Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Corruption of New Labour: Britain’s Watergate?


John Simkin
 Share

Recommended Posts

It has just been announced that Tony Blair is to be awarded a £100,000 Liberty medal by the National Constitutional Center based in Washington. It is given to those whose "actions represent the founding principles of the United States". Tom Lehrer claimed that when Henry Kissinger's won the Nobel Peace prize in 1973 it signaled the "death of satire". The same point could be applied to Blair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 417
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi is still alive after being released nearly a year ago on "compassionate grounds". On the surface the decision to release the Lockerbie bomber last August made little political sense. However, part of the deal was that Al Megrahi abandoned his legal appeal against his sentence. If the court case went ahead some government documents would have been released. It seems that MI5 and the CIA were opposed to these documents entering the public domain.

The other factor could have concerned Tony Blair's meeting with Gaddafi in 2007 - just hours before BP unveiled a £500 million oil contract with Libya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

A group of nine prominent experts, including Michael Powers, a QC and former coroner, and Julian Bion, a professor of intensive care medicine, wrote to The Times last week, calling for a full inquest into the death of Dr. David Kelly. Strangely, the government decided that the inquest should be carried out by Lord Hutton, during his inquiry into the death of David Kelly. Hutton, who since his days in Northern Ireland, was under the control of MI5, spent less than a couple of hours on the death and few relevant witnesses were called. The Hutton report cleared the government of wrongdoing, while the BBC was strongly criticised, leading to the resignation of the BBC's chairman and director-general.

The experts in the letter to The Times, described Lord Hutton’s official explanation for the death of the government’s weapons expert seven years ago as “extremely unlikely”. Tom Mangold, the MI5 friendly investigative journalist, was one of the leading proponents of the suicide theory. However, he appeared on BBC 4’s “Today” programme to say that after reading what the experts had to say about the death, he no longer believes in the suicide theory and is also calling for a full inquest. (Mangold now argues that he died of a heart attack while trying to cut his wrist.)

The former Tory leader, Michael Howard, is also calling for a full inquest (Why did he not do so at the time?) It has also emerged on Friday that the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, is seriously thinking of ordering a new inquest. As he happens, one of his ministerial colleagues, Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat MP for Lewes, wrote a book on why he thinks Dr. Kelly was murdered. The Tories clearly see that reopening this case will cause embarrassment to the previous Labour government. However, I fear that they are willing to go along with the cover-up. It reminds me of the House Senate Committee on Assassinations that looked into the assassination of JFK in the late 1970s. It was no longer possible to defend the case that Oswald was the lone gunman. So instead, they brought in G. Robert Blakey to claim that JFK was a victim of the Mafia.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKassassinationsC.htm

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKblakey.htm

I suspect we will get a new inquest and that they will confirm that the ruling elite have decided that it can no longer support the idea of suicide and that Dr. David Kelly died the way Tom Mangold said he did, of a heart attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Letter in the Guardian:

It is not a question of whether there should or should not be a proper inquest into Dr David Kelly's death (Editorial, 17 August). This is not a matter for debate. The laws of this country state very clearly that there must be an inquest into any death occurring in the manner in which Dr Kelly is said to have died.

Further, before a suicide verdict can be returned, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased intended to kill himself. In the absence of a suicide note, it is extremely difficult to achieve this level of proof. Anyone who examines the transcripts of the evidence heard by Lord Hutton can see that the required level of proof was not attained, even if Lord Hutton had heard evidence under oath, which he crucially did not.

Further, Lord Falconer inappropriately invoked Section 17a of the 1988 Coroners' Act, "ordering" the coroner Nicholas Gardiner to "adjourn indefinitely" his inquest into Dr Kelly's death on 13 August 2003. This intervention by the then lord chancellor surely constituted a blatant subversion of due process of the law.

In the case of Dr Kelly, the suicide verdict of Lord Hutton is clearly unsafe and may represent one of the gravest miscarriages of justice ever to occur in this country. A suicide verdict effectively closes the case for ever, and if the deceased was in fact murdered stops the search for the murderer(s). A suicide verdict should not be reached lightly, and if there is any doubt the coroner should return an open verdict.

The fact that no inquest has been held into Dr David Kelly's death is nothing less than a national disgrace, particularly when one recalls the context in which his death took place.

Dr Stephen Frost

Colwyn Bay, Clwyd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

There is a strange confession in Tony Blair’s memoirs, A Journey (2010). At the beginning of April 1994, when John Smith was leader of the Labour Party, Blair was staying in a hotel in Paris. Blair writes:

I remember waking up the first morning and then waking Cherie. I said to her “If John dies, I will be leader, not Gordon (Brown). And somehow I think this will happen. I just think it will.”

The following month, on 12th May, the 56 year-old John Smith died of a heart-attack. Later that day, Blair, according to his memoirs, bumps into Peter Mandelson:

“Peter” I said, “you know I love you, but this is mine. I am sure of it. And you must help me do it.”

As Craig Brown has pointed out:

“The echoes of Jesus saying “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I shall build my church” are creepy and unavoidable.

Peter Mandelson agrees to change sides and abandons Gordon Brown, the favourite to takeover from John Smith. What is more, he spreads rumours amongst Labour MPs that Brown, like Mandelson is a homosexual and that this information will be used against him by the press during the next General Election if he becomes leader of the party. This frightens the Labour MPs into supporting Blair as leader. Brown withdrew from the contest and quickly finds himself a woman to marry. He also receives a promise from Blair that he will replace him as prime minister if he wins the 1997 General Election (a promise that he did not fulfil until 2007).

Blair might try to convince his readers that the prediction of John Smith’s death came from God. However, I suspect that this information came from another source. Maybe it came from a fellow member of MI5? Maybe the death of John Smith needs to be investigated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

What do the Brits here think about "Red Ed" Milliband?

Does his election as party leader really indicate the party is, a least partially, returning to its roots?

What are the chances of such a young, inexperienced Jewish guy getting elected PM?

What will become of his brother will he remain Shadow Foreign Secretary?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do the Brits here think about "Red Ed" Milliband?

Does his election as party leader really indicate the party is, a least partially, returning to its roots?

What are the chances of such a young, inexperienced Jewish guy getting elected PM?

What will become of his brother will he remain Shadow Foreign Secretary?

His Jewish origins will not be a problem. Benjamin Disraeli became prime minister when anti-Jewish feeling was at its highest in Britain.

The current economic circumstances means that he will develop a set of policies that are to the left of those of Blair/Brown (not difficult to do). The newspaper barons like Murdoch will not like it but their power is in decline. Anyway, their anti-Labour propaganda will have little impact on those people suffering from the public sector cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do the Brits here think about "Red Ed" Milliband?

Does his election as party leader really indicate the party is, a least partially, returning to its roots?

What are the chances of such a young, inexperienced Jewish guy getting elected PM?

What will become of his brother will he remain Shadow Foreign Secretary?

David Miliband has decided not to serve under his brother. He was upset by Ed's criticism of "New Labour", especially his attacks on the Iraq War.

Ed Miliband's election has definitely upset Rupert Murdoch who was the controlling force behinf New Labour. There is no doubt that Murdoch and the other right-wing press barons will launch a smear campaign against Ed Miliband. Lord Sainsbury, the main financial backer of "New Labour" has also announced he is taking his "money bags" away from the Labour Party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do the Brits here think about "Red Ed" Milliband?

Does his election as party leader really indicate the party is, a least partially, returning to its roots?

What are the chances of such a young, inexperienced Jewish guy getting elected PM?

What will become of his brother will he remain Shadow Foreign Secretary?

His Jewish origins will not be a problem. Benjamin Disraeli became prime minister when anti-Jewish feeling was at its highest in Britain.

The current economic circumstances means that he will develop a set of policies that are to the left of those of Blair/Brown (not difficult to do). The newspaper barons like Murdoch will not like it but their power is in decline. Anyway, their anti-Labour propaganda will have little impact on those people suffering from the public sector cuts.

Disraeli however was baptized, raised and practiced Anglican, Milliband is an avowed atheist, this would kill him in the US. Do you think he can win? Will you vote Labour again now that he is leader, you previously indicated you'd been voting Lib Dem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disraeli however was baptized, raised and practiced Anglican, Milliband is an avowed atheist, this would kill him in the US. Do you think he can win? Will you vote Labour again now that he is leader, you previously indicated you'd been voting Lib Dem.

I did vote for the Liberal Democrats in the last election. I voted that way to keep the Conservatives out, not to get them in. A recent survey showed that the majority of people who voted for the Liberals will never do so again. That includes me. It is early days yet but I fully expect to vote for Ed Miliband in the next election. The fact that he is Jewish, an atheist and an unmarried father (another aspect of his life that the right-wing press are focusing on) will have no impact on my voting intentions. Those who will be influenced by these factors, would be voting Conservative anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disraeli however was baptized, raised and practiced Anglican, Milliband is an avowed atheist, this would kill him in the US. Do you think he can win? Will you vote Labour again now that he is leader, you previously indicated you'd been voting Lib Dem.

I did vote for the Liberal Democrats in the last election. I voted that way to keep the Conservatives out, not to get them in. A recent survey showed that the majority of people who voted for the Liberals will never do so again. That includes me. It is early days yet but I fully expect to vote for Ed Miliband in the next election. The fact that he is Jewish, an atheist and an unmarried father (another aspect of his life that the right-wing press are focusing on) will have no impact on my voting intentions. Those who will be influenced by these factors, would be voting Conservative anyway.

So do you think he can win? According to Guardian a recent poll puts him slightly in front

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/30/ed-miliband-labour-icm-poll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you think he can win? According to Guardian a recent poll puts him slightly in front

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/30/ed-miliband-labour-icm-poll

I think it is certain. The vast majority of people in the UK are centre-left. The problem is that this electorate has been split between Labour and Liberal. As a result of the coalition and the cuts programme, the Labour Party will win the next election easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I suspect a story that is breaking today will have major consequences for political and business leaders throughout the Western world.

A former Swiss banker, Rudolf Elmer, has passed on data containing account details of 2,000 prominent people to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. The data covers multinationals, financial firms and wealthy individuals from many countries, including the UK, US and Germany, and covers the period 1990-2009.

Mr Assange also said some information was likely to be handed over to the authorities. The data included the offshore accounts of about 40 politicians. Maybe Tony Blair will be one of those exposed. It is believed that the data will shed light on tax evasion and the hiding of proceeds of criminal acts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect a story that is breaking today will have major consequences for political and business leaders throughout the Western world.

A former Swiss banker, Rudolf Elmer, has passed on data containing account details of 2,000 prominent people to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. The data covers multinationals, financial firms and wealthy individuals from many countries, including the UK, US and Germany, and covers the period 1990-2009.

Mr Assange also said some information was likely to be handed over to the authorities. The data included the offshore accounts of about 40 politicians. Maybe Tony Blair will be one of those exposed. It is believed that the data will shed light on tax evasion and the hiding of proceeds of criminal acts.

Swiss lawmakers angry at alleged US spying program

Jan 17, 6:53 AM (ET)

GENEVA (AP) - Swiss lawmakers are calling for the ouster of U.S. diplomats implicated in an illegal surveillance program in Switzerland as authorities probe whether such activities took place.

The Swiss Justice Ministry says there is evidence that the U.S. mission to the United Nations in Geneva conducted an unauthorized surveillance detection program similar to ones allegedly run in Norway and Denmark.

The Swiss government had denied U.S. authorities permission in 2006 and 2007 to conduct such programs for security reasons in Geneva and at the U.S. embassy in Bern.

Yet a U.S. diplomatic cable leaked by WikiLeaks describes the surveillance of a Muslim couple parked across from the U.S. mission in Geneva in 2005.

American officials say they won't comment on a security issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Why was Ian Edmondson not interviewed by the police during their investigation (his name appeared on documents recovered from the private detective hacking the phones on behalf of Murdoch)? The News of the World case reveals corruption at the very top of the Metropolitan Police. The man who oversaw the original investigation and carried out the phoney review of the case, was John Yates, assistant commissioner. He also was in charge of the bungled Tony Blair, cash-for-honours investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...