The revelation that undercover Met officers spied on the family of Jean Charles De Menezes after they murdered him, leaves me utterly appalled.
You have to consider this in the context of the lies that the Met assiduously spread about De Menezes – that he entered the tube without buying a ticket, that he vaulted the ticket gates, that he ran away from officers, that he was wearing a bulky jacket.
All of these were lies. In truth the poor man had entered the tube normally and legally, walked calmly and sat down with a free newspaper. He wore a short tight denim jacket. Then totally without any cause or justification from his actions whatsoever, his murderers shot him multiple times in the head. Just because his Brazilian complexion looked a bit Arab.
I can think of no category of lie worse than that told by a murderer against the reputation of their victim.
The police did everything they could to mislead the media, planting lies and encouraging stories they knew to be untrue. Personally I find it extremely suspicious that numerous CCTV cameras were found not to be working, and have little doubt that the police destroyed that evidence.
There can be no other motive for spying on De Menezes’ family than either the hope of gaining information to feed to the media to discredit the man they murdered, or to attempt to pervert the course of justice.
They did not have to worry – their were plenty of others to pervert the course of justice for them, including the DPP and above all, Sir Michael Wright, as disgusting a piece of scum as ever sat on an English bench, who directed the inquest jury that they could not return a verdict of unlawful killing. (I was delighted to find that, when I googled Sir Michael Wright, my article on him came high on the first page. Is that result tailored by Google for me, or is it general?)
The recent revelation that the Met spied on Menezes’ family sparked very little public interest. It should. It is a still more appalling outrage than the Murdoch press hacking Millie Dowler. At least the Murdoch gang had not actually murdered Millie Dowler themselves. The De Menezes family were being spied on by their son’s and brother’s murderers.
Fred
27 Jul, 2014 – 11:32 pm
“Firstly, the Israeli government are all Jewish, every single one.”
What every single one? Surely not.
What about Afu Agbaria? He’s not Jewish is he?
What about Mohammad Barakeh, he doesn’t sound Jewish to me.
Ahmad Tibi?
——————————-
Fred, it seems your ignorance knows no bounds.
The people you name are members of the Knesset, NOT members of the Israeli government.
Please do some thinking and research before you put finger to keyboard.
louis vuitton men wallets used to be frequent spam posters here. It was often difficult to distinguish their contributions from those of the regular Gormless Squad.
“UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has urged an immediate halt to violence in Gaza, saying the Palestinian territory is in a “critical condition”.
“Shortly after he spoke, news agencies reported that Gaza’s main hospital had been hit by an Israeli air strike.”
“He said Hamas had fired missiles into civilian areas of Israel, while Israeli forces had used high-explosive weapons in the crowded Gaza Strip.”
“In the name of humanity, the violence must stop,” he told reporters.”
NO Mr Ban Ki-moon, in the name of humanity Israel must be stopped!
And YOU must be sacked!
Ba’al Zevul, 3:09 pm; my first guess would be malware seeding and/or cross-site scripting. I don’t think the page is meant to exist at accessunlimitedtraining.com.au, so possibly their server was cracked, malware embedded, and links to it were seeded across websites where comments could be placed. Google have quite a good security reputation, so maybe Google software removed any malware from the cached copy.
You could try e-mailing accessunlimitedtraining.com.au and asking them. Or maybe accessunlimitedtraining.com.au itself is just a scam… I don’t see any reason for the page linked below to exist, nor the directory it’s in; “louis-vuitton-outlet”:
http://www.accessunlimitedtraining.com.au/javascript/louis-vuitton-outlet/index.asp
Freedom Flotilla from Turkey. Check out the comments.
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Freedom-Flotilla-II-set-to-sail-for-Gaza-from-Turkey-369065
Try searching on accessunlimitedtraining.com.au
Links all across the web, in many languages… Ba’al, how did you discover this?
Words fail me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7qFACSfd_k
Andy,
If you tolerate this, then your children will be next.
Hello Baal,
Maybe AccessUnlimited have been compromised or maybe they are being paid but this is just a bog standard link building scam. Content is scraped and mixed to build pages (often not even displayed in browsers) that Google think are real lovers of the relevant product (BTW this is a sign that computer algorithms are not as smart as we often think). The handbag makers are paying for this. You could report it to Google but they will do nothing. The handbag makers advertise with Google.
It’s going on all the time. Searching for unusual words reveals the game.
It’s all part of the capitalist pig fraud that drives this open-source, free-love, commie-libertarian coder crazy.
Links all across the web, in many
habbabreak languages… Ba’al, how did you discover this? The people you name are members of the Knesset, NOT members of the Israeli government. Words fail me. try Habbabreak. It’s all part of the capitalist pig fraud that drives this open-source, free-love, commie-libertarian coder crazy. Habbabreak.
“Bert
Alternatively, of course, they could have mistaken him for somebody linked to that building who was a suspect and shot him in a case of mistaken identity. That is a very much simpler explanation.
Either way, they shot him without warning and without cause when he was totally unarmed and doing nothing wrong. That is murder.”
Craig
The problem here is with the nature of the law of “defence of self or another”, under which the first question is:
-what did the [killer] believe the situation to be with regard to threat?
Under the law, this first, subjective, test excludes any consideration of the objective reasonableness of the professed belief advanced by the [killer]. So unless the prosecution can show that the [killer] didn’t really believe the threat to be as claimed, the second question applies: given the state of mind claimed by the [killer] was his subsequent behaviour unreasonable?
In practice the self-defence defence has a patchy success rate before magistrates. But not in Crown Courts where police are concerned. The basic problem is that the criminal law does not generally penalise [killers] for not seriously testing ill-founded beliefs. Thus, JC de M’s [killers] were not required [is this right?] to explain why they had not personally assessed the threat posed by JC before they killed him.
An interesting case is that of Kenneth Noye who was acquitted of murdering an officer. My view is that the burden of proof in relation to self-defence should be reversed. Prosecution should not have to disprove it. But would the police be happy?
LOL, Diamondfish. Someone has been saying this since 1998. . Even truer today than then. Pity Anon has gone, we could probably have some fun about The Preachers as a conspiracy theory.
Mr Scorgie
Have you found out what a syllogism is yet?
If not, now is the time to do so!
Mr Scorgie
Are you missing Mary’s incisive, ground-breaking posts? How are you keeping up with the actualité in her absence? Do you feel orphaned?
Sanctions? Putin has a plan. If whining from the poison-pill of American food can’t get the West to back off, nobody can.
http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20140725&id=17807622
McDonald’s did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
The suit comes amid especially high tensions between Moscow and Washington over the Ukraine crisis; the United States has slapped an array of sanctions on Russia over its annexation of Crimea from Ukraine for allegedly supporting separatist rebels who are fighting in eastern Ukraine.
There’s no demonstrable connection between the McDonald’s suit and the tensions, but the consumer protection agency, Rospotrebnadzor, has a history of actions that appear to dovetail Russia’s political agenda. As tensions between Russia and Georgia escalated before their 2008 war, Russia banned the import of Georgian wine and mineral water — two of its major export products — for failing to meet sanitary norms. Last year, as tensions heated up over Ukraine’s desire to sign a trade pact with the European Union, Russia banned imports of chocolates made by the company of Petro Poroshenko, a tycoon who supported the EU deal and is now Ukraine’s president.
I thought Murdoch was the Met…
Oh hang on…is it the other way round?
I can never remember the arrangement…
$50 Billion fine to Russia …..hmmm. If the US can solely block Israel from coming before the Hague, why couldn’t Russia veto this?
http://rt.com/business/176064-yukos-russia-50bn-damages/
Thanks, Afrend…like the example; Habbabreak is a lot more use than a knockoff bag. Found it while idly Googling – you guessed it – “Ba’al Zevul” to see if I was achieving any kind of recognition. I’m not, of course. The link I gave seemed to be parasitising an Australian industrial safety equipment firm in order to sell the product. The mind boggled.
For the record: knockoff Luis Vuitton handbags are disgusting and smell of faeces. Ba’al Zevul Knockoff Luis Vuitton bags are made by slave labour. Ba’al Zevul Knockoff Luis Vuitton bags are impregnated with sarin. Ba’al Zevul. Hope that entertains.
Yes vote gets a bump.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/28/boost-scottish-independence-undecided-voters-yes-camp
Yes, Ben, Russia does seem to have responded robustly:
http://rt.com/business/176200-moscow-hague-yukos-ruling/
Hmm. Maybe Khodorkovsky (and the No campaign) are experiencing the Curse of Blair? Blair was reputedly nearly as close to K’s partner, Lebedev, as he was to Gaddafi. Then.
“The Russian Finance Ministry meanwhile blasted the arbitration ruling as based on “one-sided investigation with one-sided application of evidence.”
Heh. This never happens, Peacewisher. Or can we think of more than a dozen cases?
Is this anon and habba initiation?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f60_1406545156
The top of my Google search for “Sir Michael Wright” looks like this:
Sir Michael Wright – Crown Office Chambers
http://www.crownofficechambers.com › Members › Juniors over 10 years
Practice Overview. CAREER SUMMARY After completing his pupillage with Hugh Griffiths (later Lord Griffiths), he practised at the Common Law Bar from 2, …
Profile: Sir Michael Wright – The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com › News › UK news › Jean Charles de Menezes
2 Dec 2008 – The Oxford-educated Sir Michael Wright will have needed to draw on all the experience gained from his distinguished 20 years at the bar when …
Sir Michael Wright Authorised Biography | Debrett’s People …
http://www.debretts.com/people-of-today/profile/…/(John)-Michael-WRIGHT
Style Sir Michael Wright. Career Nat Serv RA 1951-53, 2 Lt 1952, Lt 1953, TA 1953-56, TARO 1956-; called to the Bar Lincoln’s Inn 1957 (bencher 1983, treas …
The Disgraceful Sir Michael Wright, A Grovelling Tool of the …
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2008/12/the_disgraceful/
3 Dec 2008 – Sir Michael Wright, coroner in the Jean Charles de Menezes inquiry, who has told the jury they are not permitted to return a verdict of unlawful …
Hammond’s at Defence now. Expect an uptick in bellicose language directed towards Russia (good job, Dave – Barack).
Hey presto, we get 1350 UK troops off to Poland for this autumn’s Exercise Black Eagle.
Black Eagle. Sounds ominous.
This involves the US and UK. It’s a NATO exercise. How many countries are taking part and why can’t I find a reference to Exercise Black Eagle on the NATO website?
It smells of another “coalition of the willing” i.e. the UK trotting obediently behind its master, and whichever European leader happens to be having ideas of Greatness in that particular electoral cycle.
The fuckers are serious. They really want to go toe-to-toe with Russia and have trumped up yet more gobshite to do it.
Have we all forgotten how the US and UK have lied to us over the last 15 fuckin years, about everything from WMD to their own expenses?
Time you got a grip of this, Craig, and wrote something about the coming war between us and Russia. Whoever’s behind it, we do have to try and raise a little squeak of protest before it happens. How about it?
Suggestion: check out the twitter hashtag #Israelification.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/04/report-israeli-model-underlies-militarization-of-u-s-police/
How many of those involved in the killing of Jean Charles De Menezes had training in Israel?
http://tinyurl.com/lz2e4lq
Black Eagle. Sounds ominous.
Sounds American. Brit operation names are usually intentionally meaningless and emotionally neutral. Septics always overdramatise. Doesn’t work on Russians, though.
We’ve been supplying about 1/10 of the boots on the ground when being America’s only combatant friend…I don’t think 13,500 is going to frighten Putin. We want to draw a line round Poland and the Balts, which is well overdue.
Statement: Legal experts and human rights defenders demand international community end Israel’s collective punishment of Gaza
In its Advisory Opinion in the Nuclear Weapons case, the ICJ stated that the principle of distinction, which requires belligerent States to distinguish between civilian and combatants, is one of the “cardinal principles” of international humanitarian law and one of the “intransgressible principles of international customary law”.
The principle of distinction is codified in Articles 48, 51(2) and 52(2) of the Additional Protocol I of 1977 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, to which no reservations have been made. According to Additional Protocol I, “attacks” refer to “acts of violence against the adversary, whether in offence or in defence” (Article 49). Under both customary international law and treaty law, the prohibition on directing attacks against the civilian population or civilian objects is absolute. There is no discretion available to invoke military necessity as a justification.
Contrary to Israel’s claims, mistakes resulting in civilian casualties cannot be justified: in case of doubt as to the nature of the target, the law clearly establishes that an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes (such as schools, houses, places of worship and medical facilities), are presumed as not being used for military purposes. During these past weeks, UN officials and representatives have repeatedly called on Israel to strictly abide by the principle of precaution in carrying out attacks in the Gaza Strip, where risks are greatly aggravated by the very high population density, and maximum restraint must be exercised to avoid civilian casualties. HRW has noted that these rules exist to minimize mistakes “when such mistakes are repeated, it raises the concern of whether the rules are being disregarded.”
Moreover, even when targeting clear military objectives, Israel consistently violates the principle of proportionality: this is particularly evident with regard to the hundreds of civilian houses destroyed by the Israeli army during the current military operation in Gaza. With the declared intention to target a single member of Hamas, Israeli forces have bombed and destroyed houses although occupied as residencies by dozens of civilians, including women, children, and entire families.
It is inherently illegal under customary international law to intentionally target civilian objects, and the violation of such a fundamental tenet of law can amount to a war crime. Issuing a ‘warning’ – such as Israel’s so-called roof knocking technique, or sending an SMS five minutes before the attack – does not mitigate this: it remains illegal to wilfully attack a civilian home without a demonstration of military necessity as it amounts to a violation of the principle of proportionality. Moreover, not only are these ‘warnings’ generally ineffective, and can even result in further fatalities, they appear to be a pre-fabricated excuse by Israel to portray people who remain in their homes as ‘human shields’……
Full Piece @
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/international-collective-punishment.html
P.S…. very apt Comment Re Law from –
Harry Law
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/international-collective-punishment.html/comment-page-1#comment-694103
I ACCEPT THAT WHAT I AM ABOUT TO POST IS OFF TOPIC – BUT – AS REGARDS THIS TOPIC AS DISTINCT FROM THIS THEAD – IT IS ON TOPIC RELATIVE TO WHAT IS UNFOLDING IN THE WORLD – THUS IS SAY…
It is clear to me that the following is the true position:-
1. The US is perfectly content to permit Israel to continue building settlements beyond the 1967 borders, without any word of protest or insistence on going back to the internationally recognised border.
2. That in the context of US foreign policy international law is not to be applied and/or addressed when it comes to the Israel/Palestinian conflict.
3. That the US position in or on Gaza is the equivalent of a Trojan Horse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIg2XeSrx18