opinion then world opinion has very much been calling for a ceasefire, so everyone else must be just plain wrong and once again the visionary Blair super-glued to the world domination plot of the disgusting ex-Trotskyite neocons and the worst president in US history will lead us all to greatness.

That Blair diplays what Riddell describes as stubbornness (what he would call certitude) on all these issues makes his judgment all the worse, not more convincing or likely to be correct.

But it seems to me that Riddell's position is symptomatic of a wider problem along the lines of 'we should stop loosing faith in the government', 'if only Tony Blair would listen', 'if we only we could bring Labour back', 'sigh, if only they hadn't had the war in Iraq' etc. There's a lot of people out there guilty of this and you know who you are; people who also think Labour can be rescued when Gordon Brown is shoehorned into power, fullfilling the Grantia conspiracy and that will save the day.

Likewise, this idea of 'steering' the government with concerned reprimands over specific policies plucked out by career columnists is, in my view, a manifestation of a complete failure to understand the problems we all now face. The fact the government has listened to none of it, apart from getting annoyed when the Telegraph saw what was happening and rightly likened them to Nazis over their ID slave grid and eugenics programmes has to tell us a great deal about the direction and velocity of their intent.

Don't get me wrong, it's extremely important that newspapers do kick up a big stink about the actions and position of the goverment but my feeling is this kind of thinking that only lambastes specific policies and positions in near-isolation is simply not sufficient or correct.

Columnists are generally not participating in policy making, or the thinking of the Blair inner-cabal who are fully partitioned from the rest of reality, that is, unless well-meaning but ill-advised press campaigns can be seized upon and twisted into 'socialist legality' or more 'social responsibility' by New Labour, giving succor those who seek censorship, more horrendous controls on society, or debasing the law further.

Thoughtful commentary, but which refuses to connect the dots on the regime's track record, doesn't seem to be working. Things are getting worse in terms of foreign policy and what is happening domestically both of which are now headed towards catastrophe.

So one has to ask those like Mary Riddell, has she considered that maybe...possibly..Blair's stance on Israel/Lebanon, which has just contributed to another 34 children killed (amid hundreds of people killed overall), is fully consistent with his position across the board from Iraq to the human ID slave grid ? That he is commited to radically perverse ideologies and depraved distortions of morality and justice that are simply not in the interest of the UK or the world ?

This seems a lot more realistic to me than this idea of 'this policy is bad', 'that policy is bad', 'I'm going to criticize this aspect of that policy', 'why won't the government listen me ?', which, at this stage of things, can only be met with utter ridicule. The truth is the whole thing is very very bad of a magnitude people don't really want to deal with. Until we can face up to the fact that New Labour has been nothing but an horrendous and destructive coup that has delivered tyranny, misery, corporatism, corruption, war and death packaged into unwelcome 'socially responsible' soundbytes, Blair's messianic delusions and the Clash of Civilizations, then things will continue to get worse.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

MP casts doubt on suicide of Dr Kelly

Scotsman: A SENIOR MP has challenged an official inquiry's finding that government weapons inspector David Kelly committed suicide.

Dr Kelly was the man at the heart of the furore over the government's dossier on Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction, and his death in 2003 led to the Hutton Inquiry.

Liberal Democrat backbencher Norman Baker published his own dossier of evidence, which he believes casts doubt on the inquiry's key conclusion - that Dr Kelly killed himself.

He wrote: "I challenge the conclusion on the basis that the medical evidence available simply cannot sustain it, that Dr Kelly's own behaviour and character argues against it, and that there were serious shortcomings in the way the legal and investigative processes set up to consider his death were followed."

Dr Kelly was the source for the notorious BBC report suggesting intelligence officials were unhappy with the claim in the government's dossier, ahead of the Iraq War, that Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction could be fired within 45 minutes.

After his name became public, he was subjected to a grilling by a parliamentary committee, followed by further questioning behind closed doors by a second committee. Days later, he went missing from his Oxfordshire home and his body was found in woodland.

Mr Baker wrote: "Many people find it hard to accept that Dr Kelly's death was suicide and the passage of time has only firmed-up that doubt."

Friday, July 21, 2006

Downing St and Foreign Office at odds on Lebanon


"A rift has opened up between Downing Street and the Foreign Office over Israel's continued bombing of Lebanon and the high civilian death toll.

Tony Blair is publicly highly supportive of Israel and has declined to call for an immediate ceasefire. But some in the Foreign Office are now privately urging greater restraint by Israel amid concern that the scale of the bombardment is counter-productive, disproportionate, and undermining the political stability of the Lebanese government.

Margaret Beckett, who only became foreign secretary three months ago, is trying to straddle the divide between Downing Street and her department. But she refused to bow to intense Labour backbench pressure yesterday in the Commons either to call for an unconditional ceasefire or condemn the Israeli action as disproportionate.

The Tories for the first time condemned the Israeli actions as disproportionate.

Mrs Beckett limited herself to calling for restraint on all sides, and pointing out it would be "a pity" if Israel lost the "window of opportunity in which it can highlight to the international community the scale and nature of the danger which Israel and its people face". She added that "the government has no wish or desire for the events in Lebanon to continue for a second longer than is necessary".

Her remarks were taken to imply that the Israeli action, in response to the arrest of two Israeli soldiers and the Hizbullah rocket attacks, was necessary.

By contrast, her junior minister, Kim Howells - due to travel to the region today - was more openly critical of the Israelis, as well as Hizbullah, reflecting the mood among many British diplomats and most Labour MPs.

Mr Howells revealed the Foreign Office "had repeatedly urged Israel to act proportionately, to conform with international law and to avoid the appalling civilian deaths and suffering we are witnessing on our television screens".

He added that Louise Arbour, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, had to be taken very seriously when she said this week that the attacks on both sides could be war crimes under international law.

No 10 has given no sign that it is shifting from its support of the US position of giving Israel time to reduce Hizbullah's military capacity.

In private, the Foreign Office, which has a reputation as being traditionally pro-Arabist, is sceptical about the Israeli strategy and its impact on the wider Middle East. It regards the Israeli bombardment as partly reflecting a need by the new Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, to establish his credibility as successor to the hawkish Ariel Sharon.

Reports from British representatives in Lebanon challenge whether Israel, after its initial attack, is having much impact on Hizbullah. A British official in London warned there was a danger that the civilian deaths risked alienating Arab governments that until now had refrained from condemning Israel's attacks.

Fighting flared on both sides of the border yesterday, amid signs that Israel was preparing a ground invasion. At least two Israeli soldiers and two Hizbullah fighters were killed. Later two Israeli helicopters collided six miles from the border, injuring four Israeli servicemen.

There has been an apparent policy vacuum at the Foreign Office since the conflict began last week. A Foreign Office source said: "It is difficult for the British to do anything. We cannot work out the direction of travel until we hear from the UN security council and know the intent of the US."

In the Commons, many Labour MPs were furious that the the shadow foreign secretary, William Hague, was prepared to be tougher in his warning to Israel than Mrs Beckett. "I think we can say that elements of the Israeli response are disproportionate, including attacks on Lebanese army units, the loss of civilian life and essential infrastructure and such enormous damage to the capacity of the Lebanese government, [which] does damage the Israeli cause in the long term," he told MPs.

The former international development secretary, Clare Short, described the British policy as "so unbalanced, morally wrong and counter-productive and disrespectful of international law".

The former Labour Foreign Office minister Chris Mullin asked Mrs Beckett if it was not "a tiny bit shameful that we can find nothing stronger than the word 'regret' to describe the slaughter and misery and mayhem that Israel has unleashed on a fragile country like Lebanon".

The Liberal Democrat leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, said: "The prime minister's uncritical acceptance of the Bush administration is not only wrong but deeply damaging to Britain's international reputation"

Lebanon 'torn to shreds'

Lebanon torn to shreds
Firstly from Gert, a powerful site depicting what is happening in Lebanon and thanking the 'civilized' west for what is being imposed on it (warning- site contains horrifying images):


Please sign the petition there.

Also from earlier today: 'Lebanon 'torn to shreds' (Aljazeera):

"Lebanon's prime minister has told foreign ambassadors that his country "has been torn to shreds".

Fuad Siniora said: "Can the international community stand by while such callous retribution by the state of Israel is inflicted on us? "You want to support the government of Lebanon? Let me tell you ... no government can survive on the ruins of a nation.

"I hope you will not let us down. We the Lebanese want life. We have chosen life. We refuse to die."

Wednesday's death toll reached 74, as Israeli strikes killed 72 people in Lebanon and a Hezbollah rocket attack left two Arab-Israeli children dead in the northern Israeli town of Nazareth. More than 300 people have now been killed and 500,000 displaced during the week-long conflict.

Jets dropped bombs on an area of southern Beirut where Israeli commanders said senior Hezbollah leaders were sheltering.

Israeli military officials said dozens of aircrafts dropped 23 tonnes of explosives on what they described as a bunker in the Bourj al-Barajneh section of southern Beirut...."

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Daniel Ellsberg: 'Government capable of carrying out 9/11'

Kevin Smith & Alex Jones (Infowars):

"Daniel Ellsberg is a former American military analyst employed by the RAND Corporation who precipitated a national firestorm in 1971 when he released the Pentagon Papers, the US military's account of activities during the Vietnam War, to The New York Times. The release awakened the American people to a systematic program of organized deception carried out by the Pentagon against the population to continue the Vietnam War.

Daniel Ellsberg, speaking on air to GCN radio host Jack Blood, stated his concerns that criminal elements of the US government were psychologically capable to have carried out 9/11. He warned that within days after a US military strike on Iran that Bush's handlers would probably stage some type of terror attack in the West to legitimize the new war.

Ellsberg went on to state that another major Reichstag-like state-sponsored attack would be followed by a martial law scenario which might include detention camps for American dissenters.

Ellsberg said that he worked with individuals at the highest levels of government who staged war provocations several times to whip up pro-war sentiment in the US.

"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country" said Ellsberg.

On 9/11 Ellsberg says:

[...] there’s no question in my mind that there’s enough evidence there to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of a kind that we’ve not seen, with subpoenas, general questioning of people, and raising the release of a lot of documents, there’s no question that (D.E. chuckles) put it this way, very serious questions have been raised, about how much they knew beforehand and how much involvement there may been. Is the, is a administration capable, humanly and physiologically of engineering such a provocation? Yes, I would say that, I worked for such an administration myself..."

'Israel claims Iran link to crisis'

"Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers last week was timed to divert attention from Tehran's nuclear programme, the Israeli PM has claimed. Ehud Olmert said that the cross-border raid in which the two soldiers were taken and eight others killed was co-ordinated with Tehran.

About 30 people died in a seventh day of conflict, most of them in Lebanon. US President George W Bush has meanwhile accused Syria of trying to use the crisis to return to Lebanon.

"Syria is trying to get back into Lebanon, it looks like to me," Mr Bush said in Washington"

"It's essential that the government of Lebanon survives this crisis. We've worked hard to free - and we meaning the international community - worked hard to free Lebanon from Syrian influence."

The US state department refused to confirm comments by an Israeli ambassador that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would travel to the region on Friday.

Israel launched its assault and blockade last Wednesday after the two soldiers were captured.

About 230 Lebanese people have been killed since then - the majority of them were civilians, but the toll includes about 30 soldiers. The number of Hezbollah militants killed is not known.

Twenty-five Israelis have died - 13 civilians and 12 members of the military" BBC

A few of the comments from the BBC's site:

"Israel claims Iran link to crisis "

Well waddaya know! As if we didn't see that coming! How utterly predictable.

Britbloke, UK

one of the problems is that Israel has a 5th column in many countries, America is an obvious example but there are many others. members of this fifth column has infiltrated governments, the press etc. over severel generations. This is why we can never get even a verbal condemnation of Israel even though they are acting like barbarians and stealing as much as they can from whom they can.

max aikin

It's funny how Israel is fighting Hizballah to "impose" UN resolution 1559 of disarming Hizballah,where it is breaking international laws and ignoring all UN resolutions imposed on it,and committing war crimes against Palestinian and now Lebanese civilians.Israel is complaining that this war is a distraction of the world from Iran's weapons; but i don't remember that Iran declared this war!It's a distraction alright,but from the daily massacres in Gaza! Has the world gone this blind and stupid?

katharina, Berlin

Friday, July 14, 2006

'Levy will take others down rather than take blame'

"Party sources expressed fears that 62-year-old Lord Levy could precipitate Mr Blair's downfallby revealing details of what he knows about covert fundraising. Ominously for Number 10, friends of the former pop promoter have warned that he will 'take others down' rather than take the blame for the scandal"

(Daily Mail 13/7/06)

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Blair money master Lord Levy arrested

"Chief Labour fundraiser Lord Levy has been arrested at his north-west London home in connection with the ongoing 'cash for honours' scandal.

The Prime Minister Tony Blair said he would not comment on the the arrest, saying: "I cannot comment on that, it is a party matter."

Lord Levy has been a close ally of Tony Blair since his election and is currently the PM's Middle East envoy.

The cash for honours scandal came to light earlier this year that several individuals who gave multi-million pund sums to the Labour Party had their transactions rebranded as loans. Many of these donors went on to receive honours, having been nominated for these by Tony Blair.

The police announced that the political affair had become a criminal matter several months ago, but few expected any action to be taken. The police also declared that the status and power of those concerned in the affair would not obstruct their investigations"

Lord Michael Levy, fanatical Blair's cheif fundraiser, described as an aspiring Henry Kissinger by Christopher Meyer 1 is also an influential figure on Blair's self-created think-tanks along with (in 2002) the money of Evelyn de Rothschild 2

Despite being a supporter (although that makes it even worse, and another terrible indictment against Labour itself), Levy seems less to do with the humdrum of the Labour party per se as Blair pleads in the article. By Levy's own admission it is Blair himself that is the prize.

'Close' as the Scotsman put it, may be quite an understatment as Levy regards Blair as a 'brother', presumbably fraternally united in the pursuit of modern tyranny, sharing those 'shared values' we hear so much about of perpetual war and the liquidation of British society.

With the collection of seemingly corrupt businessmen Levy rounded up to pipe secret cash into a degenerate Tony Blair in exchange for honours, also contributing to the complete flooding of the Lords with debased corporate fascists to rubberstamp more and more hideous legislation, it may be difficult to find a more terrifying example of power run amok. Luckily, this coup got just about busted in time and those concerned scurried away like cockroaches in the light then pointing the finger at Blair and Levy.

Of course an attack on Levy is an attack on Blair, and one has to wonder how much of the recent Prescott sleaze stories are coming from a ravenous Gordon Brown, but I think Levy is too dangerous a target for Brown.

It is very difficult to ignore that the police were forced to say "..the status and power of those concerned in the affair would not obstruct their investigations".

One can only hope then, that the arrest of Levy (if indeed it goes anywhere) may be to do with someone somewhere saying is enough is enough, and with Levy being like a 'brother' to Blair, being an entwined part of policy sitting on think-tanks, as well as helping inflict unbearable suffering on everybody through financing the wretched New Labour regime to power, the victims of Blair's wars and a British society devastated by the social tyranny of the New Labour project perhaps should look toward Lord Levy as much as his 'brother' Blair himself.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Guardian spells out reality of ID slave grid

Pretty good piece in the Guardian about the regime's radical human ID slave grid (found on Rachel's blog) Of course, some of us have been making exactly these points for quite a while...

"The government claims that national identity cards will help to counter terrorism, illegal immigration and ID fraud. That's rubbish, says Henry Porter, and in fact there is something much more sinister about them - they will fundamentally alter the relationship between citizen and state, and make slaves of us all.."

Read entire article...

It's very very very challenging for some people to accept what is happening in the UK. You almost can't blame some for turning away from it and pretending everything is more or less OK, because it's just too terrible. But we just can't do that.

Sunday, July 09, 2006

Gaza assault 'may be open-ended'

"Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has warned that Israel's offensive in Gaza to free a captured soldier and stop rocket fire could continue indefinitely.

"This is a war that cannot be on a timetable," Mr Olmert is quoted as telling Israel's cabinet. Israel pressed on with air strikes on Sunday, wounding several Palestinians, including militants and civilians. Scores of Palestinians have died in the two-week old campaign, which has also battered Gaza's infrastructure..."

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Daily Mirror: calling for 7/7 investigation or UK 9/11 Commission whitewash ?

This Old Brit reminds us that yesterday, the Daily Mirror ran a large editorial calling for a public inquiry into the London bombings last year.

In this, the Mirror covered the story of Rachel North, well known for her campaigning for a full inquiry into the 7/7 tragedy of which she is survivor.

A full public inquiry is long overdue and indeed it is difficult not to be alarmed at the Blair goverment's ongoing efforts to avoid this, but there were a number of things in the Mirror coverage that people should be equally concerned about, and knowing that an inquiry will eventually be inevitable, the direction and template for such an inquiry may already be being shaped:

What follows are some modified and expanded comments I left over at Richard's (This Old Brit's) blog:

The Mirror's own commentary advocates a 9/11 Commission-style investigation, almost promoting it as a gold standard that should be replicated here for the 7/7 bombings:

"The model should be America's 9/11 Commission into the al-Qaeda assault on the Twin Towers" (Daily Mirror 4/7/2006)

The 9/11 Commission just assumed the validity of this assertion made early on, so we are already off to a shaky start.

But there are some better parallels: The 9/11 Commission was eventually put together after the families campaigned for it and against enormous resistance from the Bush administration, but as soon as it was agreed things started to take on a downward slant and it became clear where it was headed.

Henry Kissinger was intended to head the commission, which the New York Times noted as perhaps being a means to contain the investigation. When Kissinger didn't work out, they actually picked someone even worse in the form of Philip Zelikow.

To those who haven't had a chance yet, do read about Philip Zelikow, it will make you shudder with disbelief. The familes (sadly unsuccessfully) tried to get rid of Zelikow.

It was Zelikow's staff that did by far the majority of the work, not Kean, Hamilton etc (who are worthy of great criticism in their own right), while early on... 'commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a "scam" and "whitewash"' 1

Now, there were some very interesting things that slipped out of the 9/11 Commission, but by and large, things were either lied about, grossly distorted or evidence outright ignored or denied to come up with a way of rubber stamping the official story already out there, not 'investigating it'. More worryingly the commission's report was used as a tool to manufacture a political mandate, to reinforce the direction of the administration of 'a world changed' scenario.

Some of the US families have noted it leaves them with more questions than answers and that is being very polite. For many others, the 9/11 Commission report is regarded as the sinister whitewash of our times surpassing the Warren Commission into JFK, indeed it is difficult to recognise this description from the Mirror,

"Even President Bush finally acknowledged, after taking a similar tack, that there needed to be a 9/11 Commission. The conclusions ended many of the myths around the September attacks. And the American people were reassured" 2

This statement is just false, a recent Zogby poll showed that less than half of Americans effectively accepted the 'findings' of the 9/11 Commission, who's conclusions were identical to those proposed in the hours and days after 9/11, a point of which the Daily Mirror are well aware as I (and many others) emailed the Zogby story to them at the time.

It troubles me that no distinction is being made between the families in the US who campaigned for an inquiry and the 9/11 Commission itself. There is no mention in the Mirror that the 9/11 Commission is a widely criticised affair, ranging from dangerous whitewash to malevolent story telling machine for US empire. So concerning were it's problems David Ray Griffin wrote a book about it, the 9/11 Commission report: Ommissions and Distortions.

My strong concern is that the UK is being led down an ally; in pointing to America as an example of where a commission was set up at public request, it is being nudged to effectively replicate the 9/11 Commission, where it is being wrongly held up by the press and some politicians as an example to follow, but if you follow that route then you'll just have something that will appease a lot of the tabloid press, will reinforce a lot of the worst political myths, but will horrify, and be denounced by, anyone who has actually looked at it.

The tragic and worrying real parallel which tends to get obscured by the media is both the US and UK goverments put blocks on investigations and that familes who rightly wouldn't take no for an answer pushed for it, but in the case of the US, the resulting 9/11 Commission was far from satisfactory to put it extremely mildly.

Victims and families, the UK and Rachel deserve better than a 9/11 Commission.

2. Greengrass in the Mirror.

And if people wanted a sign that they are being dangerously mislead into a corrupt UK 9/11 Commission which will do everything it can to avoid genuine investigation while fabricating a mythical politcal zeitgeist, then they can look no further than Flight 93 propagandist Paul Greengrass's comments in the Mirror:

"It was called the 9/11 Commission Report. Without it, we could never have reconstructed what happened aboard the hijacked passenger jets, nor even begun to understand the complex forces that led up to the attacks on September 11th 2001 [..]

It stands today as a powerful and impressive exercise in accountability from a society mature enough to know that when faced with a calamity on the scale of 9/11, government's first task is to find out what happened and why"

The fact they are rolling out Greengrass who is waving the 9/11 Commission report as if it were some authoritative, reliable account is extremely worrying. People are effectively being prepared for another war on terror/Clash of Civilizations mandate-making novel straight out of the CFR and piped through a collection of compromised cronies like Kean and Hamilton, or in this case their UK equivalents. And if previous regime investigations into itself are anything to go by like the Hutton report it doesn't bode well.

3. The Mirror talked about 'Al Qaeda (sympathisers) trying to infiltrate MI5'

I don't even know how the Mirror could print this garbage that's been handed to them. It's just nonsense. It may be code for MI5 trying to infiltrate itself.

Thanks to Rachel and Richard