The planned scenario for a war with Iran is playing out before our eyes at frightening speed now. Unfortunately. as I have frequently said, Iran has a regime that is not only thuggish but controlled by theocratic nutters: the attack on the British Embassy played perfectly into the hands of the neo-cons. William Hague is smirking like the cat who got the cream.
The importance of the Fox-Gould-Werritty scandal is that it lifts the lid on the fact that the move to war with Iran is not a reaction to any street attack or any nuclear agency report. It is a long nurtured plan, designed to keep feeding the huge military industrial war machine that has become a huge part of the UK and US economies, and whose sucking up of trillions of dollars has contributed massively to the financial crisis, and which forms a keystone in the whole South Sea Bubble corporate finance system for servicing the ultra-rich. They need constant, regenerative war. They feed on the shattered bodies of small children.
Gould, Fox and Werritty were plotting with Israel to further war with Iran over years. The Werritty scandal was hushed up by Gus O’Donnell’s risibly meagre “investigation” – a blatant cover-up – and Fox resigned precisely to put a cap on any further digging into what they had been doing. I discovered – with a lot of determination and a modicum of effort – that Fox, Werritty and British Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould had met many times, not the twice that Gus O’Donnell claimed, and had been in direct contact with Mossad over plans to attack Iran. Eventually the Independent published it, a fortnight after it went viral on the blogosphere.
The resignation of the Defence Secretary in a scandal is a huge political event. People still talk of the Profumo scandal 50 years later. But Fox’s resignation was forgotten by the media within a fortnight, even though it is now proven that the Gus O’Donell official investigation into the affair was a tissue of lies.
Take only these undisputed facts:
Fox Gould and Werritty met at least five times more than the twice the official investigation claims
The government refuses to say how often Gould and Werritty met without Fox
The government refuses to release the Gould-Werritty correspondence
The three met with Mossad
How can that not be a news story? I spent the most frustrating fortnight of my life trying to get a newspaper – any newspaper – to publish even these bare facts. I concentrated my efforts on the Guardian.
I sent all my research, and all the evidence for it, in numeorus emails to the Guardian, including to David Leigh, Richard Norton-Taylor, Rupert Neate and Seumas Milne. I spoke to the first three, several times. I found a complete resistance to publishing anything on all those hidden Fox/Werritty/Gould meetings, or what they tell us about neo-con links with Israel.
Why? Guardian Media Group has a relationship with an Israel investment company, Apax, but the Guardian strongly denies that this has any effect on them.
The Guardian to this day has not published the fact that there were more Fox-Gould-Werritty meetings than O’Donnell disclosed. Why?
I contacted the Guardian to tell them I intended to publish this article, and invited them to give a statement. Here it is, From David Leigh, Associate Editor:
I hope your blogpost will carry the following response in full.
1. I know nothing of any Israeli stake in the ownership of the Guardian. As it is owned by the Scott Trust, not any Israelis, your suggestion sems a bit mad.
2. The Guardian has not “refused” to publish any information supplied by you. On the contrary, I personally have been spending my time looking into it, as I told you previously. I have no idea what the attitude of others in “the Guardian” is. I form my own opinions about what is worth publishing, and don’t take dictation from others. That includes you.
3. I can’t imagine what you are hinting at in your reference to Assange. If you’ve got a conspiracy theory, why don’t you spit it out?
I can understand your frustration, Craig, when others don’t join up the dots in the same way as you. But please try not to be offensive, defamatory, or plain daft about it.
As I said, it would be honest of you to publish my response in full if you want to go ahead with these unwarranted attacks on the Guardian’s integrity.
Possible some Guardian readers will get drawn to this post: at least then they will find out that Werritty, Fox and Gould held many more meetings, hushed up by O’Donnell and hushed up by the Guardian.
It should not be forgotten that the Guardian never stopped supporting Blair and New Labour, even when he was presiding over illegal wars and the massive widening of the gap between rich and poor. My point about Assange is that he has done a great deal to undermine the neo-con war agenda – and the Guardian is subjecting him to a campaign of denigration. On the other hand Gould/Fox/Werritty were pushing a neo-con project for war – and the Guardian is actively complicit in the cover-up of their activities.
The Guardian. Whom does it serve?
Scouse Billy (I feel sorry for Barbie)
Yet another poster having a dig. This place is full of them,getting to be a bit of a joke. The ganging up on a poster,really childish to say the least.
@Ken, we’ll leave aside the first issue, since we’ll need to agree to disagree. I don’t know Mary personally, btw.
.
But in your second point you have repeated your same point again, even though I have very specifically dealt with it. I explained how someone can be inconsistent in their criticism of a behaviour given the circumstances, and sometimes that is the right thing to do. Criticism from the Left of Iran would aid the neocons’ war drive. In fact we could look at this in reverse, and say that the Left ought to be more amenable to making justifiable criticisms of Official Enemies when war is not on the cards. Such is the effect of threatening military action!
.
Anyway… at a quarter to midnight? Night-cap then bed-time! Night all.
Jon,
I try not to get involved in circular arguments, in which one side is blatantly distorting the facts as in the following:
,
Socrates proclaimed “Life is not worth living”, shortly before he killed himself in front of his distraught companions.’
.
This makes him sound like a suicidal depressive, yet it is perfectly accurate. Of course the complete phrase (which itself is only part of a sentence embedded in a discourse about an imagined scenario) is: “The unexamined life is not worth living”. Moreover Socrates had been sentenced to death by drinking poison, and he was carrying it out according to the law. So quotes can be literal and accurate but truncations can change the intended meaning drastically. (Nextus)
,
The constant references to the human rights abuses in the press, and elsewhere are not designed for promulgation of human rights, but in fact this is a left over weapon which despite having past its sell by date, to date is used in a mace fashion to beat upon the enemy of moment.
,
If you take note of this thread; you will find “Ken” has in fact taken over the thread constantly firing comments at any and all who dare to humanize Iranians. The first step in destruction of any nation is taken by dehumanization of the target nation. This aspect can be discerned by “Ken”‘s reluctance to accept the eyewitness accounts of an indigenous Iranian whom has been commenting, and time and again “Ken” has not relented and come back with the hammer of “human rights”.
,
Considering the numbers of the comments by “Ken” revolving around anti Iran sentiments, we can safely assume “Ken” is not debating, but busy patrolling and nipping any kind of meaningful debate in the bud, because invariably the progression of the debate could humanize Iranians and that is not a desired outcome for his mission.
,
Therefore, arguing the toss with characters such as “Ken” is an exercise in futility, because “ken” is on a mission. Never mind the actualities on the ground and the eyewitness account, and regardless of the facts surrounding Iran, and Iranians, because the only allowable image can only be the simplistic caricature so assiduously promoted by the culprits we all have come to know as the “Media”, in fact “Ken” is only reinforcing these stereotypical “images” with nothing new added, only regurgitation of “public domain
facts“.,
@Jon (But in your second point you have repeated your same point again, even though I have very specifically dealt with it. I explained how someone can be inconsistent in their criticism of a behaviour given the circumstances, and sometimes that is the right thing to do. Criticism from the Left of Iran would aid the neocons’ war drive. In fact we could look at this in reverse, and say that the Left ought to be more amenable to making justifiable criticisms of Official Enemies when war is not on the cards. Such is the effect of threatening military action!)
Sorry but I do not agree with the point you made and do not agree that sometimes it is right.We will have to agree to disagree. I see you skipped the bit about Mary insulting me but I expected that. Nighty night.
fedup..
You have already proven that you having nothing to offer except insults.
Ken: So you accuse me of calling you names (which I didn’t do), and then proceed to make insults at me, while failing to address even in passing one point that I’d put to you. I’d asked if you were some sort of troll or something, the answer you gave is an incredibly roundabout “yes”.
Glenn,
No need, I had assumed that already. However, it is very kind of you to clarify the point further.
@Glenn ..You inferred that I was a troll,seems you do not even know what you posted and you even come back now and insult me again because it is all you have. Give it a rest.
@Fedup (No need, I had assumed that already)
Well if it not fedup back to insult me yet again.I have lost count how many times you have insulted me in this thread,it is a lot though. Looks like that is all you have left.
It sure seems that this place is just full of people who cannot discuss anything like an adult. Been insulted so many times on this thread by various posters who cannot formulate an argument to save their asses that I see no point posting here further. Hope you all have a fun time slapping each other on the back and abusing poster who do not agree with you. Craig these people do nothing for the credibility of your site.
“Amnesty International calls for arrest of George W. Bush”
.
Amnesty International has called for several African nations to arrest and detain former President George W. Bush for authorizing the use of waterboarding and other forms of torture.
Mr. Bush is visiting Ethiopia, Tanzania and Zambia this week to raise awareness about cervical and breast cancer and HIV/AIDS.
The international human rights group’s written statement recognizes the value those goals, but says it “cannot lessen the damage to the fight against torture caused by allowing someone who has admitted to authorizing waterboarding to travel without facing the consequences prescribed by law ….”
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57335679-503544/amnesty-international-calls-for-arrest-of-george-w-bush/
.
etc etc, and at the bottom:
.
“New York Rep. Peter King called Amnesty’s action misguided.
“If Amnesty International had any intellectual honesty, it would give President Bush a medal to honor him for liberating so many oppressed Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan [!] and for assisting millions of AIDS victims in Africa,” said the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security.”
.
Feeling nauseous
‘night
Just out of idle curiosity, I bunged the source of this page through a few basic commands and found the volume of posts per poster to be as follows:
—–
Apple 00:44:37 # ./auth-count html* |head -20
Start count on html-doc-source.rtf
49 Ken
33 Mary
27 Komodo
26
19 John Goss
17 Fedup
12 Njegos
10 Azra
9 Jon
8 Septimius Severus
8 Jives
7 glenn
6 Uzbek in the UK
6 Rob
6 Edwin
5 passerby
5 nuid
5 Tom Welsh
——
And the winner is….
PS – Maybe someone could give me a quick recap of why Ken has been labelled a “troll”. It all seemed to start with Fedup and Ken disagreeing on whether Wikileaks is legit or not. And went downhill from there. Why is he (Ken) now considered a “troll”?
Maybe I’ll find out tomorrow.
Nuid: I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but my personal disagreement appears not far above, in my first exchange. It appeared Mary was in receipt of numerous demands to denounce Iran, and there were grim conclusions for her failure to comply. Further, Mary was charged with giving time to holocaust deniers (something I rather doubt).
.
There was the usual charges towards “you lot”, attempting to take over the thread (see the tally above), and having an argument with just about everyone – that sort of thing made me wonder, that’s all.
.
I might be wrong in such suspicions, which is why I asked him. Didn’t get a proper reply, of course.
I stopped writing comments on the Politics boards of the Guardian after the Iraq War started. I used to debate with TomUsa who was the original troll. I realised his function was to destroy debate not further it. Nevertheless it is difficult to permit shills and trolls to abuse one’s sincere opinions.
Likewise I have stopped contributing to Comment is Free when I realised that the moderators were unfair and partial in their removal of views they considered at variance with the current establishment position, whatever that was. Now I boycott the newspaper and refuse even to open the .co.uk website at all.
As a Buddhist I hate war and all forms of conflict and strive to avoid debate with those who I feel are not interested in my values. Reading the attack on Mary here has saddened me since it reflects all the negative elements that drove me away from posting on other fora. I try to ignore those who attack others concentrating instead on getting my own message across. We may not be able to change others but we can change ourselves.
I believe Nuclear War is coming soon and am reconciled to it. This is our collective Karma and we must accept that we deserve it. Let us try and face this with dignity and wisdom. The Universe is teeming with life I believe and even if it dies out here through the ignorance and hate of Man we will be reborn in other realms and on other planets.
Bu all those who made the depleted irradiation of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya possible will be reborn in the wombs of Iraqi mothers to suffer the birth pangs and immediate death throes for as long as that nuclear dust destroys the DNA of life in the womb of those poor Iraqi mothers. This is how Karma works. So we must feel compassion not hatred for all these warmongers. They truly do not know what they do.
Time is now short for humans on Earth and we must not waste it in conflict. Instead use the remaining time to generate compassion and love for all living sentient creatures who were all our mothers in previous lives. Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu.
Nuid
Why is he (Ken) now considered a “troll”?
.
Because he
1. Distorts what others have said.
2. Engages in ad hominem attacks.
3. Attempts to swamp the thread with his distortions and attacks.
4. Is incapable of taking part in reasoned discussion.
.
He does this again and again and again. You take issue with something he says, he comes back replying to a distortion of what you have said, and peppers his reply with insults.
.
I think he is a better candidate for moderation than Tony Opmoc.
4.24 A.M.
Has he gone yet?
Lol…Jesus this site is pretty surreal at times,yet i’m curiously drawn to it.Why is that??Just when i think it couldnt get weirder i finally hit Tony’s last post there.It was so inevitably surreal and out of kilter with the previous 30 comments yet it just seemed to fit in with the madness here that
i just had to burst out laughing.
I’ll give you one thing Tony,you’re certainly consistent in your-arguably at times addled- devotion to this blog…lol
Cheers ;.)
On Trolls:
.
A Typical Conversation:
.
Troll: Clouds are white. Snow, however, is green.
.
Victim: No, actually snow is white too.
.
Troll: So, victim, you think clouds are not white. You obviously don’t know anything about this subject. I, however, have done my research and I know that clouds are white.
——-
The purpose of the troll is to make it appear that the victim is denying that clouds are white. He does this by drawing a false analogy, or by making two statements, one true and one false. When the victim contradicts the false statement the troll acts as if he had in fact contradicted the true statement.
.
In the case of ‘Ken’, he is seeking to paint people who are concerned about or opposed to war with Iran as denying or not caring about Iranian human rights problems. It’s a childish and transparent technique, related to Tony Blair’s infamous criticism of people demonstrating against the then-impending Iraq war. For good measure ‘Ken’ has even dragged in a mention of holocaust denial – rather a sign of desperation. He isn’t very good at his game yet.
.
Of course, sometimes people who appear to be trolls may just be a bit dim or argumentative, and it can be hard to tell. On the thread before this one, I made a point about the Occupy demonstrators apparently losing their initial focus on financial institutions and disrupting a mining company on the grounds that its boss is paid a lot. Now, what I was wondering is this – is the demonstrators’ attention somehow being diverted from the financial institutions? Komodo has been wittering on about what an unpleasant company Xstrata is, how it’s really Swiss, how he doesn’t like the politics of its boss, how it’s part of the capitalist system (well, duh!), I forget the rest. So, the question is, does Komodo simply not understand my point? Is he an argumentative type who, having made a point irrelevant to mine, is not willing to let go and keeps banging on about it despite my attempts to get back to the point I was making? Or is he a troll attempting to take the conversation away from the idea that Occupy may be being subverted and having its focus on banks blurred?
.
(This is not to say that I was right about Occupy – I actually asked a question, hoping for a relevant answer, but none came.)
.
I don’t think there can be any of that sort of uncertainty about ‘Ken’, though. He’s an unmistakable troll in the mold of ‘Stephen’. A tiresome pest really better not replied to.
Above I said that ‘Ken’ was a better candidate for moderation than Tony – I don’t mean to suggest that Tony ought to be a candidate for moderation. I was simply referring back to Jon’s earlier comment to Tony. In my view Tony’s contributions are harmless and often apposite.
@ Antelope Grazer
“The purpose of the troll is to make it appear that the victim is denying that clouds are white. He does this by drawing a false analogy, or by making two statements, one true and one false. When the victim contradicts the false statement the troll acts as if he had in fact contradicted the true statement.
.
In the case of ‘Ken’, he is seeking to paint people who are concerned about or opposed to war with Iran as denying or not caring about Iranian human rights problems. It’s a childish and transparent technique,”
‘
Nail/Head/Hit.
Ken’s tictacs are obvious and he makes it look like pantomime has arrived on Craigs blog.
Well done Glenn, for showing in detail what the stats were saying.
And as for Semites, The Hebrew’s were but a small fraction of what were known as Semites.I suppose that the term could be applied to most of the peoples who live in the middles East, especially those of Arab origin.
Mary is definitely not anti semite.
Why don’t you just pack up your keyboard and troll the beaches of Tel Aviv Ken ?
Ken means yes in Hebrew doesn’t it Ken ?
Say Ken Ken.
Notice how the reply includes the useful tag “conspiracy theory”, as if the British Minister of Defence meeting with Mossad and having an unofficial friend attend security briefings with him is not a de-facto conspiracy, if only for private financial gain.
The controlled media look ever more ridiculous to all thinking people. How some of the editors and journalists in it can live with themselves is remarkable. Presumably they remove the mirrors in their homes so they don’t have to look themselves in the eye.
Take a step back, and a deep breath, Craig, and look at what you have become.
You got a very calm, patient, reasoned reply from the Guardian.
Their man is spot on: other people don’t join up the dots the same way as you. It doesn’t make them conspirators.
As to “having a relationship” with the Israelis…
FFS man, stop being such a complete and utter arse. Or are you now so far gone that you believe in guilt by (unspecified) relationship?
No-one is censoring your views.
Declining to publish your far-fetched theories is NOT censorship, as well you know.
Now get some help before you lose the few remaining sympathisers you have, outside of your little blogworld with its freaks and creeps who are now your main posters and supporters.
If you don’t accept my independent, unbiassed analysis, as a former admirer and supporter of your work, then I suggest you ask for the opinion of someone you respect, but don’t see eye to eye with. It’s always a good idea.
Reading the last post: it seems to me that this site is under concerted attack by trolls. This is no surprise, is it? I mean if what Craig’s saying is true (and equally if what many of the commenters say is true), someone out there is not going to like it.
Bjorn, you can hardly call the revelation of at least four meetings Gus O’Donnell purposely ignored a “far-fetched” theory. It is not a theory at all. It is a fact. And it is a fact that was published in last week’s Independent on Sunday. The Guardian, (I haven’t read today’s) has said nothing of this yet. I don’t know you Bjorn but I can tell that yous analysis is far from independent and unbiased. Get real, man. And grow up.
Glenn, thanks for your comments’ analysis. There’s no other purpose to me posting this than to catch the dragon!
[Jon/mod – racist/homophobic posts will definitely be deleted]
Margo posted this indie documentary on Medialens, about the history of the Occupy movement to date.
.
The contrast between brave peaceful citizens and cowardly sadistic cops has rarely been better made.
.
Apparently JP Morgan made a very large donation to the NYPD in October. Now you know who they’re working for:
.
http://www.openfilm.com/videos/rise-like-lions
Bjorn, you are showing your true colour, look the last line of your last post and if you have an ounce of decency, be ashamed of your outburst. I hope the moderator today will remove the post.
Azra, if I were the moderator I’d leave Bjorn’s comment up. It just proves my point that he has yet to reach maturity.