Coe Better Protected Than Blatter By Corrupt National Authorities 1875


Why are the Metropolitan Police not feeling Tory Lord Sebastian Coe’s collar and trawling his hard drives? I blogged recently about his involvement in awarding the World Athletics Championships without a vote to the hometown of his long term paymasters and sponsors, Nike. Plus the £12 million his promotions company made from VIP hospitality packages for the Olympics, the VIP tickets for which were allocated by the Organising Committee of which he was the £600,000 pa chairman.

Now we have this, from the person Coe works closest with in the IAAF and who he has now promoted to head the President’s office since Coe assumed that title:

« Dear Papa,

Following our discussion earlier I have already had some thoughts and believe that we need to do the following, in the strict confidence and control within a small circle of senior IAAF staff only. This must be very secret.
(…)

4. Finally, as soon as possible, and ‘unofficially’ PR campaign to ensure that we avoid international media scandals related to the Moscow Championships especially in the British press, where the worst of the articles is coming from. This will require specialist PR skills (working only with me directly) from London, but I believe that if we consider using CSM we can also benefit from Seb’s political influence in the UK. It is in his personal interest to ensure that the Moscow World Champs is a success and that people do not think that the media of his own country are trying to destroy it. We can work extremely hard in stopping any planed ‘attack’ on Russia from the British press in the coming weeks.

5. Finally, I need to be able to sit down with the Anti-doping department and understand exactly what Russian ‘skeleton’ we have still in the cupboard regarding doping. I think that the time to have unveiled the various athletes was a long time ago and that now we need to be smart. These athletes, of course, should NOT be part of any Russian team for these World Championships and Valentin should be pressurised to make sure this is the case. If the guilty ones are not competing then we might as well wait until the event is over to announce them. Or we announce one or two BUT AT THE SAME TIME as athletes from other countries. Also we can prepare a special dossier on IAAF testing which will show that one of the reasons why these Russian athletes come up positive is that they get tested a lot !!! In the same way, we can make the point that the WADA laboratory is the responsibility of WADA not IAAF and that if WADA decides there really is a problem, we have a plan B to do the tests in Lausanne instead (Gabriel confirmed this to me yesterday).

Papa, as soon as I have an idea of the price of this unofficial PR campaign I will let you know, but I will do everything in my power to protect the IAAF and the President.

All the best Nick »

So what does the Establishment now wish us to believe?

a) As long-term Vice President of the IAAF, Coe had no idea the organisation was massively corrupt and the President was taking huge bribes to cover-up doping scandals.
b) Coe had no idea his close associate and now head of his office Nick Davies was writing to the son of the President proposing that Coe’s company and Coe’s “political influence” be used to keep doping scandals out of the British media.
c) Coe’s meeting, while Vice President of the IAAF, with executives of his sponsor Nike, to discuss awarding the World Athletics Championships to Eugene, had no bearing at all on the decision of the President of IAAF to award the games to Eugene without a vote.

All that is even less convincing than Sepp Blatter’s declarations of innocence. Yet there is an utter difference in the British media’s treatment of Blatter and of “Lord” Coe.

I wonder why?


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

1,875 thoughts on “Coe Better Protected Than Blatter By Corrupt National Authorities

1 51 52 53 54 55 63
  • Macky

    JSD; “I am wondering why you saw fit to repeat what is a very serious charge from someone with the credibility of Giyane”

    Sorry, but I’m not buying the apparent fact that you are not aware of the standard literary practice of quoting whatever it is that you wish to comment on; two posters made remarks about you, one called you a troll & the other a Zionist shill, I quoted them not necessarily because I agreed with them, but because I wish to add my own opinion, which I did; expressing neither confirmation or negation of either of the two quotes, but just that I am unsure of what to make of you. Your apparent ignorance of such a standard literary practice & your curious inability to see that I didn’t express agreement, indeed even asking me for evidence of the quoted remarks,smacks not of being paranoid, but I’m sorry to say, of being disingenuous, and further adds to my unease about you.

    JSD; “The aim of which interventions seems ambiguous, and which results have been ambiguous?”

    Not sure if we have had exchanges before, but your out of the blue attack on me on New Year’s Day, in which you bizarrely accused me of being “divisive”, all couched in hypocritical politeness, didn’t make a good impression, not only for the strange dichotomy style, but also for the nonsense it contained; how you managed to single me out for being divisive, as if we are all one big happy family here, is most strange; perhaps it’s been escaping your notice that this blog is under constant undermining attack by a handful of very active pro-Establishment Apologists. Next ambiguous incident is your discouragement of a certain ex-Poster not to pursue a harassment case, especially on the grounds that the person had had several exchanges with the Harasser; now you may have given this advice with the very best possible intentions, but the end result was that the Harasser expressed a obvious sigh of relief, when the ex-Poster seemed to have taken your advice, so there’s your second ambiguous case
    Now, I’m no lawyer, and neither are you, and I’ve seen all of this sordid episode, unlike yourself, and to my mind if on-line harassment laws are not applicable in a case like this, then they are not fit for purpose; further your argument that the victim by engaging with the Harasser, invalidates the case, I also personally find suspect, as I recall that for a long while the victim did refuse to engage, and then only in the third person, and was roundly criticized by other malice motivated Posters, and I think it’s totally unreasonable to expect a person not to eventually react to blatant lies & smears, and that to assert that because of this, the Harasser has no case to answer.

    Now you may be on the level, with just a strange style about you that puts me on unease, and all this may well be all down to my own paranoia, but I repeat, I am simply unsure about you.

  • fred

    “If the stuff was half as toxic as has been suggested people would be dropping like flies.”

    Yes but if they can keep attention on the harmless people will be ignoring something which is harmful in toothpaste both on a personal and an environmental level.

    More and more products contain plastic microbeads, so small they pass right through sewage treatment plants and non biodegradable so they will build up in the environment and cause some real problems.

    The petition to ban them only has 4,500 signatures, a chance here for the Murray Keyboard Warriors to do some good in the world.

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/104464

  • Herbie

    “The thing about science is that it’s not some sort of religion (as – sadly – an awful lot of people seem to think).”

    Yes, Glenn.

    Nor does it follow the gushingly naive, childlike, ideal model, you’ve outlined at 8.18pm.

    In the real world, you see, there are other factors to consider.

    There are pressures and compromises to be made, I’m afraid.

    There are institutional pressures. There are policy pressures. There are funding pressures. There are even theoretical pressures.

    That’s why one doesn’t, as you so readily do, dismiss out of hand independent research which contradicts that handed down in public policy edicts.

  • nevermind the new year, Feldmann....resign FFS, or come clean about Elliot Johnson

    “It’s uttedrly pathetic to see normally critical people here on this blog , even Craig included, rushing into the safety of the arms of Freemasonry, when faced with what really scares them, real faith.”

    Giyanne, take a break, you are talking nonsense. I for one resent being called a Freemasons mall.

    As a stonemason I have always been appalled at the nonchalant Victorian takeover of the basic trade symbols and abilities stonemasons learned from ME masons and Arabic mathematician.

    They used secrecy to cloak themselves in magic, which attracted many , especially those who thought themselves as public servants and advanced their very own personal goals through this mantle of secrecy.

    I have had approaches from freemasons, more than once, I have seen good people bankrupted because they trusted their brethren, by the collaboration of freemasons to exorcise one of their own, that particular lodge was a racket.

    That is the last thing I shall say on thuis subject its a little long in the tooth, whilst the world around us is imploding.

    An apology, I seem to have mixed up my ppb with ppm yesterday, the vagaries of retaining age old information from the 1980 campaigns.

    @all, thanks for the trawling up of the fluoride evidence, with that much knowledge we ought to be able to control the use of this toxic substance, but it is still cloaked with the Halo of health and medical benefits. The real reason, off course, is the multinational pressure of profiteers and multinationals who have carved out their markets shares on our pliable PPPs (puppet party politicians.)

    What would happen if we would go back to cleaning sticks and/or brush our teeth with a sea salt solution? It would be heresy to them and as long as this by product exist, they would try everything to carry on administering us with this toxic chemical.

    BTW. warning to vegetarians, wash your veg well, especially from conventionally farmed sources.

    The humble iceberg lettuce can contain 180ppm of it, yes, that’s ninety times the allowed water dosage, potatoes, on the outside, 22ppm, inside 2ppm, and Citrus fruit are allowed 95ppm, very high that.

    Scrub your veg well because the application, Cryolit (sodium, aluminium fluoride) is especially sticky.

  • glenn

    Herbie: “In the real world, you see, there are other factors to consider. “

    Yes, well you’re clearly a “big picture” kind of guy, who can weigh in a lot more factors than simple folk like myself.

    Are you still factoring in such mighty considerations, while answering the problem you apparently had identified (in your own chosen example)? If you recall, you wanted to know (from me, for some strange reason) “What methodology and science was employed that resulted in the advice to avoid saturated fat, and instead opt for low-fat products?”

    My answer was Look at this particular case, study it, criticise it, find the flaws, and once you’ve identified the problems in it, tell us about it! Even more importantly, tell them!

    How long will your real-worldy, other-factor-y analysis be taking, then?

  • Herbie

    The question was primarily rhetorical, Glenn.

    Only there to assist your thinking on the matter.

    Since it clearly didn’t help, I was much more explicit in my subsequent post, detailing precisely why your naive idealised view of science in the real world is so wanting.

    You have a bit of form in championing “official” sources, so no harm in pointing out just how compromised they often are.

  • glenn

    Fair enough, Herbie – you’re obviously too concerned with the Big Picture to concern yourself with trifling details such as the actual example you hand-picked. I appreciate your attempts to educate me, will consider myself duly chastised, and strive towards your standards – although you’ll probably understand that you set the bar very high for the rest of us.

  • Herbie

    In the example, Glenn, I think you’ll find that the weight of independent evidence, finally so overwhelmed the public policy edict that they changed it.

    Pity it took forty odd years or so.

    Not exactly optimal, for simple scientific methood is it.

    Those institutional pressures, you see.

  • glenn

    I see, Herbie – help me out here. Were those “institutional pressures” coming from the sugar industry? Would you mind identifying them for those of us without your insight?

    After all, the NHS now recommends drinking very little (despite those institutional pressures from the booze industry), not smoking (despite the huge tobacco lobby), and so on. Please flesh out your big-picture understanding of why this bad advice was there, and why it remained, and why the situation is so different for booze & smoking.

    Btw, I hope you’re not one of those lunatics who think the only reason for vaccinations are to provide money for the Big Pharma monsters, even as it visits huge harm on the population for zero benefit.

  • Doug Scorgie

    Giyane
    4 Jan, 2016 – 10:36 pm

    Bouncy Castle salesman
    ……………………………………………………………………………

    From your link:

    “32-year-old former bouncy castle salesman from east London [was] able to travel to Syria with his wife and four children under the noses of the security services, despite being on bail for alleged terrorism offences”
    ……………………………………………………………………………

    Another terrorist well known to the security services.

    He was on bail but they never thought to confiscate his passport?

  • Herbie

    I think it’s best if you try to work it out for yourself, Glenn.

    Less antagonism that way, eh. No need for antagonism.

    Happy to help, though.

    I’ve mentioned above that there are a number of pressures upon the simple scientific model, in the real world.

    I’m not sure you’ve quite accepted that yet.

    Here they are again:

    There are institutional pressures. There are policy pressures. There are funding pressures. There are even theoretical pressures.

    Or, look at it this way:

    Does public health policy derive solely from science?

    Simple enough. Think about it.

    You see, it’s not a criticism of scientific method to say that there are other influences and pressures on public health policy.

    Don’t be so knee-jerk about it.

    It’s simple common sense.

    Just open your mind a bit.

  • Republicofscotland

    “BTW, does this look “staged” to you too?”

    _______________

    No Glenn it doesn’t, unlike the other one.

  • glenn

    Sure, Herbie – there’s no need for antagonism, no more than there’s a need for your lofty condescension. It’s always nice to have someone explain to me how the world works, but does it have to be done in such a patronising manner?

    The point – which you’ve steered us away from rather well – was whether nuclear by-product was being disposed of in the public water supply for no good reason (as asserted by Lysias), and whether fluoride was simply a deadly poison with no upside at all. A conspiracy involving almost every government in the developed world.

    Apparently you cannot accept anything from institutions – not even a Cochrane review? – so what are you left with? “Common sense” just doesn’t wash when it comes to such matters.

  • Republicofscotland

    So the top civil servant of the Treasury, (if you can call him that) Sir Nicholas MacPherson is standing down after 33 years in the department.

    Sir Nicholas who headed a UK public department that was mean’t to be neutral (it wasn’t) during the Scottish referendum worked on 33 budgets.

    Alex Salmond said Sir Nicholas MacPherson should’ve done the decent thing during the Scottish referendum, and resign due to his lack of impartiality, however Nick, as Gideon Osborne likes to call him, hunkered down behind his desk till the storm blew over.

  • Republicofscotland

    So the new “Jihadi John” in the video calls David Cameron an imbecile (can’t fault that) he then goes on to say we will invade your land, and rule by Sharia law.

    Invade your land, they can’t even push back Assads forces nevermind invade any land. However they’re particularly good at driving oil tankers from Syria to Turkey.

    As for the executions if they’re real (debatable) the men in my opinion are either captured Assad fighters or worse 5 random Syrian men sacrificed to frighten Western denizens, which may just allow Nato forces to go to the next level of engagement, with the backing of the public.

    More intriguing is the child in the video, who the Telegraph newspaper claims (aka Whitehall Gazette) is the son of a woman who’s ambition is to kill a British or American hostage.

    Prime Minister David Cameron, adds “It’s all very desperate stuff, and it’s proof Daesh are on the back foot.”

  • Republicofscotland

    So it’s come to light that since David Cameron has been prime minister arms deals with Saudi Arabia have amounted to £5.6 billions pounds.

    But Cameron can’t be blamed for all tha arms sold to Saudi Arabia by Britain, no the sales first began in 1965, according to investigative journalist Andrew Feinstein.

    When Britain exported 42 fighter jets with add ons so to speak. Parliamentary secretary John Stonehouse who was instrumental in the deal was later convicted of fraud.

    The 70’s saw the Saudi princes take a 20% cut of any arms deals and pocket it according to UK ambassador Willie Morris.

    The biggest corrupt arms deal between Saudi Arabia and Britain came in 1985 the £43 billion Al Yamamah deal, it brought BAE, BP and Shell into the mix in what would be later know as the oil for arms deal.

  • Macky

    Trowbridge H. Ford; “HE HAS BEEN BANNED?”

    Not for the first time, yet he will be back, meanwhile prepare for even more very Habba-like “new” commentators.

  • Herbie

    “Apparently you cannot accept anything from institutions”

    Haven’t said anything like that.

    What I’ve been saying to you is simply that public health policy is not a translation of science into policy.

    It’s a very much compromised transaction.

    More evidence based, less compromised, is certainly better. Of course.

  • fred

    “I imagine fred”

    I don’t imagine you as anything.

    You are obviously a nasty little retarded shit who posts personal attacks against other posters because they have no rational arguments.

1 51 52 53 54 55 63

Comments are closed.