From a British diplomatic source I learn that Britain has lobbied the United States against the publication of the Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture and extraordinary rendition. The lobbying has been carried out “at all levels” – White House, State Department and CIA. The British have argued that at the very least the report must be emasculated before publication.
The British argument is that in a number of court cases including the Belhadj case, the British government has successfully blocked legal action by victims on the grounds that this would weaken the US/UK intelligence relationship and thus vitally damage national security, by revealing facts the American intelligence service wish hidden. [We will leave aside for the moment the utter shame of our servile groveling judges accepting such an argument]. The British Government are now pointing out to the Americans that this argument could be fatally weakened if major detail of the full horror and scope of torture and extraordinary rendition is revealed by the Senate Intelligence Committee. The argument runs that this could in turn lead to further revelations in the courts and block the major defence against prosecutions of Blair, Straw and Dearlove, among others, potentially unleashing a transatlantic wave of judicial activism.
The unabashed collusion of two torturing security states in concealing the truth of their despicable acts – including complicity in the torture of women and minors – and blocking criminal prosecution of the guilty is a sign of how low public ethics have sunk. Fortunately there are still a few people in the British Foreign Office disgusted enough to leak it.
mark golding 20 Apr, 2014 – 1:29 am
Or perhaps an irritating but ultimately pitiable scenario ….
….. a moth flying at a light bulb, repeatedly blundering head-first into something it cannot comprehend, attracted to the light but unable to reach it, ecstatic in its futile task.
@Fred, “any country can impose sanctions on any other country”
mais non. Chapters VI and VII of the UN Charter are written to leave states with two options: pacific resolution of disputes, or referral to the UNSC. Article 41 reserves the middle ground of economic pressure for the UNSC.
Unilateral US sanctions are illegal.
Fred
19 Apr, 2014 – 3:05 pm
“I see loads of evidence Putin is loaded, reputable web sites…”
What “loads of evidence” and which “reputable websites” Fred?
“You have to come up with more than just accusing people of being in denial to refute real evidence.”
Sow the “real evidence” then Fred.
Fred
19 Apr, 2014 – 6:14 pm
“The British government can’t impose sanctions, it just doesn’t work like that, they don’t work unless everybody does it.”
Britain could make representations to the EU to bring sanctions on Israel, no Fred?
“the very worst post ever written”…”another one for the downstairs loo”…”an opportunity for martyrdom for you nutty BDSers”…”do us a favour and fuck off to your nearest socialist utopia”
Don’t waste your time this Easter. Habbabreak.
Spud
Your reading of Article 41 is not correct – it doesn’t say anything about what States may do when the dispute has referred the dispute to the UNSC and the UNSC has decided to do nothing because of the exercise of the veto.
Mr Scorgie
“Fred
19 Apr, 2014 – 6:14 pm
“The British government can’t impose sanctions, it just doesn’t work like that, they don’t work unless everybody does it.”
Britain could make representations to the EU to bring sanctions on Israel, no Fred?”
___________________
Because, as any fule kno, such representations are usually made – at least at a first stage – dans les coulisses, I can’t of course prove that the UK HAS made such representations, but equally, you can’t prove it HASN’T, Doug.
You do seem to assume that it hasn’t though. What is the basis for that assumption of yours?
************************
Xristos anesti ek nekron!
Afrend
You still haven’t told us the handle you used to / perhaps still post under, despite having told us you’ve been following this blog for a long time.
An particular reasons for this blog’s great benefactor (that’s you) to remain so coy? Are you one of those awful sock-puppets so roundly condemned by sundry Excellences? 🙂
“Bluntly, everything is shit.”
No shit.
Unpleasant bunch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad_Watch
More so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Spencer_(writer)
“A manipulative mother with Jewish ancestry.”
I’m so ashamed of what this blog has become. I’m done.
Technicolour
““A manipulative mother with Jewish ancestry.”
I’m so ashamed of what this blog has become. I’m done.”
______________________
And you’ll have noticed that that post – and many others like it – did NOT come from Habbabkuk.
Habbabkuk has persistently OPPOSED that sort of stuff since coming onto this blog.
Would you like to seize this opportunity to apologize for having tried to slam me in the past and for having expressed misguided criticism of my posts?
It’s not too late!
********************
Xristos anesti ek nekron!
@Andy
America has the political clout to impose sanctions, they can make a lot of other countries impose sanctions as well, but they won’t, Israel is their ally.
Yes Britain could impose sanctions on their own, if they wanted to damage the economy, risk America retaliating and have the rest of the world laughing at them. Wouldn’t bother Israel much if they did.
@Spud
‘@Fred, “any country can impose sanctions on any other country”’
I didn’t say that, Andy said that, attribute it to him.
“What “loads of evidence” and which “reputable websites” Fred?”
I’ve posted two links and pointed out the contents of the Wikileaks cables so far.
You’ve come up with Jack Shit.
For those folks who would like to join in for a special online memorial for Michael C. Ruppert hosted by his good friend, Carolyn Baker, on Thursday, May 8th at 9PM EDT.
IN MEMORIAM MICHAEL C. RUPPERT, February 3, 1951–April 13, 2014
http://www.synchcast.net/#!gatheringformichael/c1x3m
My own personal thanks to Michael for his enlightenment on ‘Guns and Butter’, which was aired on KPFA, one month after the tragic events of 9/11. Michael Ruppert was first to reveal the forbidden truth: speculative trade on airline stocks based on foreknowledge of the World Trade Center attacks.
Ignoring the ire of Technicolour who found it necessary to reprint what I said which happens to be completely true, as did Habbabkuk, and Resident Dissident earlier on. Perhaps they see nothing strange or untoward in the facts.
I came across this website for the Slynn Foundation today. It aims to assist young lawyers by offering training and support and lists the countries where it works. The list includes Ukraine and Iraq.
http://www.slynn-foundation.org/?page=Home
Funding-
From the start the Government took a keen interest in the Foundation’s work with financial help being awarded by the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe (BACEE) and by the British Council. More recently, the Foundation has Government support through the the FCO’s Reuniting Europe Programme. Some of its programmes have recently been funded from EU sources (including the EU Ukrainian Business Council). The Foundation has also received a large measure of support from the legal profession, particularly from judges and practitioners who have volunteered their services in helping with seminars and other courses abroad. The interest of the senior judiciary in the Foundation’s work is demonstrated by the list of Patrons.
In the past the Foundation has received funding for specific programmes from government bodies such as:
•The Lord Chancellor’s Department
•The Foreign and Commonwealth Office
•The British Council
•The British Association for Central and Eastern Europe
•Curt Engelhorn European Foundation for the Advancement of Medicine.
http://www.slynn-foundation.org/?page=Funding
The name at the top of patrons is Cherie Booth. Falconer is also there. There is no irony in the fact that Ms Booth’s husband and his government including Falconer waged a war on Iraq which destroyed its institutions, including its legal system, killed many of its people and laid waste to the country. Now these legal worthies concern themselves with the replacement of the same lawyers who left the country or who were killed.
‘The physical elimination of academics, writers, teachers, intellectuals, scientists and professionals, especially physicians, engineers, lawyers, jurists and journalists was decisive in imposing ethno-religious rule under a colonial occupation. To establish long-term dominance and sustain ethno-religious client rulers, the entire pre-existing cultural edifice, which had sustained an independent secular nationalist state, was physically destroyed by the US and its Iraqi puppets.’
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-us-war-against-iraq-the-destruction-of-a-civilization/14870
A weekend of what must be indiscriminate slaughter in Yemen by American drones.
Dozens Of ‘Al Qaeda Militants’ Killed In Yemen
Those targeted were reportedly among the “leading and dangerous” elements of al Qaeda and were of different nationalities.
http://news.sky.com/story/1246105/dozens-of-al-qaeda-militants-killed-in-yemen
CIA using Saudi base for drone assassinations in Yemen
Disclosure comes as architect of programme, John Brennan, prepares for Senate confirmation hearing to become CIA director
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/06/cia-using-saudi-base-drone-yemen
Brennan is busy. He has been to Kiev over the weekend.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/melikkaylan/2014/04/16/why-cia-director-brennan-visited-kiev-in-ukraine-the-covert-war-has-begun/
So much for Obama’s empty wishes for the holiday.
Mary
“Ignoring the ire of Technicolour who found it necessary to reprint what I said which happens to be completely true, as did Habbabkuk, and Resident Dissident earlier on. Perhaps they see nothing strange or untoward in the facts.”
______________________
1/. Unhealthy to ignore what we said about your post, Mary. Healthier (for you in particular) would be for you to reflect on WHY you choose to bring those facts to the attention of readers. What point were you trying to make and what was the relevance of your post to anything?
2/. Personally, I see nothing strange or untoward (untoward??) in the fact that Kate Middleton’s mother may be, or is, manipulative and has Jewish roots. Many people are manipulative (including yourself, to judge by your posts) and many people have some Jewish roots. Why do you see those facts as strange and untoward?
Have a little think about why you piss off people like Technicolour and Dreoilin.
Thanks Mary; the Slynn Foundation fits nicely within the hierarchy of the British establishment being the judicial signalling post for the ears and eyes of the Privy Council operating within the mandate of Protectorate vs. Turks and Caicos islands, and also as a veiled ‘force majeure’ within the European Council; hence the pressure on the Council of EU for example, to relieve the CIA controlled MEK organisation of it’s terrorist label.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/world/middleeast/iranian-opposition-group-mek-wins-removal-from-us-terrorist-list.html?_r=0
As Craig quite accurately writes, ‘the utter shame of our servile groveling judges’ accepting ambiguous even dubious arguments of breaching National Security to negate revealing the scope and horror of torture, can be traced back to Privy Council jurisdiction and the Judicial Committee.
On good advice I have no doubt that Sir Robin Auld of the Slynn Foundation counsel fingered the Ukraine judiciary in 2012/13 as constitutional prep for the 2014 putsch, subsequent IMF default clauses and legal movement into the EU.
@Res Diss. I’m always delighted to see people reading the supreme pact of the world order. There’s a huge amount of painstakingly-inculcated ignorance about it in the NATO satellites.
However, close but no cigar re Article 41. Read the whole thing. Article 37 states that if pacific resolution of disputes should fail, the parties shall refer the problem to the UNSC. What if the UNSC chooses to do nothing? The resources of the state remain at the disposal of the UNSC. You stand by. Your sovereign rights are limited to self-defense, subject of course to the necessity and proportionality tests applied by the ICJ in Case Concerning Oil Platforms, Nicaragua v. United States of America, and other binding rulings.
You sit on your thumb.
But but but, you’re really, really, rarin’ to go? Then you have one (1) option. A 377 or ‘Uniting for Peace’ resolution in the UNGA. In practice, interventionist states are leery of 377 because the UNGA is kind of, well… democratic. You never know how it will turn out.
You don’t have to like it, but there it is. Your head of state, war’s above his pay grade.
Kseniya Simonova — winner of “Ukraine got Talent”… …Isle of Seil …..Ellenabeich…rules… SeaFari.. ( Adventures ) oot there…Coryvreckran…Yah
Back from mega Adventures.
… Bed n breakfast second to none… warm people….Run by expert sea / dive people…. And the wee dog Angus
long hours driving..2 hours of loch side roads…a Police car almost killed us.. but for my ..GIVING LOTS OF ROOM… to the car in front..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIVTBL5r1Hg
“The resources of the state remain at the disposal of the UNSC. You stand by.”
Where does it say that?
““Bluntly, everything is shit.”
Cheer up, pal. Or do us a favour and fuck off to your nearest socialist utopia.
Cheers!”
@ Anon
What a genuinely weird retort. Sometimes the internet can be a baffling place. But, no, I’ll stay where I am, and post sometimes, if it’s ok. Ta.
Anyway, as any fule know, there are no socialist utopia’s. If there were, the yanks would destroy them soon enough. Domino theory. Or something. Or perhaps Oligarchical Collectivism, as some writer once wrote, rather presciently.
“Everything is shit”
Depends on your perspective, of course. Not for those in power, and wielding that power, clearly. And especially if they think they have a deity with them…
But it is shit for many because world war 2 was supposed to put an end to all that, and they see good people around them who have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves and make their voices heard. It is absolute shit for those who are the butt of the Daily Mail’s little campaigns, like the one suggesting that principles behind food banks are corrupt.
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella) !
20 Apr, 2014 – 3:05 pm
“…I can’t of course prove that the UK HAS made such representations, but equally, you can’t prove it HASN’T, Doug.”
Russell’s teapot!
As far as I can tell, food banks serve the following purposes:
– Good PR for supermarkets.
– Good opportunity for wasters to spend their benefits on less important things.
– Super huge opportunity for leftists to start handwringing about evil Tories/capitalists/cuts/bankers/scum etc.
Note, nobody is actually facing starvation. The private purse stumps up for the food and the public purse covers the wide screen TV, Sky subscription, booze, fags, iPhone etc.
The fact is that if you offered 5 million free food parcels, then 5 million would be taken, allowing leftist to claim that millions are dependent on food banks.
Brendan
“Everything is shit”
Forgive me, but I do get a little sick and tired of seeing yet another middle class leftist twit putting down his country, which offers him every opportunity and which much of the world would happily give their back teeth to live in.
“Anyway, as any fule know, there are no socialist utopia’s.”
As any fule kno, there can be no socialist utopia. It’s going to be a long and hard journey for you, Brendan, but eventually you’ll get there.
If only that were true, Anon. People are starving, both physically and emotionally. People are killing themselves because life is so bad for them. I’m sure the figures for suicides on the rail network would really shock you. So much for the big society.
But you probably know all this anyway and are just being facetious…