Tonight I am appearing at a panel discussion following the screening of the long-awaited film by George Galloway, The Killings of Tony Blair. I shall have the dubious pleasure of debating with John McTernan, who has never lacked brass neck but does deserve some credit for appearing to represent the forces of darkness before what I imagine will be a very hostile audience. The other panel members are Michael Mansfield and Lauren Booth.
The film has been predictably lambasted by the mainstream media. But it does include some very essential first hand evidence – myself apart, two other British Ambassadors tell what they themselves witnessed, as do Cabinet members. Noam Chomsky adds some important perceptions. This cannot just be dismissed by cries of “Oh look! George Galloway’s in a hat!! Remember when he was on Big Brother!!” The mainstream media’s response to this film has been unanimously puerile.
The Blair-loving Guardian gave the film two stars and called it “sanctimonious”. If one cannot express moral condemnation of a man who forced through an aggressive war, directly killing hundreds of thousands and destabilising both the Middle East and communities in Europe, and who then went on to make multiple millions of pounds promoting vicious dictatorships, then are we to suspend the very idea of ethics itself?
The Guardian subscribes to the world view propounded weekly by Nick Cohen, that to appear on an Iranian government TV channel is a far greater sin than to promote a war which killed and maimed countless thousands of small children. None of the many contributors appeared in the film under a mistaken belief that George Galloway is perfect. That George (whom I first met in Dundee in 1977) is not perfect in no way detracts from the evidence stated against Tony Blair. On Iraq, George was both right and brave. I would add that I did not for one moment consider refusing to take part on the grounds that George is a unionist.
Getting cinema screenings for an independent documentary film is extremely difficult. This is what is available so far.
I assume there are plans to make it available on wider platforms later.
The Killing$ Of Tony Blair – Official Trailer from The Killing of Tony Blair – Film on Vimeo.
Looking forward to seeing this – somehow.
great if you live in London and are mobile, as usual!
You’ll be able to stream it pretty soon, they do need to recoup. Though.
This important film should be available online for maximum viewing. I’m certain you’ll add your knowledgeable weight to the discussion.
An excellent venture and your position on it seems entirely reasonable.
Great stuff! I’d like to be a fly on the wall tonight! Best news I’ve heard for some time. Sock it to ’em!
“I assume there are plans to make it available on wider platforms later.”
Nothing near me yet. I’ve contacted a cinema-owner in Birmingham I know to see if he will put it on, or if he knows where it might be being screened.
I would have thought the Everyman would show it? Birmingham used to be excellent for art house cinemas – better than London I think – certainly 25 years ago when my brother was at uni there.
From 29/07 to 04/08:
– Bath, Little Theatre Cinema
– Bradford, Picturehouse Bradford At The National Media Museum
– Norwich, Cinema City Picturehouse
http://www.londonnet.co.uk/films/thekillingoftonyblair.html
How much is a ticket then? and are those who crowd funded the film getting in free?
This is the pricing at the Norwich Cinema City for this film
does not look like George’s supporters and crowd funders areb getting in free.
Price: £9.10, child £5.60, concs £8.10, mems £7, family £25, before 5pm £8, child £5.50, concs £7, mems £6, family £23, mon £7, child £5.50, concs £6, mems £5, family £21, big scream £6.50, kids’ club £3
Wasn’t it crowd-funded? Shouldn’t it therefore be made available for free on the Internet, or would that leave George out of pocket?
Given that the crowdfunding raised £164 K or so, I imagine he’ll be out of pocket anyway, though it hurts me to say so. That’s astonishingly cheap for a cinema release, and it took a very long time. I can’t remember whether a profit-sharing clause was included in the crowdfunding appeal: my impression was that funders got preferential treatment, tickets etc. It was understood from the beginning that this wouldn’t be going straight into the free media, however.
Not bold enough to ident yourself with your critique, eh? Your comments are only worthy if there is a person attached.!
Galloway apparently sold his house to pay for the shortfall, and says he is living in rented accommodation. The crowd funding did not cover the inevitable rise in costs of not just the filming but the licenses paid for use of copyright material.
You can bet your life George will put it up on the internet – but give the guy a chance to make a bit first!
His campaigns (generally good ones) need funding.
What’s the big rush to see it? Maybe you could get crowd funded for the ticket price!
I didn’t realize you were such a great fan of ‘Gorgeous George’!
I’d be very interested in the outcome of the debate …. and as an aside, what is Michael Mansfield’s view of the the high court action by Michael Foster and the alleged zionist influence on the Labour party. Have a good debate Craig! I wonder what stance Lauren Booth wil adopt….
Hope it comes to Brighton….The Duke of York cinema is independent and a possible location??
Quiet amazing how Archant’s newspapers are collaborating with the new Labour renegades. Our local establishment newspaper of the year 2014/15, the EDP, will not allow any of Corbyn’s principled policy to be debated, but if you want to sling invectives untruth or lies about Corby and his followers, you are very welcome to leave a vile message.
http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/norwich_south_mp_clive_lewis_backs_jeremy_corbyn_in_labour_leadership_campaign_1_4632979
Excellent pic.
I wonder if the film gives the Arch-demon Tony Blair any credit for the saving of many lives by his successful Statesmanship regarding the Northern Ireland peace process and the Goid Friday agreement? Or will he be painted as a figure akin to Himmler and Heydrich, deliberately joining in with the invasion as a means to foster sectarian civil war? Somehow I imagine the concept of nuance and balance may be lacking.
I don’t think anyone has ever doubted that the Northern Ireland peace process was perhaps Blair’s only decent achievement, but he was one of many involved in that process (one of whom died from cancer) and NI does not quite compensate for the catastrophe of the Iraq War. Not does it compensate for an orgy of PFI debt, the disaster of faith schools, or the grasping greed through associations with the world’s worst despots.
Not good enough I’m afraid. Let’s stick with ‘killings’ shall we, as that’s the theme of the film and the main charge.
Blair was not just ‘anyone’ regarding the GFA, he was the British prime minister, generally considered the leading figure.
If you want to talk about PFI and other awful initiatives that’s a whole other subject, but regarding the subject of greed, hypocrisy and outright criminality, when it comes to Corbyn’s team the charge sheet could be laid at Diane Abbott, Seumas Milne and Corbyn’s close aid convicted of electoral fraud.
PFI was indeed disastrous, however I also note that McDonnells much heralded team of world renowned economists have recently bailed on him, which doesn’t paint a very promising picture of likely economic competence.
It’s a messy and very imperfect world!
There are 29 police investigations being held up /going slow at present, for criminal intent to cook the books, breaking electoral law and rules, just to keep you on the carpet, and this fraud, although it happens in both main parties, is outshining all others at the moment.
We should have had 29 by-elections by now, Jim, in Conservative held seats. Not a peeps of it in the media, versus a crescendo of demented and scared accusation’s against Corbyn and his supporters.
Blair built upon Mo Mowlams essential groundwork, her trust building was pivotal, before and during the discussion, her determination to come to a peaceful solution is much underrated, but will be seen by historians as what it was, building peace.
Can you just give us a reference to what it is you charge Diane Abbot, Seumas Milne and Corbyn with?
Blair and Brown were financially incompetent, they could not see what it would mean to sell all the gold reserves, what it would mean to implement a perfectly ready financial regulation for the City of London in 2006, it was ready and shelved after Blair dismissed it.
This is not about the personalities involved, its about principles and taking control over austerity, waste and fraud that is happening, hence the scared right wing papers and their proprietary predators.
why anyone could be asking for more of the same is beyond me.
Yep, I know Nevermind, depressing stuff. All I’m saying is hypocrisy and human fallibility are found everywhere, people are so blinkered they don’t allow themselves to see it though. I’m as guilty as the next person, but am trying to form an accurate overall ‘picture’ for myself without become too jaded & cynical.
I must say though, some of Craig’s posts (on Laura Kuennsberg and the 38 degrees affair for instance) really do seem beyond the pale. I’ve shown him clearly that his position on this is tenuous at the best, in my opinion it’s outright dishonest. The phone call to the 38 degrees office is absolutely pathetic ‘evidence’. And I trawled through hours of FranzB’s LK ‘bias’ from election night to point by point show it was complete rubbish. Not a peep from Craig. That’s dishonest and disrespectful behaviour.
Just seen the bit about Abbott & Milne etc. I got carried away by the LK affair stuff!
Abbott & Milne’s hypocrisy is regarding their schooling of their own children. I’ve posted on this before, you must know about it surely? Michael Rosen wrote an open letter to Diane which was brilliantly to the point and scathing.
We have to disagree Jim, Laura Kuensberg had overstepped the mark and it was mentioned by ex BBC bosses, not just Craig.
She was the best paid Conservative party spokesperson the BBC ever employed as a political correspondent.
The 38 deg. retraction of a 35.000 petition, was a scare job without grounds. Comments on twitter were used to discredit the petition and the puppets at 38 deg. colluded with BBC/party political pressure to withdraw it.
That was my last petition signed with 38deg., a sad day.
Jim,
It always astonishes me how some people seem to have a tin ear for the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg. Does it perhaps coincide with agreement with her views? In the examples below, quoted recently by Media Lens, would you say that the Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn, elected by a massive majority, deserves to be interrupted and snorted over; whereas Michael Gove making his case for ditching his colleague Johnson and putting himself forward for the Tory party leadership must be treated with utmost respect and patience?
The ‘impartiality’ of BBC News and its political editor Laura Kuenssberg…
Exhibit 1:
In full Laura Kuenssberg interviews Jeremy Corbyn
Exhibit 2:
In full: Michael Gove interview with Laura Kuenssberg
By the way…
Jim wrote:
“Abbott & Milne’s hypocrisy is regarding their schooling of their own children.”
Whenever someone points at someone for doing what’s best for their children in the circumstances, I don’t see the hyprocrisy pointed at, I see the nasty child hatred of the pointer.
Nevermind :
To quote the Dude, ‘that just like, your opinion, man!’. The ‘evidence’ I referred to was indeed evidence, for her impartiality. As I said, I tediously went through it all, and none of it held up at all. You could go back and check it all yourself if you like.
Dave: running low on battery juice & time, I’ll get back to you when I’ve read your replies properly in an hour or two.
Dave : Ooooh, just seen that ‘child hater’ bit, God that’s weak!
Nevermind :
As I pointed out to Craig several times, his telephone conversation ‘evidence’ with a 38 degrees staffer (un-named), is utterly pathetic. He’s libelling David Babbs and Joe, the very organiser of the petition itself (so certainly no love for LK) as liars. They did not think to get screen grabs of the abuse they witnessed on Twitter. Why should they lie? Unless you believe the conspiraloon bullshit that they were ‘leaned on’ by mysterious and powerful forces. Give me a break, it’s total drivel. Craig makes himself look a completely absurd, not to mention dishonest character. A child could pick holes in this nonsense.
Nevermind :
And also the 35,000 signatures already on the petition were forwarded as per the petitioners wishes. Then the whole thing was pulled for the very good reasons David and Joe gave.
And talking of misogyny, there was talk of ‘tarts’ and ‘bitches’ on this very site a couple of days ago, from some regulars. Not a peep from Craig.
Jim wrote:
Ooooh, just seen that ‘child hater’ bit, God that’s weak!
How would you describe your attitude to other people’s children, if you begrudge them having the best education their parents can provide for them under the circumstances? I call that hatred. Maybe I should have said envy?
Dave Price :
It’s not my opinion, it’s the opinion of the well known child-hater and children’s poet laureate Michael Rosen. The complete child hating bastard.
Dave Price :
So the children’s laureate and noted socialist Michael Rosen is also an envious child hating bastard? And Diane Abbott is a paragon of socialist virtue by example? Hmm.
Nevermind :
Just noticed your claim re: the lack of any media scrutiny of the Tory election fraud. There’s lots in the Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/01/judge-grants-extension-to-police-investigation-into-tory-election?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
And channel 4 broke the story if I remember correctly. Bet there’s zilch in the Torygraph though! I’ll have a quick google.
Jim wrote:
“It’s not my opinion, it’s the opinion of the well known child-hater and children’s poet laureate Michael Rosen. The complete child hating bastard.”
If the cap fits…
Dave Price :
Michael Rosen as an envious child-hating bastard isn’t very convincing though is it?
The GFA came about through war-weariness, the IRA taking the war to Britain and the US threatening to stop money flowing from the USA to the IRA. Everyone saw the way the wind was blowing, even the prods.
Jim,
What did you think of ‘Exhibit 1’ and ‘Exhibit 2’ above? You need only listen to the first 3 or 4 questions and answers in each case (in Corbyn’s case the video is edited so that you don’t hear the first question, so I’ve discounted that answer), though you’ll end up spending about four times as long with Gove I’m afraid. In Corbyn’s case you can clearly hear Kuenssberg on several occasions noisily taking a breath, implying impatience or disagreement with what Corbyn is saying and an intention to interrupt (no doubt there were visual cues too, that we can’t see) – all of which pressurises Corbyn to make somewhat hurried responses. Gove’s answers are all over a minute long, with just one interruption after a minute; Corbyn’s answers are between 10 and 15 seconds long, with interruptions and attempted interruptions.
In isolation they’re pretty meaningless Dave. You might care to go back to the 6 hours of continuous election night coverage, with timings helpfully provided by FranzB from the initial Laura K thread. I went through each purported instance of terrible bias and none of it matched the descriptions Franz gave. It’s all down in the record there if you care to check it out.
Dave Price :
At work Dave bit busy right now! I’ll get back to you at lunchtime. Cheers.
JIm said:
“Michael Rosen as an envious child-hating bastard isn’t very convincing though is it?”
Having just now read his highly unpleasant attack on Dianne Abbott, a fellow parent, I think it is convincing in that particular case. He’s clearly prepared to sacrifice someone else’s child’s future for the sake of political bluster. By the way, rather than you hide behind Michael Rosen, can you join with me and wish all the best to Dianne Abbott’s son in his school? Because that’s the only issue here, not the difficult choices that parents have to make in ‘a messy and imperfect world’.
How are you getting on with the Kuenssberg homework I set you?
Dave Price:
I’m not ‘hiding behind’ Michael Rosens opinion, I’m agreeing with it. It’s irrefutable hypocrisy from a high profile avowed socialist like Abbott to have done what she did. It’s a pure case of Orwell’s animal farm satire of left wing hypocrisy : All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
What the hell sort of impression does she think that gives the cause? And it’s the sheer affrontery of her wheedling excuses that really grates. She’s utterly shameless.
As I said earlier in regard to the LK footage, it’s feeble in isolation, unlike the 6 hour homework I gave you earlier. Get back to me when you’ve been through it.
Jim,
Thought you might be interested in this:
“The online and television media showed “clear and consistent bias” against Jeremy Corbyn at the start of the Labour leadership coup, according to new research, which also accuses the BBC of giving twice as much airtime to Corbyn’s critics than to his supporters on some programmes during the crisis.”
Jeremy Corbyn Study Claims TV And Online News ‘Persistently’ Biased Against Labour Leader
Yes I’ve already seen that Dave, and I agree with the conclusions.
Now, getting back to the specifics of the LK affair, how are you getting along with the election night coverage homework I set you?
And do you have any views on the repeated libels of David Babbs and Joe Hayden, the 38 degrees petitions organiser? Are you convinced by Craig’s ‘evidence’ in a telephone conversation with an exasperated 38 degrees staffer, rather than more compelling evidence in the form of conversations with, say, Joe himself? Have you read Joe’s testimony at the time as reported in the Independent, as to the reasons for his decision to pull the petition?
Jim,
I am already convinced by the two exhibits I have recommended for you: I don’t need to sit through six hours of election night coverage.
As for the 38 degrees climbdown I’m with Craig I’m afraid. I find the entire lack of misogynistic comment in the original petition convincing. However I fear no amount of to-and-fro between us here is going to convince you or me of the opposing view, so I suggest we just agree to differ.
Jim wrote:
“Not good enough I’m afraid. Let’s stick with ‘killings’ shall we, as that’s the theme of the film and the main charge.
Blair was not just ‘anyone’ regarding the GFA, he was the British prime minister, generally considered the leading figure.”
What point are you trying to make? This is a film about Tony Blair and Iraq. It was partly funded by ordinary people through crowdfunding, and by Galloway selling his house. If you believe this should have been a film about Tony Blair and the Good Friday Agreement we now have an objective measure of how strong your belief is. Go for it!
As for Diane Abbott & co I second nevermind’s request for some evidence please.
Michael Rosen :
http://socialistreview.org.uk/280/education-dear-diane-abbott
The film is called the killings of Tony Blair, just thought I’d give a little balance by daring to mention the saving-lives of Tony Blair, sorry if that offended you in some way.
Jim said:
“The film is called the killings of Tony Blair, just thought I’d give a little balance by daring to mention the saving-lives of Tony Blair, sorry if that offended you in some way.”
No offence taken at any point, old boy. But you suggested that the film should give credit for the Good Friday Agreement. I responded that was not in its remit. I am hopeful of seeing your personally-financed epic ‘Blair and The Good Friday Agreement’ in a few years time.
LOL Dave @14.32
No all my money shall be going towards a film called “Indefatigable Fascist Bastards and their Friends”
To be preceded by the short cartoon “Catman laps up the cream”
Jim, The film’s title has a dollar sign after the word killing. So it is not just about the state sanctioned murder of hundreds of thousands and the starvation or neglect of perhaps a million others through food and medical blockades. The dollar sign represents how Blair braizenly cashed in on his “status” in the same way the Clintons did with their ghastly foundation. The methodology is this: Create instability and provocation in the middle east and elsewhere, and then present yourself as a “peace” or corporate-deal broker cashing in on the very instability you caused.
So when you say let’s stick to the killing, I am obliging you. “Killing” also means “making a killing” in the financial sense, or perhaps you missed the title of the film.
Leonard:
State sanctioned murder my arse, grow up. Blair criminally stupidly helped foment a vicious sectarian civil war. That’s a million miles from what you’re describing. And the idea that Blair deliberately fomented that sectarian nightmare as part of some plan to enrich himself is absolute garbage. I mean, do you really believe that rubbish?
Can’t reply, only 1% battery left! Nothing personal in this by the way, just robust argument. ?
Jim,
I never implied the methodology was planned from the start. Where did I say that? I mean that it became convenient after the event not to disown it or apologise for it, but actually to line his pockets from it. If it was just about a wrong decision that by itself is bad enough. The subsequent conversion of the instability to then go on to make money from it makes the crime so much worse.
Leonard:
You wrote : ‘The methodology goes like this…..’
What am I to make of that line of reasoning?
I agree with you totally about the post-disaster enrichment by the way. The guy’s beneath contempt for that. However, a lot of people make the absurd sort of allegations which you appeared to be making. Which is insane.
Out of interest, does anyone know if the vast personal enrichment everyone claims for Blair is as totally heinous as is claimed by his biggest detractors. Is there any mitigating evidence that lots of his personal fees for speaking engagements etc are disbursed into charitable causes, a bit like the Gates foundation stuff? If not, then I’ll get my pitchfork out and join you at the bonfire!
I’m finding lots of Daily Mail smeary stuff, some tedious religion bashing tendentious stuff from Dawkins. Some distinctly iffy-sounding links to Egypt, Kazakhstan though!
Zhanaozen. No more need be said, pass me a pitchfork, the guy’s a cnut.
Ostriches of the world unite!
If we’re counting bodies – let’s by all means stick with the killings – Blair’s still heavily in debt. And if we’re not, we might look at who was doing the heavy lifting in NI* and who took the credit (at every possible opportunity, and has singlehandedly failed to reconcile any two warring factions since. Notably the Labour Party).
*Notably Mo Mowlam. Remember her?
Tony Blair and ‘Statesmanship’ in the same sentence? Man, you MUST be living on another planet.
Little wonder Craig won’t reply to you. I’m 100% sure he has better things to do.
Meantime, +1 to Leonard and Baal.
Alcyone :
Better things to do like libelling and smearing people repeatedly like he does with David Babbs and Joe? Or unbelievable attempted smears of the McCanns? Or absolutely reprehensible attempted smears of Jo Cox’s husband within 24 hours of her murder?
I haven’t followed the former stories you mention. Can you spell out the source of your latter charge re Jo Cox’s murder please?
You’ll have to go back to whichever thread was relevant on the day following the murder. It was a loathsome little interjection, made my stomach churn.
Yes I’ve read it, so what was the “loathsome little interjection” and what did YOU understand from it?
I believe that you have completely misunderstood so I reject your assertions as rubbish.
And if you’ve lost respect for Craig, why are you stalking him?
If you don’t think that pathetic little interjection about Brendan Cox was contemptible coming 24 hours after his wife’s murder, on a blog that Craig is proud to state is read by many hundreds of thousands of people, then I’m lost for words. It was disgraceful. And you’ve got the gall to suggest I’m ‘stalking’ him, when he feels perfectly free to make such outrageous public insinuations repeatedly about other people. People like the McCanns, or David Babbs and Joe, the 38 degrees petitioner.
And I’d like to see some acknowledgement of the ‘bitch’ and ‘tart’ misogyny from some big JC fans on here the other day. Craig seems very happy to libel David and Joe as liars, but when it’s under his nose on his own blog…not a peep.
Jim, I have spent over an hour searching high and low on this site for this smear you accuse Craig of, but I have found nothing. The only mention of Brendan Cox that I can find is from November 2014.
Neither has Craig smeared the McCanns. He has correctly pointed out that they must have repeatedly left their children unattended.
Well it’s there, unless Craig has deleted it, which I almost wish he had, as I am aware that by talking about it I’m drawing further attention to the despicable little interjection. Alcyone found it when he looked earlier. I’m not going to repeat it as he was asking me to do on this thread. You’ll just have to have another look.
No, he has returned to the insinuation-laden speculative McCann smearing subject more than once. Its like something from the News of the World, with added smug self congratulation. Poisonous stuff, why on earth he thinks he’s got the right to publicly insinuate basically that they’ve killed their own child, is beyond me. It’s downright creepy.
Why would you have to search ‘high and low’? The murder took place only on one specific date.
Jim, I suppose you’re referring to Alcyone’s comment at 19:34; “Yes I’ve read it”, and I’m almost certain that the “it” Alcyone referred to was Craig’s thread about Jo Cox, NOT any “interjection” about Brendan Cox. Alcyone?
So Jim, if you don’t come up with a link and a quote, you should retract.
I used to moderate here. Craig is honest. He does not “sanitise” his own writing in the manner that you allege; rather, he retracts and apologises, as various examples on this site demonstrate. It would be pointless and stupid to remove such remarks since sites such as this are extensively mirrored and cached – indeed, Craig and commenters here have repeatedly used cached copies to expose such dishonesty, such as the occasion that this site exposed Anders Behring Breivik’s posts that Pamela Geller attempted to remove from her blog Atlas Shrugged.
Jim, I’m disappointed. Again, I think you should retract.
Jim, I searched high and low because I took you for honest, so I checked Craig’s original post about the murder of Jo Cox, subsequent posts, and all of Craig’s comments that I could find – blogs are not the easiest environment to search. But the “interjection” you allege is nowhere to be found. Could you have been confusing this site with another?
Clark: Jim might be referring to this comment:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/06/sad-death-jo-cox-terrorism/comment-page-1/#comments
—start quote
craig Post author
June 17, 2016 at 11:19
This is interesting
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1122773/pg1
—end quote
That article is now removed, with no trace in the Wayback machine either. I have a recollection of what it was about, which centred around supposedly inappropriate behaviour by Jo Cox’s husband in the immediate aftermath of her assassination by a right-wing extremist. I thought the article a bit inappropriate and uncomfortable to read, like the impression one gets after reading of heartless individuals, questioning the existence of victims of the Sandy Hook massacre.
FWIW, that’s what I recall in the briefest glance at that thread. Maybe that got Jim a bit worked up.
I think the article is still up, on a different link: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1123463/pg1
Aside from a few sinister conjectures in the comments section, there’s nothing much to get worked up about.
Glenn, thank you. Here is Jim’s original objection:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/06/sad-death-jo-cox-terrorism/comment-page-1/#comment-603694
So Craig hasn’t deleted his own words. Iit never was anything that Craig himself wrote, but something that he linked to and called “interesting”.
Clark: Yes, and by “interesting”, I don’t think CM meant he endorsed the article! Rather, it was a side-issue he probably forgot about, a possible avenue to follow up, since it showed someone had an interest in trying to throw doubt on what fairly clearly happened.
Such as when the NRA like useful idiots to throw doubt around, where it concerns the Sandy Hook massacre. Obviously, their lovely little honest battlefield, military grade weapons are harmless, and only used in “home defence”. They couldn’t possibly hurt anyone, even while every nutjob, criminal, or just plain old ammo-sexual can get hold of them at a moment’s notice.
Back to the point – Jim might have misconstrued that reference to a personal attack on Jo Cox’s husband, which is a bit unfair. However, his gripe was based on what he saw, so he’s truthful about that.
Jim, you seem to have an interesting set of priorities. You wrote:
– “Any smidgen of respect I harboured for Craig has disappeared”
merely because Craig linked to an article about allegations of sexual harassment by two women against Brendan Cox. Yet you attempt guilt by association of misogyny because Craig hasn’t condemned use of the word “bitch” in a comment he most probably hasn’t even seen!
So all Craig’s human rights work, his sacrifice of his career to expose torture, his work to expose a plot to attack Iran, his blogging to expose the mass murderer Brievic’s political motivations, and so much else – for you, all this pales into insignificance compared to one link, and neglecting to denounce use of the word “bitch”. I’m reminded of Craig’s comment above:
– “The Guardian subscribes to the world view propounded weekly by Nick Cohen, that to appear on an Iranian government TV channel is a far greater sin than to promote a war which killed and maimed countless thousands of small children”.
Well you’re convincing me, but in precisely the opposite direction than you seem to intend. My resolve to support Corbyn is strengthened.
Clark :
Don’t try and pull that rubbish with me. There are several regulars on here who witnessed it and posted comments at the time in distaste. I posted myself to the effect that I’d lost any smidgen of respect I had for Craig in posting stuff like that. He knows it’s true, if he’s deleted his comment and is remaining schtum that’s even more reprehensible. At least have the decency to admit your lapse and publicly make amends. I somehow doubt Craig will do that though.
Just read the remainder of your comment. So you have seen it now, and didn’t have the decency to not repeat the loathsome little attempted slur on a man whose wife had been murdered 24 hourspreviously? Classy.
It’s the very posting of that link by Craig, at such a time, and on a blog he boasts of being widely read that is, how shall I put this? not exactly ‘kind and gentle’. There are other words I could use to describe it.
I ant even bother with the rest of the feeble defensive stuff trying to defend the indefensible.
And I’m not trying to get you to change your vote on Jeremy. He’s a total shoe-in for success against the useless Smith. I’m just pointing out in my posts that there are aspects of JC and his followers that are not as kind and gentle as the passive aggressive blandishments from Momentum would have everyone believe.
You mean this “loathsome little attempted slur”? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3298572/New-charity-scandal-Save-Children-executive-quits-women-s-complaints-inappropriate-behaviour.html
Interesting, but hardly a smear. The accusations could be trivial or utterly false. Words and actions can be easily misinterpreted, after all. I guess he didn’t want to endure the trauma of refuting unfounded allegations – which can be ruinous regardless of the facts. Maybe he deserves our additional sympathy because of this. There’s no harm in knowing what was reported.
If you read Craig’s book “Murder in Samarkand”, you’ll see that he’s acutely aware of what it’s like to be falsely accused of inappropriate behaviour. Accordingly, he’s hardly likely to assume such allegations amount to evidence of a “smoking gun”. Work it out.
“He’s a total shoe-in for success against the useless Smith”
You mean he’ll be booted in? 🙂
You probably mean “shoo-in”, as when you shoo an animal into a pen.
In any case, how do you know what CM intended when he posted the link? All he said was it was “interesting”. I find it interesting that all these slurs against Sanders are the same playbook as those against Corbyn.
It’s interesting to me that in the last US elections, the manufactured division was between “makers and takers” – the “makers” being the investor class of course (in faithful Ayn Rand terminology), and the “takers” being everyone else. While in the UK in the meantime, the division had mysteriously sprung up against “workers and shirkers”.
These tactics have a curious ring about them. Interesting, but please don’t take that as a personal endorsement of them.
“Jim”, OK, you win. Morally speaking, I am at best worthless, and in all likelihood actively evil. Certainly my adoptive mother would have agreed.
Who are you? I find it disconcerting to be denounced by anonymous Internet entities.
Clark :
More evasion I’m afraid, I’ve addressed the issue of ‘anonymity’ before with other posters here. Craig knows who I am, I can provide any evidence you or he need privately. You as a moderator also should know who I am. The very subjects under discussion are the reason I would not be happy to put my full name on public display. That is, intimidation by the likes of some of the characters the 38 degrees petition was pulled, by the petitions organiser himself.
I have not looked at your blog site, I have no idea who you are. I find the vague threat implied in your suggestion I ‘out’ myself on here a bit sinister frankly.
You have signally failed to address the points I’m making regarding the distinctly unpleasant behaviour I’ve identified. The rationalisations you’ve attempted to give to explain it away just aren’t convincing, however articulately expressed ( chapeau for that by the way!)
These are very straightforward points I’m making, and have made several times. There have been repeated attempts to deny the reality of an unpleasant underbelly beneath the claims of ‘kindness and gentleness’, attempts which I’m showing are not only untrue but are themselves pretty egregious examples of the kind of behaviour being denied by Craig. Particularly the Brendan Cox episode. If you can’t see that’s terrible behaviour then you need to think again.
A simple acknowledgement from Craig that, on reflection that was a terrible lapse, would clear the air.
Same regarding the repeated libels of the 38 degrees guys.
Clark :
Been working, only just got some free time.
I’m me, who are you? I’m not pointing out any of this stuff just to play games, I’m serious about it. It’s pretty nasty uncalled for smearing in my book. The very antithesis of ‘kind and gentle’. I’d forgive and forget if he held up his hands and said ‘yes, I see what you’re getting at, I crossed a line there.’ There’s a world of difference between investigative journalism and the behaviour I’m referring to. The 38 degrees thing was pointed out long ago, they are not liars, as the Independent article I posted shows. And yet the same old lies are trotted out again, in a tone of sanctimonious righteousness. It needs calling out.
Kudos for Samarkand, I’ve already personally let Craig know I’m impressed with that work.
And yes, I’m as feeble and hypocritical as the next man. But I do try to be kind and gentle with people.
Let’s get back to black holes & event horizons, much more fun and jolly! ?
Jim, Craig only reads a small proportion of the comments; until a couple of years ago he didn’t even know how to read beyond the first page of them. I used to try to read all comments when I was the moderator, and even then it was a struggle to find enough time (and patience). The comment rate has increased many times over since then.
Craig is very busy. There’s his family and whichever book he’s writing at the time, all the human rights work he takes on voluntarily, his interviews and articles, discussions such as last night’s, plus all the usual demands of everyday life, of course.
I’m Clark Killick. The username by my comments links to my little contact page, which I put on my webspace specifically so that I wouldn’t be an anonymous blogsphere commenter – it’s about taking responsibility for the views I express, linking them to a verifiable real-world identity; about standing up and being counted. I think that’s important on a serious political blog in the current atmosphere of astroturfing, in which multiple secret services, governments, corporations, pressure groups and PR companies seed fake identities onto social media in order to distort appearances and sway public opinion. We live in paranoia-inducing times, unfortunately.
Sorry but I’d rather not go even further off-topic onto esoteric physics here on the front thread. We could continue such discussions on the General Discussion Thread at squonk.tk, or open a thread for it in the local forums. If you’re interested in nuclear tech there’s a thread for that already, where I posted various comments but discussion died out – no one wants to discuss nuke with a rational moderate like me, it seems.
Clark :
None of your reply addresses the issues I brought up, it’s just a long list of excuses. I’m sure Craig is a busy man, it’s just what he’s busy with that has me posting here. The 38 degrees repeated libels, the deeply unpleasant and unnecessary posting of the Brendan Cox link at such a time, the frankly creepy McCann vendetta.
The jokey physics reference wasn’t literally asking for debate, it was an attempted gesture of friendship based on our recent Newton/Relativity/Quantum dynamics exchange on the Jonathan Cook ‘Kuhn/paradigm shift’ question!
Anyway, I think I’ve made my point.
All the best.
Jim, olive branch accepted, and reciprocation offered, though neither have you dealt with an issue I raised – in that you remain an anonymous Internet entity, discussing, with somewhat less than complete moderation, with me as a verifiable real-world person. That gives you the freedom to be less temperate than myself, a freedom not available on sites such as Facebook, since my vote in the labour leadership election that is at risk while yours isn’t:
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/07/14/breaking-labour-trawling-social-media-stop-voting-leadership-election/
I deplore the recent demonisation of forceful or angry expression since it is so often used to silence dissent. Routinely, angry communication is falsely characterised as some sort of psychological aberration. Jobs-worths, exploiters and abusers use this recent fashion quite deliberately, by giving minor but ongoing provocation until an angry response is elicited. For instance companies with unfair business practices route disgruntled customers to call centres and there, at the hapless customers’ expense, confound them with blatantly lame excuses, stone-wall denial, deception and other run-arounds until the customer gets cross, which is then used as an excuse to “terminate the call”.
So, I’m sorry you see my arguments as mere excuses, and for my part I think you seem to be trying rather hard to make mountains out of molehills.
Clark :
See my reply above, I’ve posted it in the wrong place mistakenly.
Not to mention noted socialist. The envious child hating bastard.
I was proud to have chipped in a few quid to George Galloway’s film and its release is my return on the investment. The more people see it, the greater the return. I would be surprised if George didn’t have to put in his own money or secure funds from secret investors to complete the film because in one update he said obtaining footage from commercial TV is expensive. He also said a lot of material had to be edited out because originally it was too long for sitting through in a cinema, so he probably bought footage he didn’t use in the end.
Perhaps the full unedited film will also make it onto the net, in time.
That was a clever move of George, to put the ‘s’ in killings as ‘$’.
Only just noticed that.
I think one of the backers made the title suggestion in an early update because the working title was The Killing of Tony Blair, as in the killing he had made since leaving office. She said the papers would rip into that as sounding like a clarion call to do Blair harm. George agreed and I think he came up with the $ sign.
Paul Barbara? Are you a taxi driver in Royston Vasey? ;o)
The trailer for the film, reminds me of Michael Moore’s excellent movies.
As for John McTernan, anyone who followed his statements during the 2014 indyref, will know first hand that he’s a odious little pipsqueak. He has zero talent and believability, and cost Jim Murphy to lose more votes through his idiotic comments, than Murphy cost himself, why anyone would want to employ that man is a mystery.
George Galloway does have his flaws and I disagree with his views on Scottish independence. But when it comes to Tony Blair, I believe Galloway knows his stuff. The focus should and must remain on Blair, and the devastation he helped cause in Iraq. In my opinion Blair should be tried at the Hague, for war crimes against humanity. I’d also like to see his buddy Bush standing in the dock beside him.
Thirteen years on from the illegal war in Iraq, it appears to me that people are still dying from its consequences, and the country itself is, in part, still in turmoil.
Craig don’t take any shit from McTernan.
Here’s a list of people who’ve already tried to make a citizens arrest of Tony Blair, for war crimes, I tip my hat to them.
http://www.arrestblair.org/war-crimes-reports
And here a Ms. Saleh, is trying to bring Bush, et al to justice in America using the Chilcot report on Blair’s illegal war in Iraq.
http://witnessiraq.com/2016/07/23/chilcot-report-submitted-to-the-ninth-circuit/
Can’t agree with you on Michael Moore – I believe he’s a ‘Limited Hangout’ a**hole. He backs the drive to disarm Americans, and with his ‘Bowling for Columbine’ he dealt atrociously with a young survivor of the attack, by using him to effect in his film, not paying him a penny, and when the kid got an extreme response from the police (on behalf of the drug company), to the effect he was forcibly detained in a mental facility, and forcibly dosed with the very same drugs he had campaigned about in the film; so far as I’m aware, he is still incarcerated (I’ll check up on that). He got ZERO help from Fatso.
Paul.
Everyone has their own opinion that’s fair enough, I see Moore from a different perspective, he openly points the finger at America’s misgivings. He’s openly shamed big pharma, I recall him taking 9/11 vets to Cuba, to get medicines they couldn’t afford in the US,
I also recall Moore standing outside the Senate, trying to get senators to sign their daughters and sons up to fight in foreign wars, needless to say he was told where to go by them.
Moore who hails from Detroit, also tried to get an interview with the head of GM, and find out why he sold out the American motor indudtry in Detroit, to foreign labour, no one else tried but he eventually did. Detroit to this day as far as I know, has never recovered.
I can only hope George Galloway’s film is as successful as Michael Moore’s films, or documentaries if you prefer.
“Moore who hails from Detroit,”
Flint, I think, where GM complained that the water was bad and a pipeline was laid on-to the GM plant- and the rest of the working class town was left to choose between lead poisoning and Legionaire’s disease.
Bevin, my apologies you are correct Flint Michigan.
@RoS – Completely OT – Have you seen this?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3711040/How-British-Genetic-study-reveals-Yorkshire-Anglo-Saxon-UK-East-Midlands-Scandinavian.html
According to the study, 43.84% of Scottish make-up is Irish, by far the majority, so maybe you need to become RoI? 😉
Alan yes many Scots as they were known, moved to Scotland mainly Argyll, from Ireland, around 258AD. They christened their new home Dariada.
“I believe he’s a ‘Limited Hangout’ a**hole”
That view smells like the general opinion among conspiracy theorists (not a derogatory term in my view. You can include Machiavelli and Adam Smith among those who sought to account for conspiracy in their theory.)
Sicko in particular points toward what Moore is doing. It would be something of a culture shock for most Americans who see it but particularly the British audience since it illustrates the stark difference in philosophy between us and the rest of Europe at the time it was made.To see cultural differences so clearly demonstrated is a remarkable achievement.
Wisely in my view, he prefers to repeat what he can prove for the mass audience. Certain memes in conspiracy circles have the effect of (or appear to be designed toward) pushing theorists of conspiracy toward the loonier end of things by divorcing them from them from solid argument and the provable. Information which really would damage those in power were it more widely known is left outside or even better for them, tainted through proximity.
In any case, Moore turned out be right in Fahrenheit 9/11 (not inconsistent with the deep background you allude to although supplementary to it.) As the establishments had to concede recently, not without a degree of opportunism.
“He backs the drive to disarm Americans”
An interesting point of contention. How many conspiracy theories point toward the gun industry with regard to mass shootings in the United States? And yet with every single mass shooting, without exception their product sales rise extraordinarily. It would seem they have considerable motive. Especially if one were to build a conspiracy theory based upon the principle of who benefits. The answer is few, and none that I know of. Which by itself is quite interesting.
Sort of on-topic, Yvette Cooper’s piece in today’s Guardian is just priceless; for the reader’s comments, of course…
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/27/labour-party-worker-low-pay-zero-hours-owen-smith
Who designed the excellent movie poster?
I’m certain the charge against Bush/Blair would be limited to ‘Reckless Disregard’ and manslaughter carries roughly a 5 year sentence with 4 off for good behavior in a country club type prison.
the youtube film london 7 7 the ripple effect documentary i thought captured all that needed to be said about the nature of the man and his party.
the mysterious deaths of kelly,cook and john smith should be of interest the one sided zionist clique surrounding him.
Tam Dalyell, the Father of the House, sparked outrage last night by accusing the Prime Minister of “being unduly influenced by a cabal of Jewish advisers”.
when you have hideous monstrous secret it leaves one open to hideous monstrous blackmail when you have horrific debts to repay horror and blood must be the payment.
he said it himself that he was prepared for the blood sacrifice for the cause.
can galloway really get to the heart of the matter?
not possible
is galloway like much in this world a limited hangout
who knows
nothing wrong with wanting to live.
did david kelly regret or know gilligans island was just another bbc spook.
maybe
that is why he did not struggle when the team came to collect him for the long walk to oblivion.
poor tory blair has been short changed the blood flow he created should of made him a multi billion not a few hundred million.
Jim
July 27, 2016 at 14:20
“The film is called the killings of Tony Blair, just thought I’d give a little balance by daring to mention the saving-lives of Tony Blair…”
………………………………………………………………………..
How many lives do you think he “saved” through the Good Frida Agreement Jim, as opposed to how many deaths he is responsible for in Iraq?
‘The Killings of Tony Blair’…I could see Quentin Tarantino doing a remake of this as a kind of Bonnie & Clyde ‘buddy’ movie with Tony Blair and George Bush in Reservoir Dogs style black business suits embarking on an orgy of nihilistic violence.
Nothing could surpass the original cast for nihilistic violence. Tarantino would be out of his league in Iraq, even today.
Or perhaps a sequel rated ‘R18’ depicting the ongoing orgy of Muslim-on-Muslim violence since the bloodthirsty dictator was removed by Tony & George 13 years ago.
I would disagree Anon on the correlation and the sequencing. You may be playing into the Bastard’s hands where they feign that theirs was a very benign indeed benevolent act of removing a dictator. What followed was not there problem and would have happened anyway. I’m not at all sure about that.
Craig,
You said:-
” The Blair-loving Guardian gave the film two stars and called it “sanctimonious”.”
Seems to me that the simple question is:-
– IS THE FILM HONEST ACCURATE AND TRUTHFUL?
one can never be to accurate where life is on the line…
the youtube film london 7 7 the ripple effect documentary i thought captured all that needed to be said about the nature of the man and his party.
the mysterious deaths of kelly,cook and john smith should be of interest to folks with a memory.
what of the one sided clique surrounding him.
Tam Dalyell, the Father of the House, sparked outrage last night by accusing the Prime Minister of “being unduly influenced by a cabal of extreme advisers”.
when you have hideous monstrous secret it leaves one open to hideous monstrous blackmail when you have horrific debts to repay horror and blood must be the payment.
he said it himself that he was prepared for the blood sacrifice for the cause.
can galloway really get to the heart of the matter?
not possible
is galloway like much in this world a limited hangout
who knows
nothing wrong with wanting to live.
did david kelly regret or know gilligans island was just another bbc spook.
maybe
that is why he did not struggle when the team came to collect him for the long walk to oblivion.
poor tory blair has been short changed the blood flow he created should of made him a multi billion not a few hundred million.
Let us never forget according to Charles Shoebridge, a 12-year veteran detective of the London Metropolitan Police, a former graduate of the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, and now a broadcaster and writer on terrorism in the UK confirmed to the BBC that Mohammed Siddique Khan, the alleged ringleader of the 7/7 London bombings, was working for British intelligence agency MI5 as an informant at the time of the attacks.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/audio/270606khan.mp3
Sadly Khan on the day his wife had a miscarriage, July 7th 2005, made a short drive to oblivion accompanied by the Gibraltar Firm, the ‘big boys’ who do the Security Services dirt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_2786474077&feature=iv&src_vid=R7PQG5weeHk&v=kwyzpzEgUWE
“What can be done to spur a more multicultural society in a divided France?” asks Jon Snow in his opening words on C4 News tonight, pressing home the “divisions” in French society and the need for more “diversity”.
It took the broadcaster a full five minutes of hand-wringing about alienation of the poor and disenfranchised to finally get around to mentioning the religion/allegiance of the perpetrators. Hitherto they were referred to as “teenagers”.
But it took the first guest, a young, French, dark-skinned woman clearly invited to be on-message, to put Snow right by firmly informing him that French minorities were in the main well integrated and that there was absolutely no excuse for what these terrorists had done. Cue Snow interrupting her at every turn, in contrast to the head-nodding approval and shallow smile C4 News aficionados are accustomed to whenever he interviews a right-on ethnic minority activist type who presses all the right buttons.
For the next five minutes, we heard without any opposing view how news media reporting of any future (Islamic) terrorist attack should be censored, ostensibly to prevent ‘copycat’ attacks.
Since then and up until 19.36, the rest of this evenings content has been an entirely unchallenged love-in for Black Lives Matter and a yearning for Hilary Clinton’s election as president (last night C4 News actually signed off with a eulogy to Michelle Obama complete with music).
And now, up until 19:42 we have a report of institutional Police racism against black people.
So, a full 42 minutes of race-baiting by C4 News. I have said it before, C4 News is the worst offender by miles. It makes the BBC look almost impartial by comparison. And Snow is pure poison.
I believe Jon Snow is the son of a Church of England bishop.
In my experience, religious figure of all kinds do not take kindly to being contradicted (although their ways of dealing with it vary). You should meet my Rebbe! 🙂
Anon1 and HabbaPrejudice, if you haven’t already seen it I would strongly recommend a documentary called ‘The Power of Nightmares’, made by Adam Curtis. The remarkable thing about it is that it’s one of those very rare occasions when the truth is allowed into the MSM: this documentary was aired by the BBC shortly after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. If you watch it you might start to understand that the whole ISIS thing is a total crock of shit, and you might get some further understanding about what the present ‘terrorist attacks’ are all about.
‘The Power of Nightmares’ keeps being removed from video sharing sites (I wonder why). It’s in three parts, and this link to the first part should work…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTg4qnyUGxg
£150,000 stretch goal
£134,540 raised
4574 backers
89% of stretch goal
————
Please contribute here, and let’s move this across the goal line:
https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/chilcot/
————–
FAST FACTS
“Following the publication of the Chilcot Report, we are seeking justice on behalf of our loved ones who needlessly lost their lives in the Iraq War.
We wish to bring those state officials responsible to account and, by doing so, ensure such a tragedy that has caused such far-reaching and long-term damage, both to our country and world-wide, never happens again.
There is no prospect of the case being referred to the International Criminal Court. It is highly unlikely that the state will carry out any arrests or prosecutions. Parliamentary action, such as impeachment or contempt of Parliament, will not result in a conviction.
Our only hope is for the Families to bring a private civil action. It is down to us.
We need funding for a full and forensic legal analysis of the Chilcot Inquiry Report (2.6 million words over twelve volumes), to determine what cases can be brought against any state officials who might have acted unlawfully in sending our loved ones to war.
We truly thank you for your support.”
————-
Please also spread the word across the ‘social media’ .
Note to Ms. Nicola Sturgeon
oil dropped over 2% today now at $43.60/barrel
slim pickings for the new state of Scotland
BREXIT likely to be very bad for Scotland
‘Much more pessimistic’
Fraser of Allander Institute director Graeme Roy said: “Following the referendum result we predict a significant slowing in the rate of growth in the Scottish economy.
“The combination of economic and policy uncertainty, coupled with the longer-term structural consequences for trade and investment from leaving the EU, make the outlook much more pessimistic than before.
“Given Scotland’s fragile economic performance over the past 18 months, the impact of the EU referendum result is exactly what the Scottish economy did not need.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-36903893
“A change is as good as a rest” as the saying goes and therefore I shan’t bother this evening to challenge any of the various bits of the usual garbage this new post has attracted. Three comments, however.
1/. I do feel that my good friend |Jim has been a little harsh on Craig when he accused him of dishonesty and slander for his past comments on Laura Kuennsberg, 38 Degrees, etc.
But it is true that I have been puzzled by the prominence Craig has seen fit to give to the question of how Mr Corbyn is “treated” by the media and the Blarites amoungst others.
I think the reasons for that concentration of what one might call “form” rather than on the substance of Mr Corbyn’s prospectus are threefold:
a) Craig is himself, whether he likes it or not, a media (although not a MSM) person; therefore such matters are of particular interest to him;
b) Craig, deep down, knows that a Labour Party headed by Mr Corbyn and like minded souls – and, a fortiori, a Labour Party fully behind Mr Corbyn’s prospectus – is highly unlikely to win the next general election; it is more comforting, therefore, to discuss media attacks and so-called dirty tricks against him than to attempt to make a favourable case for his prospectus;
c) and following from b), he may – perhaps unconsciously – be building up an alibi in good time before Mr Corbyn’s likely defeat at the next election (“it was the media and the Blairites wot lost it”).
2/. On the subject of Ms Diane Abbott, Seumas Milne and others who might be fairly described as being on the left of the Labour Party sending their children to private, fee-paying, it has been said on here – I forget by whom – that parents have the right to do what they feel best for their children.
I entirely agree – but the point is that the Labour Party, and certainly the left wing of the Labour Party, has been and is loud in its defence of state education and in its condemnation of private, fee-paying education. Left wing Labour politicians who send their children to private schools are therefore guilty of being, at the same time, parents who do what they feel is in the best interests of their children…and hypocrites. One would have more respect for them if they came out in the open about the education they are choosing for their children rather than leaving it for the media to find out and inform their (and other) voters.
3/. On Mr George Galloway and his film : Baal Zevul makes the point that the crowd-funding is unlikely to have covered the costs of making the film and that, accordingly, it is fully justified for there to be a charge for seeing it.
Baal may well be correct – but would it not be reassuring if Mr Galloway were to present to the public full accounts for his project, setting out both the sources of revenue, including the crowd funding monies, and the various items of expenditure incurred on the debit side (including any fees paid to himself and other individuals?
Having been accused – whether justly or unjustly – of financil shenanigans in the past, Mr Galloway woud surely have no objection to doing this?
my habababa
one should tread softly
where mr galloway
goes as i am sure you are aware
he makes most of his money
from court case involving slander.
treat soft or hard whatever way
your bravery lends you.
brutal even
state the facts on galloway if you have any
defend your strong or weak position.
if you have only he sayings she said
best be quiet
A
hababa baby
as your electronic words are bonded contracted related to your isp
Can you provide quotes from Abbott re. Private schools?
Do I need to?
Fact 1 – the Labour Party (and in particular its left-wing element) is committed to state education and is opposed to private eductaion)
Fact 2 = Dian Abbott sent her children to private, fee-payng schools.
Are you disputing either of those facts?
Yes. Let’s deal in facts. Tell us exactly what we are dealing with. Give her s chance to defend herself at least.
Which of those two facts are you denying?
Fact 1 and Fact 2 do not add up to hypocrisy. Better facts please.
To help you, Dave : Dianne Abbott is a leading Labour Party politician.
All clear now?
Habbakuk said:
“Dianne Abbott is a leading Labour Party politician.”
Is that Fact 3?
Contrary to what you might like to be the case, simply being a leading Labour Party politician does not make one a hypocrite, even in conjunction with Facts 1 & 2.
You need to show that Dianne Abbott has said that it is wrong for anyone to send their child to a private school, and to show that she continues to say this while sending her own child to such a school. That would be hypocrisy.
There is nothing hypocritical in maintaining that the existence of private schools is unfair, and working to abolish them so that investment can be concentrated on state schools, whilst sending one’s own children to such a school because the local state school alternatives are currently inadequate.
I’m not denying any facts. I merely want proof of said facts. Please provide ASAP.
Yes, you’ve hit the nail on the head: Galloway is obviously being funded by Moscow, and the money flow is all being controlled by Jeremy Corbyn, who also controls the flow of drugs to Russian athletes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3DcChXNyYQ
I am sympathetic to that last point, Habba. But in a spirit of reciprocity, I do think Mr. Blair, whose financial affairs are completely opaque and which involve at least one offshore not related to the charitable sector…whose Tony Blair Associates simultaneously fronts (allegedly) charitable work and securities trading under the same banner…etc…might offer at least some disclosure regarding the destination of the not inconsiderable contribution the UK taxpayer makes to his way of life.
Actually, Galloway is pretty transparent by comparison. Earlier this year he is reported to have had to sell his house to meet a £100,000 tax bill, which at least confirms that a good part of his earnings are subject to UK tax, and that he’s being hit for it. There is good reason to believe that Blair’s desire for ‘privacy’ – his explanation for running a dozen companies which pay each other for management services through an LP – is well-founded, in terms of cash streams leaving the ken of HMG.
Or wouldn’t you wish to invade Tony’s ‘privacy’?
Fuller details here. Still need to discover ownership of two Gibraltar companies…
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/02/an-apology/comment-page-29/#comment-600153
Thanks Ba’al; the devil is in the detail.
No, I agree with you about Blair and his entreprises.
Actually, I am in favour of what I believe to be the system obtaining in Sweden (someone correct me if I’m wrong), where everyone’s tax bill is open to public scrutiny.
Some people believe much of Blair’s income comes from the Private Finance Initiative which his own government brought in whilst he was PM, but I suspect much of it comes from deferred payments from his own Workfare programme. The last figures I saw a year ago said there have been 1.5 million Workfare placements, all unpaid, all compulsory, and if he got paid just £10 per cohort (that was Alistair Darling’s term), that would earn him £15 million, or more likely £50 per cohort which would earn him £75 million.
Thing is, if the job’s there why isn’t it a proper paid job? If forced labour becomes the norm we’ll end up picking GM-cotton.
I have not responded to most of what you wrote, because I’m only now reading it Jim. As it looks like there is not much to be said anyway.
Had some heavy physical work to do and it has taken it out of me.
Shall go and switch off now.
Yep I’ve had a physically hard day too Nevermind believe it or not! Posting in brief free periods. I still maintain that the LK affair, both aspects to it, are as I describe. There’s 6 hours worth of continuous election night footage provided by FranzB (very good of him, he gave all the relevant timings so you can check) in the original thread. The descriptions given of the purported terrible bias turned out to be in every case totally without foundation. It’s a boring exercise, but with Franz’s timings to help it doesn’t actually take very long to go through it. Our (Franz & my) brief online back and forth might be helpful too when viewing.
Regarding the 38 degrees ‘liars’ claim, Craig’s telephone conversation with an anonymous and exasperated 38 degrees staffer is of no evidential value whatsoever. It is not with either of the protagonists, and provides zero proof of Craig’s claims. And just to point out that misogynist terms of abuse from ‘kinder, gentler’ JC fans on this blog just recently, have received no comment or acknowledgment from Craig whatsoever.
More on Joe Hayden’s (the petitions originator) reasons for deciding to pull it.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_5731d2b6e4b0e6da49a6e56b
The relevant link for that LK election night ‘analysis’ by me & J is given below. It’s towards the end of that page of comments (search for FranzB).
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/05/laura-kuenssberg-meet-barbara-streisand/comment-page-5/#comments
Yeah, I hope someone asked him about his dodgy Australian visa. Mcternan is impressive: he’s disliked by Labour members in Scotland, England, and Australia. And he’s a serial loser, too. They say nobody likes a winner, but he’s got no excuse. Prat. And I wouldn’t give him any credit for fronting – he’s a paid shill, who is doing it all for himself.
This summary of an investigation into election rigging in the US democratic primaries is worth reading (which is more than can be said of….)
https://www.facebook.com/notes/election-justice-usa/democracy-lost-a-report-on-the-fatally-flawed-2016-democratic-primaries/923891901070837
O/T Please sign and share. Thank you.
https://www.change.org/p/owen-smith-mp-owen-smith-mp-stop-your-cynical-exploitation-of-the-miners-strike
“Now that Owen Smith MP has decided to run for the leadership of the Labour Party, he is very concerned to emphasise his political affiliations with the miners’ strike.
“Coming from a mining town I know we need an urgent independent Hillsborough style inquiry to secure Orgreave justice”, he tweeted on 20th July 2016.
“I grew up in South Wales during the miners’ strike. That’s when I came alive politically” he wrote to me and other members and supporters of the Labour Party on 26th July 2016.
The media report his call for a full public enquiry into the 1984 “Battle of Orgreave” at Sheffield’s Advanced Manufacturing Park today.
Jeremy Corbyn among many other MPs signed an Early Day Motion on 15th June 2015 calling for a public enquiry into the policing of Orgreave and the miner’s strike. Where was Owen Smith?
Jeremy Corbyn among many other cross-party MPs signed a letter to the Home Secretary in May 2016 calling for a public enquiry into Orgreave. Where was Owen Smith?
Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign has never received support from Owen Smith MP before today.
So much for Smith’s political awareness and concern for truth and justice for the striking miners and their families.
Smith’s attempt to exploit one of the most tragic and memorable events of Labour and working class history for his immediate political purposes is sickening and contemptible. Stop it now.”
Perhaps somebody could put forward an early day motion asking that there be an investigation into why the leader of the opposition spends his time politicking with a convicted electoral fraudster. Maybe Owen Smith would sign it, I imagine it could be quite successful unlike many EDM’s.
There are currently 29 police investigations into electoral fraud by Conservative candidates in the last general election.
But I know I’m wasting my time with trolls like you.
Democracy, ay…
Let’s all go to war, yay!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajBHNFgEW6s
I liked the list of Boris’s screw-ups as London’s mayor:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/this-is-what-boris-johnson-being-mayor-has-actually-cost-london-10491163.html
(Why allow a politician to design anything? They have no design skills at all.)
I know, what’s that got to do with JC’s convicted criminal aide? I hate the Tories.
Of course you ‘hate theTories.’
And it does you great credit that, despite this, you side with them almost invariably. Few Tories are quite as concerned as you are to show that Laura K. is not just another overpaid propagandist doing everything she can to damage Corbyn and the Labour party but the victim of misogynists, doing her level best to tell the truth, whose opinions just happen to coincide precisely with those of the Tory/Blairite Establishment.
No doubt you hate Blair too, and it speaks volumes for your integrity that, hate him though you do, you insist on giving the man his due: he might have been responsible for the war on Iraq (and I bet you were opposed to that from the beginning) a million dead and still counting but he was the Peacemaker in Northern Ireland, etc etc.
With enemies like you, Jim, the Tories don’t need friends.
That’s a pretty good post actually, nicely sarcastic!
However, the reality of my situation is that I was on the anti-war march in 2003, and am generally (to my shame) pretty apolitical, more interested in trivial things like music and having fun generally. I admire engaged political activists. I happened to stumble in here a good few months ago as you know, mainly through the endless ear-bashing political diatribes from a friend of mine who’s on your side of these debates. We’re still very good mates!
I have no axe to grind either way, I’m just trying to paint a picture of reality for myself, and if that means pointing out the sort of inconsistencies and hypocrisies I’ve highlighted, well what’s the big deal? Man up and take it on board Bevin, why be scared of reality?
The enquiry you call for for should be accompanied by an enquiry into the organisation and development of the various miners’ strikes since 1972, including the question of the involvement of Communist and Communist-leaning union leaders.
Nah, the South Yorkshire police were notorious thugs Habbs, Orgreave is running sore, everyone knows the truth, just like Bloody Sunday, it’s just not been officially admitted yet. The stuff you mention is a whole other issue to State thuggery whatever position you take on ‘communist subversion’. I’ve mining mates from the time who can vouch for the facts.
Jim
I don’t know whether your characterisation of the South Yorkshire police is correct or not but that is a “whole other issue” (to use your words) from the question of secondary picketing/flying pickets.
The outlawing of secondary picketing by the Thatcher govt was an excellent reform.
Do you happen to know whether Mr Corbyn (2016 version) has said anything about repealing the legislation on secondary picketing or indeed any of the other trade union reform measures undertaken by the Thatcher ministries)?
Jim
I don’t know whether your characterisation of the South Yorkshire police is correct or not but that is a “whole other issue” (to use your words) from the question of secondary picketing/flying pickets.
The outlawing of secondary picketing by the Thatcher govt was an excellent reform.
Do you happen to know whether Mr Corbyn (2016 version) has said anything about repealing the legislation on secondary picketing or indeed any of the other trade union reform measures undertaken by the Thatcher ministries)?