As of today Julian Assange has finished his jail sentence for missing police bail. There is no Swedish charge or request for his extradition, those risibly flimsy sexual allegations no longer being needed by the state.
As of today, Julian Assange is in prison purely and simply for publishing secrets of the US state, revealing war crimes and the dirtiest of diplomacy. I should like to dedicate this post to all of those in the title and dozens of their colleagues in the British “liberal” establishment, all of whom claimed that Julian’s fears of being incarcerated in the UK or Europe facing extradition for publishing US secrets were entirely bogus and a mere pretext for hiding, and that this would never happen. Those of us who said this was a real fear and a real danger were, myself most definitely included, derided as fantasist, deluded, paranoid and conspiracy theorist.
So now Julian is a political prisoner, a journalist in a maximum security prison, probably for years, waiting for his case to be heard and extradition faced for the grievous crime of doing his job and publishing. While the British liberal establishment simply buries its nose in its perfumed handkerchief and pretends that the fear it derided as imaginary, has not come true.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
IF YOU LIVE IN THE UK, PLEASE SIGN MY PETITION FOR OFFICIAL INTERNATIONAL OSCE OBSERVERS FOR THE NEXT SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM
I just don’t think after what you say anything you have said is credible ROS.
You admit basically they are just the same. Then you go on & On & on incessantly about the virtues of “independence”& focus like a mad man on the British state. Yet are totally cynical really.
What laundry could be that bad that your willing to see someone tortured FFS, it really speaks about your snake oil sales, that’s assuming your simplification is correct & I don’t think it is that simple. I think they are mostly cowards protecting position. They don’t want to end up like Chris Williamson MP & other champions.
Fine, but you can’t claim then they are champions for anything. You essentially admit indy would mean nothing, just getting screwed over by another bunch of sycophants who will sacrifice nothing for the common good, Or even basic humanity….
& truth is it not like that. Once a critical mass of people coming froward..
Just look at the risks other have taken, & they are just going to let them rot?
It’s despicable behaviour.
I thought you’d had enough of posting to me?
Anyway since you can’t help yourself I’ll reply.
Independence is a natural state to be in, just look at other nations that control their own affairs.
Sure I point out the machinations of the British state, they’re there for all to see, and yes I praise the SNP in their push for independence, (though not of late) however I’m cynically minded first and foremost and I know that when Scotland becomes independent it won’t be some sort of shining beacon of justice and parity that some folk falsely believe.
However it won’t as an independent state be among the worst, (warmongering, exclusive, and unwelcoming to immigrants). I’m hoping that there’s some forward thinking from our politicians, however I doubt they’ll stick their necks out to save the likes of Assange, and I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense. In an ideal world they would, we all would, but as I said earlier in this post I’m a cynic first and foremost, as was Diogenes.
You Ishmael strike me as a bit of a dreamer, and idealist in a cynical world. Don’t get me wrong its an admirable quality, and I hope you never lose it.
“Independence is a natural state to be in”
You sound off your head, literally off your head. You just basically admitted they are just the same, yet call ME a dreamer?
& “independence” is a totally constructed context when referencing a state. I think you just use it because people as individuals identify with the sentiment, Like the two are somehow linked, While at the same time as making it clear this is the way they all work in this “natural state”…
There is nothing unforced or “natural” about this order. & no state can ever be “independent” in any meaningful “total” way. That’s not how the system of statehood (or just basic material life) works. Yet on and on you go like a wind up toy.
Just how long do you think you can go on maintaining these fundamental contradictions?
“While at the same time as making it clear this is the way they all work in this “natural state”…”
Of course its natural, kids leave their parents, animals become independent from theirs, its a natural progression.
You are taking it to a literal point Ishmael, which seems a bit of a silly thing to do. Of course nation states are intertwined through commerce, communications defence etc, but they are still independent states in there own rights.
Jeez, and I though I was the cynical one here.
Your conflating totally different realities. They are by definition not “independent” because of these very things, & influences you sight on individuals freedom to act, who are in critical positions.
It literally is totally meaningless to say they are still “independent in their own right”. It references what exactly? You clearly just said they don’t have freedom to act, Even within the constructs that is the states main interconnected functions.
Can’t help but agree with you. His user name gives the impression of someone really radical -but I think he “doth protest too much” judging by his tame posts.
Those who consider themselves dab hands at spotting British ruling elite cynicism and hypocrisy – the “qualities” so evident in how they are keeping an Australian citizen captive in a British high-security prison on US say-so – might ask themselves why the Supreme Court is delaying the announcement of its decision until after the Labour Party’s conference has received maximal negative coverage.
In the most recent Britain-wide vote, hard Brexit parties scored 34%. I assert (with supporting argument given elsewhere) that among white British people they may have received as much as 40% or higher. Now imagine a Labour government – perhaps a minority Labour government – tabling a referendum that pits what the right, far right and gutter press call call a “Surrender Brexit” against Remain.
Can people not see how this is going?
Another only slightly different scenario would be a general election campaign in which the Tories paint the Labour manifesto in those terms.
Or a huge “centrist” split-off may bury the Labour party within a day or two…
But whichever way you cut the position and the ongoing developments, it looks ideal for the far right.
The media are reporting that Corbyn is losing support fast, a YouGov survey is reportedly shown that half of those who voted for the party in 2017 now want a new leader.
Also has Corbyn finally realised that Watson is an agent provocateur in the party, I say that due to Corbyn claiming he didn’t know that there was a motion to scrap Watson’s position. I find that very hard to believe.
But wasn’t it John Lansman who was behind the motion against Tom Watson?
The Supreme Court have told the ladies and gentlemen of the press to be ready to hear their decision at 10.30 this morning (Tuesday). You can easily imagine their lordships and ladyships of the poshboy regime’s judicial wing clearing it with No. 10 and Conservative Central Office that Labour has sustained sufficient damage for the announcement to be made. “Anyone want to get any more kicks in against the ‘communists’? No? Then we’ll release our decision.”
I am expecting a reversal of the prorogation, or an annulment, the latter being less likely but which would come to the same thing, i.e. a recall of Parliament. Why? Because it will help the Tory party.
Students of “pomp” might like to consider the idea that supposedly Parliament can’t be recalled TOO soon, because there needs to be a “Queen’s speech” and for that there needs to be “security”, and “security” takes a while to organise. Imagine if something serious were to happen, e.g. if war were to break out! Would it still be a case of “It always takes the royal police exactly three days to check for whether any snipers are planning to position themselves on top of the ICA?” Whose interests are being put first here? If it’s in the country’s interests for Parliament to be recalled, and there really has to be an announcement in the Lords in which the head of state says that her government plans to give away loads of free money to everybody so long as we all vote Tory, does the old bag really have to sail down the Mall in a gold coach to make the announcement in person? Can’t one of her courtiers or poison-tasters send a text message? Can’t she delegate? WTF is wrong with her? Too busy counting her money?
It’s fairly obvious that the establishment – that’s just about everyone except for the Labour left – want Mr Corbyn out. All the polls and the vox pops (just as easy to manipulate as the polls) are aimed at convincing him he should resign. Of course, he shouldn’t. He is the only political leader who will end the attacks on the welfare state and social democracy. When you hear voters in Bishops Auckland who have been driven to food banks by UC claiming they would vote Tory – for more food banks and more benefit cuts – then you have to smell a rat. An army of rats. For three years the media have been shaping public opinion with regard to Mr Corbyn’s supposed leadership disability (basically, he is against Trident and wouldn’t press a button to kill millions of people in the name of the Patria) and to line up with them and amplify the smears is appallingly self defeating.
I think David Graeber’s article the Bully’s Pulpit makes some good points.
https://thebaffler.com/salvos/bullys-pulpit
“When researchers question children on why they do not intervene, a minority say they felt the victim got what he or she deserved, but the majority say they didn’t like what happened, and certainly didn’t much like the bully, but decided that getting involved might mean ending up on the receiving end of the same treatment—and that would only make things worse. Interestingly, this is not true. Studies also show that in general, if one or two onlookers object, then bullies back off.”
What really annoys me is this idea *I’M* stupid for thinking people should not allow this. & those who basically say that’s life, you should not think otherwise. As if “leaders” should get some special dispensation.
I congratulate myself in not being directly offensive toward those who front this meme. But your the reason people like me were bullied at school. I imagine ROS like one of those screwed up kids who’d sit on the sidelines & think it’s all just normal. Perhaps have a little giggle how unwise whatever victim was.
Oh stop acting so peurile Ishmael, being bullied at school is unfortunate you have my sympathies. However most folk (when grown up) see past that time in their lives and look forward.
Maybe its time you stopped dragging that ball and chain around with you and looked to the future, you seem a bright person, who somehow has developed the weight of the world on your shoulders, I wish you well.
ROS. I don’t want your dam sympathy, it was not reaching out in any way or wallowing in any way. Just a statement of fact.
I think, for the record, Your a >>>>fill it in yourself.
Now kindly do one & do the human race a favour. .
Steady on Ishmael.
Both you and ros have my sympathies. And if you don’t mind my saying so both often make useful and interesting contributions to the various debates.
I agree that it is important to come to terms with schoolyard bullying, but it can be a very serious matter indeed. Children have been known to take their lives over it.
from the article:
“It doesn’t matter who started it” are probably six of most insidious words in the English language. Of course it matters.”
No, I would strongly disagree. Who started it is of no consequence. What matters is who lays down their arms and makes peace.
namaste!
It’s really not me who needs to steady on. & we are not dealing with forces that respond to reason. …In ROS’s case, especially so.
Why should I tolerate all these degrading patronising sentiments? He’s very clever at hiding his own form of bullying, Behind polite “encouraging” rhetoric, while interpreting what I say in a twisted way that enables him to continue.
He’s made specific assumptions about my character & dis-position that are totally out of order. I won’t tolerate it.
“I think, for the record, Your a >>>>fill it in yourself.”
Your a >>>> = dear? Why thank you Ishmael, I never knew you cared. ?
Listen, You should like some kind of religious fanatic imo. Likening the state system that’s existed for the blink of an eye in human history, & is born of violence & exploitation to some kind of natural order, the birds & the bees etc. No doubt it serves your agenda, But these conflations are just mad & clearly have no solid basis is history or reality.
It’s really the kind of assessments id expect form a kid. Just meaningless slogans.
Go read the conquest of bread, then come back once you have some grounding in reality, maybe we can then have an adult discussion. But I tried many times before & all I get is personal patronising & tripe (& yes, you can expect it back when that’s the substance you give) ….so I don’t hold out much hope.
David Graeber is right when he says that “in general, if one or two onlookers object, then bullies back off.” (I’ll leave out the “studies show” wrapper.)
This an example of there being truth in the “Emperor’s New Clothes” story.
Whenever some idiot says “Google it”, I reply “Ask a US advertising company”. In most cases it goes in one ear and out the other, but I like to think that in some cases I have an effect. (Glenn might call this terribly pompous. I wonder what he has to say about the monarchy and “travelling up to Balmoral for a Privy Council meeting” and “don’t drag the queen into politics”, and all the other things that politicians and journalists say that are truly pompous.)
As for private schools, Labour will be framed by the right, far right, the BBC and most of the rest of the media as offering a choice between “Remain in Practice” (“Brexit in Name Only”) and “Remain”, understood to be a choice between Surrender and Surrender, or basically between “Have a Dark-Skinned Person as A Neighbour” and “Have a Dark-Skinned Person as A Neighbour”. It is really great to see the party adopt a position that is anti the private schools. Yes, Boris Johnson, it is indeed a return to manifesto promises from the past – and that’s a damned good thing too!
Johnson is of a generation of members of the British elite who grew up in families who literally would have supported a military coup in the 1970s rather than allow the “communist” Labour Party under Chancellor Denis Healey attack the private schools.
Soon there could be an election fought between “Blame the Dark-Skinned” and “Blame the Private School Scum”. I know which side I’m on.
Do we think Boris Johnson might get somewhere by saying that abolishing Eton and Winchester is an old-fashioned idea nowadays? I seriously hope the Tories run with that. Unfortunately they are likely to focus group it, but who knows, maybe they will put some feet wrong in this area. The fact remains that elite is WEAK on the private schools. They do NOT want too much light shone on them.
Many who don’t know much about the private schools other than that several of the top ones are centuries-old boys-only boarding schools don’t have much of a clue about how important they are in Britain. Which can make it sound strange when people denounce the elite or use silly terms such as “Powers That Be” or “Establishment” without showing much grasp about what the elite are like and how they operate and view themselves as a caste that owns a country largely populated by natives aka townies aka chavs.
I detect Seumas Milne’s hand in this policy, and all I will say is “Good on you, Seumas”. I know people say things about him, but you’ve got to admire someone who went to Winchester and yet has remained a left winger all his life.
On a side note, I was thinking lately about this idea Borris wants to fight this as a people vs parliament thing.
If I was in labour i’d grab that turf with both hands. Bring it on.
They demonize Seumas because he won’t cave to their ultra-remain agenda, despite all their commands. He knows the only way forward for the country is to bring people back together. Milne frightens them because they know he is smarter than them.
Yeh, we all love Julian Assange, but the Democratic Vote will win.
I may yet vote for Jeremy Corbyn again. From The Independent:
“Labour conference votes against backing Remain in new Brexit referendum
Chaotic scenes as delegates demand paper vote, following show of hands that means party will not be forced to support staying in EU – a victory for Corbyn ”
I always knew he was a good bloke.
Tony
@Tony – Good to hear that you are thinking of voting Labour. What’s your view of the prospect that the right and far right will frame the policy as one of holding a meaningless referendum pitting Surrender against Surrender? I am interested in this because if we try to see things from a fascist strategist’s point of view, that seems to be an ideal scenario for a “March on Rome” and a “Kristallnacht” rolled into one, and for the replacement (by whatever means) of the Labour government with one which, shall we say, would make Boris Johnson look “liberal” and “moderate” . Would you support allowing a hard Brexit onto the ballot? The fascists are very likely to say either hard Brexit goes on the ballot or we take over by force.
N_
The problem with officially recognising a hard Brexit as a choice is that it would institutionalise a piece of meaningless nonsense. A hard Brexit is the equivalent of a sulk, sooner or later you would have to negotiate with your neighbour with whom you have been trading for centuries. Alternatively you could up anchor and move HMS GB to nearer where you want to trade with.
Anyway all of this will be highly academic as the planet heats up and at best we all resort to return to be hunter gatherers.
By casting themselves as the party of Remain and revoke without a referendum the Lib Dems have delivered nearly all their votes to Labour, because a liberal would want another referendum and if your priority is Remain you will vote Labour to deliver the 2nd referendum.
And soft-Brexit which will win the referendum as most leavers (they only profess support for No Deal if its the only way to leave. It isn’t and never was) will support a compromise as will many remainers to secure a ‘half-way in’ membership. Whereas Cameron called the referendum to use a remain vote to take Britain into the Euro.
You’re right Dave. A soft Brexit compromise was always the only commonsense solution. But it is difficult for commonsense to get heard above all the misdirection of fanatical liberal and conservative media.
“I may yet vote for Jeremy Corbyn again.”
And a couple of weeks ago you surprised us all by saying you were going to vote Tory. Once again, Scotland awaits with bated breath.
Labour consistently makes the mistake that the British public (significantly dumbed down by the really shitty quality of education in this country, which worsens with each year that passes with a Tory government) is still intelligent enough to understand its policies and just how sensible they are.
They are not complicated, and yet we repeatedly hear that they are ‘vague’.
Labour makes a mistake by assuming that people are intelligent enough to understand that Brexit is all just shock and distraction from what are much more important issues.
It makes the mistake that people have enough compassion to recognise that there is something really sick about homelessness, food banks, starving children, and so on. People seem just too busy with their own lives, same as always.
Labour makes the mistake of assuming that the common person really cares for or wants democracy. Nobody still has these illusions, and therefore nobody wants the reponsibility of having to vote or decide on something (let alone another referendum).
Labour makes the mistake of believing that people are grown-up enough to do this.
I could be wrong though. There do seem to be some very smart people around still.
The Guardian, while always ‘soft’ left, was once a newspaper worth perusing. Its comment section Comment is Free was, prior to 2013 and the infamous MI5 basement hard drive massacre, one of the MSM’s liveliest discussion forums with moderators having a very light touch.
The Guardian in 2019 is a different paper altogether. Katherine Viner finished the process Alan Rusbridger started during his last months as Editor in Chief and wrung the old Guardian’s neck, fully turning it into the neoliberal Atlanticist establishment mouthpiece it is today.
I do wonder if the propagandist ‘journalists’ that Craig mentions ever have moments of doubt or feelings of shame about their role in destroying an honest man’s life and propping up an illegitimate and anti-democratic political and economic system. Assuming they aren’t sociopaths and lack the normal range of human emotions, the fallout from prolonged cognitive dissonance will eventually take its toll on at least some of these spineless and pathetic collaborators.
Although I agree that the smashing of the hard discs was a turning point I think there may also be an element of commercial pressure that has driven the Guardian to this position. The internationalisation of IT has meant that the Guardian cannot remain concerned only with local readership but heavily influenced by readership from the US and Australia.
Yes, but the Guardian, however flawed, and not the icon of perfect intellectual honesty that commenters here insist it be, is still a lot better than the other papers, and not only in Britain.
That’s a devious rhetorical move.
If you want to identify some specific good things about the Guardian, then do so.
I could do so myself. Just to mention one thing: I’ll always be deeply grateful to Amelia Gentleman for her series of articles about the DWP, Atos, Maximus et al, at a time when the rest of the Press were screaming about “benefit scroungers”. Those of us who have been at the bottom of the social pile often need the support of the “liberal” Press. There was a vast moral gulf between the Guardian and the most of the rest of them, and only the Guardian wrote about this particular issue with any real investigative depth.
But equally, I was deeply shocked when I turned to the Guardian in the aftermath of the 2015 UK general election, only to be faced with a disgraceful barrage of mindless, content-free, arrogant, condescending, mean, spiteful ad hominem attacks on Jeremy Corbyn and anyone who supported him. If anything, it was worse than than the tabloids; but I won’t quibble about that; the point is that in this respect it was doing very much the same thing as the tabloids (and the right-wing “quality” Press).
It was only then that I began to understand what Media Lens had been going on about all these years (and I started reading Craig’s blog). I still can’t pretend to understand very much, but the Media Lens Message Board (later The Lifeboat News), and this blog of course, have been very educational, in a way that the Guardian certainly has not been.
My point – in case I have once again failed to be clear 🙂 ! – is that you’re wrong to insinuate that those who are severely critical of the Guardian are unreasonably expecting it to be “perfect”, or are not allowing it to be humanly “flawed”. (Some on the Left do have such an attitude, but that doesn’t mean everybody should be tarred with the same brush.)
The Guardian objectively deserves the very severest criticism, but you are right to remind us (or those of us who need reminding) that it is not a total cesspit of evil in every way.
It is a confusing situation, especially for those of us who, like me, still think of ourselves as “liberals” (in some sense of that highly ambiguous and much-abused word), but are not naive or wilfully blind enough to continue to find a home at the Guardian.
What sums the confusing situation up for me is the fact that Amelia Gentleman – whom I mentioned so respectfully earlier – is married to Conservative MP Jo Johnson, brother of the infamous Boris. My poor mind cannot square that circle!
Well, Craig and the rest of the commenters are indeed expecting the Guardian to be perfect, a shining light on the hill, but that standard is never applied to any other paper. I don’t quite see why the Guardian should have to work to a different and higher standard. Most of the so-called quality titles in Britain are well down in the dirt, and the US nationals aren’t any better.
Your position on this sounds like my own position from several years ago. I think you misunderstand the situation, just as I did back then. It was an honest misunderstanding on my part then, so it is probably an honest misunderstanding on your part now. I’m certainly not the one to correct it for you, because I’m still struggling to grasp all the reasons for the Guardian being what it is. Others here are better placed to take the conversation from this point, if you wish.
Actually I think the closing down of CIF was also because of increased polarization and also people becoming more readily offended. This was especially evident on any article touching on Israel or feminism. It became too much work for the moderators. It is really quite sad.
The link below is to an excellent article by Matt Kennard and Mark Curtis entitled, ‘UK Security Services Neutralized Country’s Leading Liberal Newspaper. The title is a nice summary of the content, but do read the whole thing – it explains a lot.
https://consortiumnews.com/2019/09/11/uk-security-services-neutralized-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/
That is excellent, indeed – thank you.
‘I do wonder if the propagandist ‘journalists’ that Craig mentions ever have moments of doubt or feelings of shame about their role in destroying an honest man’s life and propping up an illegitimate and anti-democratic political and economic system.’
I don’t think they have the emotional intelligence or ethics to see much beyond the duty that gives them a salary? Could be wrong though. Craig is right to hold up The Guardian for special contempt. I think it is now just a newspaper that people read in order to find out what other people are reading, so they can be a part of the discussion, as it were, while knowing all the while that its authors don’t have what it takes to be real or responsible journalists, never mind their dubious morality.
You’re a good example of what I was saying above.
I’m not sure what you mean.
We shouldn’t have to compare The Guardian to The Sun or something, so that we can call fell good about ourselves.
The standard should be decency and common sense, not the bottom of a cesspit.
It is plain silly to defend The Guardian on the basis that it is not as bad as anything or everything else.
It is all-round a very dangerous institution given how many people happily, trustingly and unthinkingly subscribe to its rubbish.
For that reason, it is so much worse than anything else!
At least all the other garbage is not so pretentious!
Agree totally with Baalbek – Guardian is a disgraceful publication and is, however, far from “soft-left”: its agenda (since Rusbridger) is wholly American and attracts a yob audience of indoctrinated right-wing simpletons who have no understanding of their country’s war crimes. The Guardian’s right-wing, corporate-capitalist agenda is utterly corrupt and the publication cannot be trusted for anything it states. The Guardian’s role in the torture of Julian Assange is noteworthy – The Guardian is as guilty of his imprisonment and torture as are all the liars who have framed this innocent man.
The constant character assassination of Julian Assange engaged in by The Guardian, which went on for years, should never be forgotten. Craig Murray is absolutely right to point out the guilty parties who engaged in this libel and those “journalists” (not one of them is worthy of the title) should be prosecuted for their crimes. Freeman is a particular species of poisonous liar who thinks she engages in satire – she doesn’t remotely arrive at understanding the concept. The inanity of those who write their bilge should be constantly boycotted and The Guardian should be considered amongst the most guilty of media rogues responsible for the slow murder of Julian Assange.
“The Radical begins by demanding a greater extension of political rights, but he soon sees that the breath of liberty leads to the uplifting of the proletariat, and then he turns round, changes his opinions, and reverts to repressive legislation and government by the sword.
A vast array of courts, judges, executioners, policemen, and gaolers is needed to uphold these privileges; and this array gives rise in its turn to a whole system of espionage, of false witness, of spies, of threats and corruption.
The system under which we live checks in its turn the growth of the social sentiment. We all know that without uprightness, without self-respect, without sympathy and mutual aid, human kind must perish, as perish the few races of animals living by rapine, or the slave-keeping ants. But such ideas are not to the taste of the ruling classes, and they have elaborated a whole system of pseudo-science to teach the contrary.
Fine sermons have been preached on the text that those who have should share with those who have not, but he who would act out this principle is speedily informed that these beautiful sentiments are all very well in poetry, but not in practice. “To lie is to degrade and besmirch oneself,” we say, and yet all civilized life becomes one huge lie. We accustom ourselves and our children to hypocrisy, to the practice of a double-faced morality. And since the brain is ill at ease among lies, we cheat ourselves with sophistry. Hypocrisy and sophistry become the second nature of the civilized man.
But a society cannot live thus; it must return to truth or cease to exist.”
…..Expert form chapter one. Pëtr Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread
It’s nice to see Kropotkin is not entirely forgotten, for a while he lived in Brighton and now even has a Brighton city bus named after him, see: https://www.myscience.uk/news/wire/anarchist_prince_to_be_commemorated_with_blue_plaque-2018-sussex
Break him out.
George
Seconded.
FREE JULIAN ASSANGE! Jail the war criminals and their toadies!
There can be no doubt that there is no rule of law.
Assange was banged up on the flimsiest of pretexts with the police, the prosecution service and the judiciary doing all that they could to facilitate that.
But do people really care. For the vast majority, I don’t think they do. And that maybe, is why 1930s Germany ended up the way that it did. Eerie parallels between then and now.
‘rule of law’ also revealed here that Bulk Personal Datasets started in at-least 1917, the grand-uncle of mp Luciana Berger was pursued by stenographers, even whilst chairman of the Labour Party, and David Aaronovitch’s father was followed…
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/mi5-spied-manny-shinwell-kinni-zilliacus-gorpal-mukund-huddar-pieter-keuneman
Your confusing the rule of law with justice.
…This is the systems proper function (what they are doing to julian) checking challenges to ruling class dominance. Keeping their control over the education of the population etc. Thus such absurd things are though my most everyone.
Law is violent control. It is functioning as intended.
“Law is violent control. It is functioning as intended.”
And *justice* has no substance beyond mental conception. There is no such beast….there is loss, hurt, resentment retribution, vengeance, bitterness, example, suppression on and on, but *justice*, not so much. Can there ever truly be a balancing of the scales that does not negatively impact someone or something else or can the notion of justice turn back the hands of time? Justice beats to the rhythm of the lawyers wallet, its beat is misleading and pounds in resentment and bitterness and the hope it promises can, and often does, steal away not just time but the very life force.
Not saying I have the answer or even an alternative, but I am sure that the notion of justice, is bollox.
Every time I listen to or watch BBC news reports these days they take a comment from some random Scottish person. It’s got to be deliberate.
Thomas Cook goes down and the BBC are talking to inconvenienced Scottish people at an airport, kids take part in a climate change protest and they interview a Scottish parent, some new medication is invented that will potentially put an end to itchy balls and “we have Hamish on the line from Inverscrotum…”
It’s also clear that the Orange Order has been activated recently. There seems to be Orange parades in Glasgow every weekend. I heard there was even one in London in the last few days. Incidentally, I have no issue with Orange Walks. It’s their right to make idiots of themselves just as it’s mine.
So, what the hell is going on with all this? It sounds like someone is panicking and very concerned about the prospect of Scotland becoming independent. Funnily enough, I get the impression that independence supporters in Scotland have never felt so pessimistic and unrepresented.
Strange times.
It sounds like someone is panicking. Yep it sounds like it with every western news report, fear is the main arbiter today, fear that makes us buy stuff, fear that makes us worried whether life will carry on as normal and fear of the unknown, known threats as well as the newly known threats. Ebola rampant enough to stop a state reporting it, apparently, false fear of anti semitism to deny an activist become PM, fear of the army in the streets should a hard Brexit turn humble workers into non tax payers.
Don’t panic, get even and be publicly disobedient….join XR
Rain has come and shoed away the blue boys above,
wasting fuel on training for war,
some are still watching them with love,
as they plan to bomb the innocent from great height,
do as they’re told, creating fright.
“It’s also clear that the Orange Order has been activated recently. There seems to be Orange parades in Glasgow every weekend. ”
Hatuey.
Yes the greatest amount of marches in Scotland are attributed to the O/O, and second spot goes to wait for it, its the Derry boys. Wings Over Scotland’s Twitter feed had a chart on the number a few days back and the top two stuck in my mind, between them they’re in the hundreds, which I found quite remarkable then I realised independence or the fear of it must be a driving factor for them.
As for Thomas Cook, I find it quite disgusting that the British government can find the resources (Magic money tree) to bailout failing banks such as RBS, of course throwing they’re corporate buddies a lifeline is a way of securing future capital or employment.
Yet the same politicians can’t find £200 million pounds to bailout Thomas Cook, a firm with a long and interesting history, and save thousands of much needed jobs in the process.
Of course the collapse does sound like mismanagement, and the insincere interview with one of the executives yesterday over not being able to carry on, but a good fight was fought, smacked of crocodile tears. They’ll not be stranded and unsure of how to get home, their golden parachutes await them.
I’m afraid, for me, it was wrong to bail out the banks and, since two wrongs don’t make a right, it would be wrong to bail out Thomas Cook too. FYI I was vehemently against bailing out the banks at the time, and I don’t say that from some cosy retrospective position.
All the problems I see these days are down to people screwing around with established rules and failing to accept that there’s consequences to the choices we make. Laissez Faire?
What’s next, is someone going to tell me liquidation doesn’t mean death for a business and claim Thomas Cook’s illustrious history?
“I’m afraid, for me, it was wrong to bail out the banks and, since two wrongs don’t make a right, it would be wrong to bail out Thomas Cook too.”
I’m beginning to change my stance on not bailing out the big beasts of industry, I until recently thought it might be the right thing to do, to let the firms go under.
However, I realised that the collapse of large firms who would usually get through tough times is down to a few individuals and possibly their greed.
Australian and NZ banks had the proper laws in place ergo their banks virtually needed no bailout, casino banking and mismanagement and greed are the culprits perpetrated by the few, though the many lose out because of them.
No I’m now of a mind, that if governments can first change the laws (major coaxing required ) and if large struggling conglomerates due to mismanagement, begin to flag then why not save the jobs of the workers by bailing them out, on the conditions that repayment is made and proper procedures are adhered to.
Why should thousands of innocent workers be made unemployed, and left unsure over income, if the government of the day can help.
ros, my concern with the RBS issue is what happens to their customers if the are not “bailed out”. My guess is that I’d have been up shit creek if they’d let it fail and presumably I would have lost my house.
Perhaps there is an alternative, but I’m not sure how that would work in practice.
I’m pleased that you didn’t lose your house John. As you say there’s no simple answer to a very difficult poser.
One thing you may also notice is that when male prisoners get the UK version of ‘the perp walk’, filmed being taken out of the Serco van and into the court, he is invariably tethered to a female guard.
I don’t think many waging this campaign of brutality know it, i’m sure many do believe this is about julian, convinced by there own propaganda so they can feel better about it.
But it’s go nothing to do with him individually. It’s a class issue.
Just look who speaks out & who doesn’t, who was at the vigils night & day at the embassy?
Maybe tomorrow it will be one of your children.
our* children.
Stop Press: the Supreme Court of the UK has just declared the prorogation of Parliament by Boris to be unlawful, and so effectively preferred the view of the Scottish judges. A good day for the Constitution of the UK as a whole.
Johnson I think is in New York at the moment at a UN climate meeting.
The Telegraph says Johnson has said he won’t resign over this.
Best place for him. As he has dual UK/US citizenship, perhaps he could stay there.’
‘Kevin Schofield
@PolhomeEditor
5 Minutes ago
Jeremy Corbyn takes to the stage at Labour conference to announce the Supreme Court ruling, demand the immediate recall of Parliament and ask PM “to consider his position and become the shortest-serving Prime Minister there’s ever been”. Huge ovation from the hall.’
As for Labour I’m under the impression that a vote was passed at their conference not to have a policy on Brexit until after a GE.
Who in their right mind would vote for a party that doesn’t have a position on Brexit prior to a GE?
Corbyn’s still hedging his bets by sitting on the fence.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/labour-and-brexit-clarity-at-last/
@RoS – If you frame it as Labour not having a policy, you should also say the Tories have no policy. The Tory position right now, at this moment, is “Try to get a deal; if we can, good; otherwise crash out”. The Labour position is “Get the best deal available, then let the people decide between it and Remain”. In neither case is it a straightforward “We will do X”.
From a fascistic “let’s push this envelope where it’s never been pushed before” point of view (hello Bannon and Cummings), a huge “physical force” popular movement against a Labour “choice between Surrender annd Surrender”, and backed by most of the media, looks ideal. This is exactly what Nigel Farage has threatened civil war – literally civil war, military conflict – about.
They have been very clear, Even going back to May’s tenure.Though the specifics of a deal they have intended to attempt all along would be hashed out in the party’s internal democratic process.
Seems your being wilfully ignorant, Why are you repeating right wing taking points?
Do you even know how the labour party works?
RoS
I see you are indulging in your favourite sport of slagging labour. The policy is very clear:
51.8% voted to leave
48 % voted to remain
35% of labour voters voted to leave.
But of course it is very simple to follow the braying of the press that Labour has to have a clear policy. Why?
A pro remain stance would alienate at least half of the voters or 35% of Labour’s own voters. whilst not attracting any of the hard remainers from other parties. In fact Labour’s is the only stance that offers a true democratic solution and a unifying and healing answer, let the people decide we are not so demagogic about it but if we are in charge at least we will work out an equitable leave.
As he has dual UK/US citizenship
Johnson did actually renounce his US citizenship: a somewhat surprising fact.
Public lists of persons who have renounced US citizenship are published by the US government. I looked it up once and his name was on one of the lists. (I can’t remember the web page, but I found the lists through google.)
Boris Johnson renounced US citizenship in the last quarter of 2016, so he must have been a US citizen for at least two and a half months when he was British Foreign Secretary, a post he was appointed to in mid-July. Even if he wasn’t a known liar, that could be a textbook example of a conflict of interest.
I doubt the real reason that Johnson is currently in Donald Trump’s home city has anything to do with wanting to attend an event with Pippi “Climate Change” Longstocking. Once upon a time Peter Mandelson ran to the US when he was in trouble too. After the indyref result, David Cameron ran to the same country. It’s kinda like Head Office.
As for who else in the cabinet, the government, or among the special advisers is a foreign citizen (US? Israeli? Irish?) it’s anybody’s guess. The information is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Johnson renounced his US citizenship to avoid paying capital gains tax in America.
So he’s going to hang on to the doorpost? There could be a Commons vote of no confidence in him personally, or a decision that he acted in contempt of Parliament, or both. I can’t imagine how he would possibly win either of those votes.
Any word from Rees-Mogg yet?
I wish Jeremy Corbyn wouldn’t use the term “consider his position”. Say something pithy, for goodness’ sake! If you don’t want to say “In the name of God, go!”, say “Get out!”
They haven’t only declared it unlawful: they have annulled it. The position now is that Parliament has not been prorogued.
This will probably mean there is no Tory conference.
People should remember that one single man is
* the person who first proposed prorogation as a method to achieve a Tory Brexit
* the Leader of the Commons (responsible for organising government business there)
* the Lord President of the Privy Council (the now annulled prorogation took the form of an Order in Council)
* the berk who lay down on the Commons front bench with his eyes shut when he was being questioned by opposition MPs
Get out, Rees-Mogg, and get out now, and take your cokehead school chum Johnson with you.
That fact that nobody, including you, knew how this court ruling would go proves that it was at the very least a grey area. You can’t now argue that the ruling proves the Government was blatantly out of order when just an hour ago you were probably thinking the Government would win.
This case was always about badgering the Government, making Boris look bad, and having a bit of fun. I might be up for that but let’s not over-egg the pudding. Nobody really cares if Parliament is prorogued or not and if they didn’t tell us nobody would even notice.
The UK constitution, which doesn’t even exist in any meaningfully definable way, is a complete farce. Today’s judgement simply confirmed that. That aside, this ruling amounts to nothing but a nice cheque or two for some lawyers and already rich Justices.
It’s true about most court rulings (and jury decisions) that nobody knows for certain how they will go. I was not thinking the government would win. On the contrary, I thought the advice to the monarch would be ruled unlawful, but I am surprised (and pleased) that the judges went further still and annulled the prorogation altogether.
Clearly we disagree about how important this is to people, but I think it’s you who are overegging the pudding by saying the decision amounts only to some money for the lawyers.
Have you factored it in that Johnson is going to be back at the dispatch box before the end of this week? I don’t see him as being able to cut it with bombast and bluster somehow. This is terrible for Johnson. He’s likely to be out of office within 10 days.
How it plays out for the Tory party, I am not quite so sure now. I thought it would be good for them, but who knows?
You aren’t listening. Boris won’t resign and shouldn’t because at the root of this and what he did is the steaming slab of useless crap that we refer to as a constitution.
He’s really charged with trying to take advantage of the lack of clarity in that constitution and, unless you assume lying or misleading the Queen raises moral questions, which being reasonably sane I don’t, there’s no reason for him to resign.
He’s no more or less a slug than he was yesterday or last year.
You think it’s moralising and not “sane” to want rid of a leader because they tell lies?
As for morals, the question of whether Johnson will resign is different from whether he “should”. I don’t believe in the “should” for government leaders when the whole system and state are corrupt – and when it’s money, wage-labour, commodity economy, private property and the capitalist mode of production that should, and must, from the viewpoint of humanity, be thrown in the bin. (If I say a government leader “should” do this or that, it’s shorthand and has considerations of psychological warfare thrown in.) The abolition of capitalism is not on the horizon unfortunately – technofascism is far more likely – but in the meantime I want to see the ruling elite in Britain, its principal political party, its monarchy, and one of its principal tools for retaining its power, the private school system, weakened like nobody’s business. They should be seen as the filth that they are. I like the Labour decision against private schools. Let’s bring the Tory scum out in their true colours – let them scoff that getting rid of Eton will be like turning the clock backwards, going back to the time of wildcat strikes and Twiggy, and tantamount to surrendering to North Korea. They got away with saying this about anti-trade union legislation in the 1980s. With Eton and the Clarendon schools I’ll doubt they would be so successful. You talk about “sane”. Let’s watch the Tory elite’s mouths fill up with the foam when they attempt to defend what “benefits” the schools that THEY attended, that THEY send their offspring to, that THEY love so much but nobody else does, bring to the population as a whole. Go for it, Seumas.
This also looks very bad for the Queen, who should have known better than to simply accept it despite obvious consitutional and democratic considerations.
Awwww the poor Queen… my heart bleeds.
“the Queen … should have known better than to simply accept it”
– are you sure she did? And she can’t really refuse the Prime Minister. The UK constitution (for all it’s faults) just does not work that way. She is an unelected – and thus powerless – Head of State.
I know many people here would love to see her “guillotined on Trafalgar Square” (to paraphrase Peter Hitchens with reference to the Tories). Time will tell, but I really don’t see that there could be any alternative.
The Prime Minister is in charge. Not the Queen.
UK’s (=Greater London) Elite protects their own – shocker – not.
Maybe take a train some time, @Antonym, from somewhere on the edge of Greater London (e.g. Sutton or Croydon) to the centre, and report back what you see? You won’t spot many polo games or Rolls Royce salesrooms.
Wrong again Antonym, if you or I do something unlawful/illegal, we get arrested charged and put to court.
I want to ser him arrested and stopped from proroguing Parliament again.
Can an appointed/selected PM be arrested?
An unlawful suspension of parliament.
For once a decision against the illegal use of executive force. And fantastic that the Scottish Court of Session got it right in advance of this decision.
The question however as to why we the people allowed the ever creeping increase in un-democratic rule remains to be answered. Let’s have more of this, and let us in Scotland take back full democratic control.
Dominic Cummings has succeeded in rattling the judiciary with his proroguement of parliament. That will embolden the bully to reinstate the proroguement. Like tennis, politics is a spectator sport salivating the spectators with barely covered crotches and spontaneous grunts.
Compare that to the lonely encarcerations of political prisoners Assange and Manning.
Isolated, in the company of murderers. Drugged, despised and ignored.
” indeed they are in total loss
Except those that believe and do good works
And advocate for truth
And advocate for patience.”
Justice is not titillating the public with juicy headlines. Justice is blowing the whistle on state evil and rotting in jail for your conscience.
According to Amber Rudd, Boris never made known to the Cabinet the legal advice he got about prorogation. I wonder whether his lawyers told him that it was a bad idea, but he (encouraged by DC, both interpretations valid) decided to go ahead anyway.
Sounds as though he’s unlikely to blame the lawyers (Buckland and Cox) then. (Trump in his position might, but whilst Johnson has an obnoxious personality he’s not la-la like Trump.)
N_
Boris not La la
For some reason best known to himself the oaf decided to portray himself as a handyman.
Maybe because he thought people who work with their hands are considered more trustworthy.
His description of an imaginary Boris trying to make a cardboard box into a bus, something that would take me about five minutes, was so excessively laborious that he was obviously making it up.
Why? Was it something he dreamt? The guy, if that’s what he is , is nuts. Completely and incurably bonkers.
Unlike Trump
The Mail has an interesting account of Jonathan Freedland and Sadiq Khan dealing with some rather aggressive labour members last night. By all accounts, Khan dealt with it well. At the end of the article: “Dame Margaret Hodge MP said: ‘I’m not going to give up until Jeremy Corbyn ceases to be leader.'” At least she’s honest, but I would rather she took Khan’s approach.
The gentrifying and social cleansing approach. He is a corrupt fraud, forcing working class people out of London.
@ S September 24, 2019 at 11:50
Would that be the same Margaret Hodge as the ex-Islington councillor?
‘Margaret Hodge and the Islington Child Abuse Scandal’:
https://beastrabban.wordpress.com/2019/03/04/margaret-hodge-and-the-islington-child-abuse-scandal/
(Rhetorical question).
Bercow has ordered that the troughers report back to the HoC tomorrow at 11.30am.
Trust that none of them slipped off on a Thomas Cook holiday/flight and are marooned elsewhere.
Return to Parliament to do what? The only thing they can get a majority on is No-deal Brexit being a bad idea. Thanks to Swinson they can’t agree on a caretaker Prime Minister. They can’t agree on a reason to request an A50 extension (GE or Referendum).
Days apon days of meaningless prattle and pearl clutching. This is what turned the “volk” against Parliamentary democracy in early 1930’s Weimar Republic.
Cummings wants a “people v’s Parliament / treacherous elite” GE. The trap is set and the idiots can’t wait to throw themselves into it.
How did the English High Court go from a unanimous finding that the proroguation was not justiciable to the Supreme Court finding unanimously that the proroguation was not legal? Because the Government goaded them into a volt face with all the talk of a second proroguation or simply continuing with business as normal in defiance of the Courts.
” Thanks to Swinson they can’t agree on a caretaker Prime Minister. They can’t agree on a reason to request an A50 extension (GE or Referendum).”
You’re far too cut-and-dried there. Better not to believe clap-trap coming out of politicians mouths, unless it’s re-confirmed. There’ll be a negotiation, if it’s possible to get Johnson out.
The Tory conference is scheduled to take place Sunday 29 September 2019 until Wednesday 2 October 2019.
How does the latest news affect that? What is the official date of the end of this session?
The parliamentary officials and the civil service must be spitting feathers.
“How does the latest news affect that?”
It will just be the usual war between the various factions.
No good Dodos complaining about their feathers when their main problem is their having all been eaten up by Zionists.
There’s nothing to prevent parliament sitting during the Tory conference. It’s only a convention that they recess for the conferences, and that has to be voted by Parliament (which of course they may not be in a hurry to do, given the situation).
Supreme Court judgment.
And the court’s <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-summary.pdf".
Front page of the Evening Standard.
So parliament will reconvene, and continue in its three years plus ineptness surrounding Brexit.
Looks like a GE is on the horizon, however this is an interesting titbit from Wings.
“UK electoral law requires 25 working days between the dissolution of Parliament and the date of a general election. There are exactly 27 working days (inclusive) between now and 31 October.”
https://wingsoverscotland.com/lord-pannick-on-the-streets-of-london/
A supplement to my above comment on how quickly a GE could take place before October 31st.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-08-28/how-quickly-could-a-general-election-take-place/
An interesting titbit from wings that I’ve been pointing out on here for weeks…
That’s just one root to a general election though. There are others (plural).
And I think it’s more relevant to consider the option that exists for replacing the government without a general election which would take around two weeks. That’s the most likely scenario.
I guess Swinson will start attacking Corbyn again and try to make a case for herself taking over as PM.
What a disaster with Boris.
If Boris can go into a GE as PM, in my opinion he’ll win with the backing of those who voted to leave the EU.
Whilst the remain vote will be divided up by the other parties, Labour, LibDems etc.
So you think it will be a single issue election?
For those who wanted to leave the EU, and feel that democracy has failed them it will.
Spot on RoS.
Until Hard Brexit is delivered, nothing else is of importance.
The future of this country depends on our turning away from our failed empire and trying to make Tory and Nu Labour empire 2 by colluding with Israel and the US. The future of this country for the indefinite future is not with these dodos, of which Jo Swinson is a prime example, nor with the dodos of the EU like Macron, but with the talented intellectual team around Jeremy Corbyn. Where does Macdonnell get his whacky baccy 32 hours a week and believing the Skripal yarn?
The idea for the anti-hard-Brexit alliance was to ask for an extension for Brexit before a GE exactly because there is no time for a GE before end of October. It is also the reason why Boris called for a vote of no confidence in himself but failed twice to get one.
Hasn’t Johnson called for a GE twiced already and been blocked by the opposition, who I understand are trying to safeguard our imminent exit from the EU on October 31st via the Benn bill.
One wonders what will happen if Johnson, who’ll be well informed by now of what’s going on (Supreme court verdict) asks for another GE, and the opposition including Corbyn of whom I think now awaits with bated breath a GE say yes.
Wouldn’t parliament then need to be dissolved, and wouldn’t the Benn bill also then become void, and Johnson would not then be able to ask the EU for an extension.
RoS
Why ignore Craig’s point that Johnson’s appointment as PM was unconstitutional?
It followed 3 years of unconstitutional behaviour in which May interpreted Brexit as not just Leaving the EU but also jettisoning free trade and free movement of people.
The Tories are morally obliged to recognise the referendum result to leave the EU and Cornyn also wants to.
The referendum mentioned nothing about limiting trade and people. Far age can only muster a few yellowjackets not a whole army of rich racists to fight a civil war.
The reality is that tomorrow Johnson gets his bulk data package scrutinised by a Commons committee and on Wednesday resigns as PM. Queenie accepts Cornyn as caretaker PM And the rest is history.
The British establishment will not be pissed off by Cummings for another second. Corbyn’s patience and good manners will win the Queen’s approval.
That is precisely why Johnson’s call for a GE failed twice to pass through parliament. Calling a GE now will mean de facto leaving the EU with a hard Brexit at the end of October.
Regards Swinson’s ambitions.
A recent edition of Private Eye stated that the LibDem constituency associations in Sheffield were no longer viable and a city wide association has been formed. Their accounts for 2018 show income from membership fees at £399. Therefore they have a maximum membership of 33 for the City of Sheffield.
Meanwhile, the LibDems nationally have spent £367 K on Facebook advertising in the last 11 months (Salmon of data @ Slugger O’Toole).
Think about those numbers, there’s foul play afoot.
Swinson is a sockpuppet for (a branch of) the Deep State.
Viv O’ Bliv
More like one of those orange wind socks seen at airports.
Are you sure the new FB CEO isn’t financing the Swinson campaign?
On a simple question of yes or no the electorate voted to leave the eu. Over three years later we have still not left. Who exactly is behaving illegally here?
quite
I think it’s a fair question to ask. I don’t like Boris or his government, but he is trying to implement the result of the referendum.
I wonder how all of this desperation to remain in the EU is playing out with politicians abroad. I think it makes us look quite weak.
If we are so desperate to remain then is there no amount of sovereignty we would be willing to give up?
And are we really sure that the UK needs to belong to the EU to survive?
If leaving the EU would destroy the UK then surely the Scottish nationalists here ought to be cheering Boris along.
I have always believed that an independent Scotland can do it’s own deals with Europe.
“If leaving the EU would destroy the UK then surely the Scottish nationalists here ought to be cheering Boris along.”
John2o2o.
At first glance yes that would seem true, however, if Johnson is willing to lie and undermine Westminster, he could also attempt to negate Holyrood by rolling back devolution. Those living in Scotland would have no recourse to the EU simply because we’d be out.
The Tories have already completed their staging post in the new Hub building that opens in Edinburgh this year, with a 3000 staff capacity and the only cabinet office outside of London, the signs are looking ominous in my opinion.
As for your first point, if you believe that Brexiting will severely damage the UK’s economy amongst other things, then would it not be fair to say that leaving without a deal is not a good idea.
Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas but on this occasion the majority voted to leave the EU based on what can only be described as misinformation.
The question is, is democracy absolute even when it leads to self harm? Or do we draw a line in the sand.
“Johnson is willing to lie and undermine Westminster, he could also attempt to negate Holyrood by rolling back devolution. Those living in Scotland would have no recourse to the EU simply because we’d be out.”
– A very good point ros, thank you
When it comes to stopping brexit, anything goes. People that were talking about getting rid of the monarchy just yesterday are shaking with anger today because she may have been misled.
In other news, the authorities have cleared those who funded brexit of wrongdoing.
It is officially a matter of fact and not opinion that there are no grounds whatsoever today for overruling the 17.4 million who voted to leave the EU.
Brexit will hurt but it must go ahead. If it hurts some of those who have callously voted for Tories, wars, and austerity, and turned a blind eye to the suffering of others then it may turn out to be a good thing.
That 130,000 have died of austerity-poverty since 2010 in the fifth richest country in the world, is a tragic and shameful cancerous sore on the conscience of the British middle classes.
“It is officially a matter of fact and not opinion that there are no grounds whatsoever today for overruling the 17.4 million who voted to leave the EU.”
correct
“Brexit will hurt but it must go ahead.”
It’s never as bad as you think Hatuey
Boris – because we’re a Parliamentary democracy. The Supreme Court strengthened the position of Parliament in its ruling.
That said, I can see many MPs who promised to deliver Brexit losing their seats (mainly Tory and Labour) at the next general election, and the Brexit Party and the Lib Dems making big gains. It’s no wonder that Labour is sitting on the fence. The party as a whole prefers Remain, but many Labour constituencies shave Brexit majorities.
If there is to be a vote of confidence in the government following the Supreme Court’s ruling, then without question Jeremy Corbyn, the Leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition, should lead any interim government.
Undoubtedly, in such a scenario, there will be calls from Swinson and her ilk for Corbyn to stand aside for the good of the country, but in that situation it is she and they who must put aside their silly ideas and get behind the leader of the opposition.
If the situation arises Corbyn and Labour must unequivocally and uncompromisingly demand this.
Well said Peter, JCshould be going to the palace with his plan for Government. The shrill yellow Tory whp supported most of the Tories austerity measures should take whatever portfolios they can coalesce and be a happy bunny, it was her who got the Lib Dems into Government again.
Labour Greens and Snp, as well as the yellow peril will have to have/ should have had coalition talks?, weeks ago.
After the Scottish judgement no other outcome was possible. Imho
There was an interesting article in the Torygraph this morning by Nigel Farage, published about half an hour before the Supreme Court announced its decision.
Farage says his offer of a pact between the Brexit Party and the Tory Party would have helped to achieve two aims. Only one of them was the “delivery” of a “clean break Brexit”, or in other words a crashout. The second aim was “smashing” the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. Not ensuring they don’t take office. Not providing the electorate with a unified slate opposed to theirs. But “smashing” them.
“Over the last few weeks I have been touring the country and meeting large audiences in predominantly Labour areas. The passion shown by so many people in these places is extraordinary. They crave not just Brexit but a new kind of politics altogether.”
Ah, the craving!
Farage is offering to sate the popular craving by smashing the left and centre.
Other than immigration, is there a single other fact in British life that the majority of Leave voters can associate with EU membership? (Never mind that most immigrants to Britain come from outside the EU. That isn’t the point.)
Inside the article the Torygraph place
* a clip of a dark-skinned British woman speaking triumphantly (Gina Miller) and
* a photograph of Boris Johnson shaking hands with foreigner Donald Tusk, with Tusk standing slightly taller and standing on the left.
They sure know their readership!
“Whatever happens, the Brexit Party is ready.”
Or let’s say it in Croatian, shall we? Za dom, spremni!”
What about if a Labour government happens and acts on its promise to hold a referendum between Labour Deal and Remain? Where will the craving and the urge for some smashing turn then?
Bet on a Labour election victory and loose money for sure.
Immigration and EU? One word: Merkel.
Sure the UK let in droves of non integrating Pakistani families, made up that bed and now has to lie in it: Karma.
I agree totally with your views on Julian Assange and the views of these MPs and journalists. And to digress a bit it did not surprise me in the least that David Aaronovitch gave a very snide review of Edward Snowden’s new book. He basically disissedSnowden’s motives, attributing his actions to ego etc.
The Scottish readership on here might be interested to know that Johnson is pushing hard for GM foods to be introduced into Scotland.
https://gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/19068
@ Sharp Ears September 24, 2019 at 22:42
If he is pushing for GMO’s to be introduced into Scotland, he obviously also wants them in the rest of the UK.
GM’s; neonicotinoids; 5G; piratising the NHS; Fracking; demonising Russia, Iran, China; increasingly belligerent Foreign Policy re wars, attacks: has the calendar stuck on April 1st?
Even turkeys know better than to vote for Christmas. Hopefully we will soon see the back of Bullingdon Boris; maybe he’ll apply to Trump for asylum, to save his head from High Treason charges.
Maria Miller Con Basingstoke calls out Jess Phillips Lab Birmingham Yardley
26th September
‘Calculated and highly political’: Maria Miller slams ‘screaming’ Jess Phillips after heated commons debate
https://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/17930293.maria-miller-gets-twitter-argument-labour-mp/
The Privatisation of Espionage: What On Earth is MI6-Connected Citizens=Network Up To? – Sputnik International https://sputniknews.com/military/201909271076906340-hakluyt-citizens-network-mi6/
There is still much work to be done uncovering the networks of anti democratic forces who spy on us and lock up those who expose the lies and crimes of the rich and powerful.
‘Spanish security company spied on Julian Assange in London for the United States’:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52310.htm
‘Spain’s High Court is investigating the director of UC Global S. L. and the activities of his company, which had been hired to protect the Ecuadorian embassy in the English capital
By José María Irujo
September 29, 2019 “Information Clearing House” – Undercover Global S. L., the Spanish defense and private security company that was charged with protecting the Ecuadorian embassy in London during the long stay there of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, spied on the cyberactivist for the US intelligence service. That’s according to statements and documents to which EL PAÍS have had access. David Morales, the owner of the company, supposedly handed over audio and video to the CIA of the meetings Assange held with his lawyers and collaborators. Morales is being investigated for this activity by Spain’s High Court, the Audiencia Nacional.
The judicial investigation into the director of UC Global S. L. and the activities of his company were ordered by a judge named José de la Mata, and they began weeks after EL PAÍS published videos, audios and reports that show how the company spied on the meetings that the cyberactivist held in the embassy.
The secret probe is the consequence of a criminal complaint filed by Assange himself, in which he accuses Morales and the company of the alleged offenses involving violations of his privacy and the secrecy of his client-attorney privileges, as well as misappropriation, bribery and money laundering. The director of UC Global S. L. has not responded to calls from this newspaper in order to confirm his version of events….’
It seems Spain has at least a partially free Judiciary; let’s hope this investigation does it’s job, and gets some international attention.