“”This is beyond belief. The political structure in UK starts with Group 1, at the top with the German Queen & Zionist Banksters (Rothschilds). Next in the structure is Group 2, the Secret (James Bond) Services MI5 & MI6, who control everyone else with blackmail & violence on behalf of Group 1. Below them come Group 3, the lapdog politicians, then the Government Administrative Structure, Social & Military depts, Local Government etc. Below them, is Group 4, the Plebs like you & me.
Gordon Brown was & is a lapdog, there’s no fucking way the UK Secret Services weren’t slap bang in charge of the whole show!”
The US defence department knew that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction but kept Britain in the dark, according to an explosive new claim from Gordon Brown.
In an extraordinary allegation, the former prime minister states that a secret US intelligence report into Iraq’s military capabilities was never passed to Britain and could have changed the course of events. The revelation leads Brown to conclude that the “war could not be justified as a last resort and invasion cannot now be seen as a proportionate response”.
The public-to-private sector “revolving door” has crossed into the macabre twilight zone.
Moments ago an announcement by giant bond manager (technically, these days “merely above average height” bond manager, considering the collapse in the TRF’s AUM since Bill Gross’ departure over a year ago) revealed that public service cronyism is not only alive, but has never been better, when in a press release it reported that former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, ex-U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and former ECB president Jean-Claude Trichet will form the backbone of a “global advisory board” at Pimco.
The Deputy Governor of the Bank of England encouraged Barclays to try to lower interest rates after coming under pressure from senior members of the last Labour government, documents have disclosed.
A memo published by Barclays suggested that Paul Tucker gave a hint to Bob Diamond, the bank’s chief executive, in 2008 that the rate it was claiming to be paying to borrow money from other banks could be lowered.
His suggestion followed questions from “senior figures within Whitehall” about why Barclays was having to pay so much interest on its borrowings, the memo states.
Barclays and other banks have been accused of artificially manipulating the Libor rate, which is used to set the borrowing costs for millions of consumers, businesses and investors, by falsely stating how much they were paying to borrow money.
The bank claimed yesterday that one of its most senior executives cut the Libor rate only at the height of the credit crisis after intervention from the Bank of England.
David Cameron, like Gordon Brown before, is an elite puppet.
President Obama has already been proven to be worse than even G. W. Bush.
Presidents or Prime Ministers are not elected, but selected.
David Cameron has now backed plans to sneak changes into the Lisbon Treaty
BRITONS have been robbed of the chance to vote on a power grab by Brussels despite promises of a referendum.
In the wake of the Lisbon Treaty fiasco, David Cameron vowed Britain would never again give away powers to Brussels without first holding a referendum.
In a spectacular U-turn, however, Mr Cameron has now backed plans to sneak changes into the Lisbon Treaty without triggering referendums across Europe.
It is a significant victory for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who was last night dining with the Camerons at Chequers, the Prime Minister’s country retreat in Buckinghamshire.
At the Council of Ministers, Europe’s prime ministers and presidents backed “a limited treaty change” to deliver tighter fiscal discipline across the EU and a permanent bail-out fund for members of the eurozone. The change will create an “economic government” for Europe.
Nigel Farage, frontrunner to lead the UK Independence Party, said: “It is one of the most massive power grabs they have ever attempted but because it is so devilishly complicated this might just sneak through by default. But make no mistake, these are draconian powers and without a shadow of a doubt this should trigger a referendum.”
Leaders are petrified that any change to the EU treaties would spark referendums in the UK, Ireland and the Netherlands.
In Britain the EU Referendum Campaign has been launched calling on the Government to give the country the vote denied when Gordon Brown ratified the Lisbon Treaty. More than 5,000 Sunday Express readers signed up after we highlighted the campaign last week.
And, addressing the use of Snatch Land Rovers, which he deemed to be unsafe and prompted his decision to stand down, he said: “I had to resign.
“I had warned (the MoD) time and time again that there were going to be needless deaths if we were not given the right equipment, and they ignored this advice. There is blood on their hands.
“There was no other vehicle to use. The simple truth is that the protection on these vehicles is inadequate and this led to the unnecessary deaths.”
The former head of the Army accuses Tony Blair and Gordon Brown of badly letting down the Armed Forces during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In a damning verdict, General Sir Richard Dannatt accuses Mr Brown of being a “malign” influence by failing to honour guarantees on defence spending during his time at the Treasury, and charges Mr Blair with lacking “moral courage” for failing to overrule his chancellor.
Gen Dannatt’s book, Leading from the Front, which begins its serialisationin The Sunday Telegraphtoday, is the first major public critique of the Blair/Brown administration by a senior outside figure who served under both men. He was Chief of the General Staff from 2006-09.
He describes his efforts to persuade Mr Blair and Mr Brown that the Army – fighting in both Iraq and Afghanistan and suffering heavy casualties – was facing almost unbearable pressures as “pushing a rock up a steep hill almost all the way through”.
His book is further evidence of the cripplingly dysfunctional nature of the relationship between Mr Blair and Mr Brown, which Mr Blair spelt out in his own memoir, A Journey, published this week.
The general also reveals in his book and in interviews for this newspaper that:
-By early 2009, at a time when the Army was suffering a punishing casualty rate in Afghanistan, he had not had a face-to-face meeting with Mr Brown for six months. Eventually he was forced to “ambush” the prime minister during a chance meeting in Horse Guards Parade to get his concerns across;
-The 1997-98 Strategic Defence Review (SDR), which set out a “good framework” for future defence policy, could not cope with troops being committed to Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time and was “fatally flawed” through being underfunded;
-The intelligence about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, cited as the main reason for Britain joining the United States in the 2003 war, was “most uncompelling”. Planning for the aftermath of the conflict was, he said, an “abject failure”.
Gen Dannatt reserves his strongest criticism for Labour’s two prime ministers, accusing them of letting down the troops they sent to Iraq and Afghanistan.
He writes in his book: “History will pass judgment on these foreign adventures in due course, but in my view Gordon Brown’s malign intervention, when chancellor, on the SDR by refusing to fund what his own government had agreed, fatally flawed the en tire process from the outset.
“The seeds were sown for some of the impossible operational pressures to come.”
Mr Blair “lacked the moral courage to impose his will on his own chancellor”.
The general also admits he was “bemused” by Mr Brown’s decision to write his book, Wartime Courage, about the generation that suffered so much in winning the Second World War. He adds: “I am still not sure whether he ever realised that by denying the proper funding of his own government’s declared policy, he was condemning more young men and women to the same sacrifices he railed against in a previous generation.”
Asked why he thought Mr Blair did not overrule Mr Brown, he replied: “To me it seems extraordinary that the prime minister, the No 1 guy, cannot crack the whip sufficiently to his very close friend apparently, his next door neighbour, the chancellor.
“In the war Cabinet that Margaret Thatcher put together in 1982 [during the Falklands conflict] there was no one from the Treasury. It’s tough to criticise lack of moral courage, but moral courage is what you need. Physical courage is a wonderful thing, but moral courage is actually doing the right thing at the right time.”
Gen Dannatt warns the Coalition that carrying on with the current rate of casualties in Afghanistan – where more than 100 servicemen were killed last year – would be unacceptable. “We’ve got to have cracked it by 2014, 2015,” he said.
By Patrick Hennessy and Melissa Kite
Published: 10:00PM BST 04 Sep 2010
Murray asserts that the primary motivation for US and British military involvement in central Asia has to do with large natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. As evidence, he points to the plans to build a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan that would allow Western oil companies to avoid Russia and Iran when transporting natural gas out of the region.
Murray alleged that in the late 1990s the Uzbek ambassador to the US met with then-Texas Governor George W. Bush to discuss a pipeline for the region, and out of that meeting came agreements that would see Texas-based Enron gain the rights to Uzbekistan’s natural gas deposits, while oil company Unocal worked on developing the Trans-Afghanistan pipeline.
“The consultant who was organizing this for Unocal was a certain Mr. Karzai, who is now president of Afghanistan,” Murray noted.
“There are designs of this pipeline, and if you look at the deployment of US forces in Afghanistan, as against other NATO country forces in Afghanistan, you’ll see that undoubtedly the US forces are positioned to guard the pipeline route. It’s what it’s about. It’s about money, it’s about oil, it’s not about democracy.”
“I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States’ presence in Afghanistan,” he wrote Sept. 10 in a four-page letter to the department’s head of personnel. “I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end.”
“I’m not much for this war. I’m not sure it’s worth all those lives lost,” said Sergeant Christian Richardson as we walked across corn fields that will soon be ploughed up to plant a spring crop of opium poppy.
– Top US commander in Afghanistan: The Taliban have gained the upper hand:
The Taliban have gained the upper hand in Afghanistan, the top American commander there said, forcing the U.S. to change its strategy in the eight-year-old conflict by increasing the number of troops in heavily populated areas like the volatile southern city of Kandahar, the insurgency’s spiritual home.Gen. Stanley McChrystal warned that means U.S. casualties, already running at record levels, will remain high for months to come.
MPs and peers brand government’s definition of complicity in torture as ‘worrying’ and call for urgent independent inquiry
Former Guantánamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed, whose alleged abuse in captivity sparked an inquiry into UK government complicty in torture. (Reuters)
The government’s definition of what constitutes complicity in torture has no basis in law, parliament’s joint committee on human rights warns today in a hard-hitting attack on its attitude towards the abuse of terror suspects.
Its narrow definition of complicity is “significant and worrying” and in light of evidence, notably in the Binyam Mohammed hearings, the case for an urgent independent inquiry into claims of involvement in torture is irresistible, the committee says in a report.
It says ministers gave evasive replies when it asked them what would amount to complicity under international law. But in evidence to the committee and in public statements both the home and foreign secretaries, and the head of MI5, came “very close to saying that, at least in the wake of 9/11, the lesser of two evils was the receipt and use of intelligence which was known, or should have been known, to carry a risk that it might have been obtained under torture, in order to protect the UK public from possible terrorist attack”.
The report adds: “This is no defence to the charge of complicity in torture.” The government changed the question from “does or should the official receiving the information know that it has or is likely to have been obtained by torture?” to “does the official receiving the information know or believe that receipt of the information would encourage the intelligence services of other states to commit torture?”
Under international law complicity does not require active encouragement, the committee says. The formula used by the government “appears to us to be carefully designed to enable it to say that, although it knew or should have known some intelligence it received was or might have been obtained through torture, this did not amount to complicity because it did not know or believe such receipt would encourage … torture by other states”.
Lady Manningham-Buller, the former head of MI5, appeared to go further in a speech this month:“Nothing, even saving lives, justifies torture.”
What constitutes complicity in torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is a key issue behind Gordon Brown’s refusal to publish new guidance given to MI5, MI6, and military intelligence officers, operating abroad.
Brown has also declined to publish criticism of the guidance by the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), whose members are handpicked by the prime minister.
An honest answer would probably sound like: “The elite told me to do so.”
Gordon Brown has been ordered to release information before the general election about his controversial decision to sell Britain’s gold reserves.
Gordon Brown pushed ahead with the of Britain’s gold despite serious misgivings at the Bank of England, it is believed Photo: REX/ALAMY
The decision to sell the gold – taken by Mr Brown when he was Chancellor – is regarded as one of the Treasury’s worst financial mistakes and has cost taxpayers almost £7 billion.
Mr Brown and the Treasury have repeatedly refused to disclose information about the gold sale amid allegations that warnings were ignored.
Following a series of freedom of information requests from The Daily Telegraph over the past four years, the Information Commissioner has ordered the Treasury to release some details. The Treasury must publish the information demanded within 35 calendar days – by the end of April.
The sale is expected to be become a major election issue, casting light on Mr Brown’s decisions while at the Treasury.
Last night, George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, demanded that the information was published immediately. “Gordon Brown‘s decision to sell off our gold reserves at the bottom of the market cost the British taxpayer billions of pounds,” he said. “It was one of the worst economic judgements ever made by a chancellor.
London, England (CNN) — The decision to go to war in Iraq “was the right decision and it was for the right reasons,” British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Friday in his first response at the Iraq War Inquiry.
Brown was answering a question from the chairman of the inquiry, John Chilcot, about whether he thought taking military action in March 2003 was the right decision, especially given that it led to such a great loss of life among military personnel and civilians.
The prime minister said he pays respect to members of the armed forces “who served with great distinction in Iraq” and lost their lives, and to civilians who died.
“I think any loss of life is something that makes us very sad indeed,” he said.
The US bought Osama Bin Laden, who died a long time ago, before. Brilliant strategy!
The elite has really some excellent ideas to further loot the taxpayers.
My guess is that most of this money will never reach any Taliban leader.
LONDON — An international fund amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars will be established this week in a bid to buy off Taliban leaders in Afghanistan.
An outline for the strategy, which will be principally funded by the US, Japan and Britain, was reported to have been drafted at a meeting in Abu Dhabi two weeks ago of top-level diplomats from 20 countries.
The announcement of the establishment of the Peace and Reintegration Trust Fund, which will seek to “split the Taliban” by luring into mainstream politics any leaders not connected to, or ready to break their links with, al Qa’eda is due to be announced at the end of Thursday’s summit on Afghanistan in London.
Some will see the plan as the most public acknowledgement yet that there is no military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan.
But, assuming the scheme is approved on Thursday, it will represent the most comprehensive political attempt to draw the sting out of the insurgency since the fall of the regime in 2001.
According to The Times yesterday, the draft communiqué to be issued at the end of the conference also foresees Afghan troops “taking the lead and conducting the majority of operations in the insecure areas of Afghanistan within three years and taking responsibility for physical security within five years”.
The Bank of England and the government have created this mess:
Quantitative easing is creating money out of thin air or “printing money.”
Quantitative easing increases the money supply, creates inflation and devalues the currency.
Inflation is a hidden tax. Quantitative easing is nothing more than stealing from the people.
“By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.“
– John Maynard Keynes
“In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. … This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists’ tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard.”
– Alan Greenspan
Economists have another term to describe the monetization of government debt (=Quantitative easing). The history of “seigniorage” goes back to the debasement of the coinage under the Roman emperors. Seigniorage is really a tax on holders of money and government debt which is paid via inflation. When carried to excess, it leads to hyperinflation.
The sharp rise in the annual rate of consumer price inflation from 1.9pc to 2.9pc was driven by exceptional events in December 2008, as the VAT cut and high street discounting at that point were not repeated last month.
An increase in the price of petrol and new cars also drove the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) up last month, the Office for National Statistics said. Economists had expected a smaller rise in CPI to 2.6pc.
Howard Archer, chief UK economist at IHS Global Insight described the data as “a very nasty shock”.
It was the first time since May that inflation has risen above the Bank of England’s 2pc target, and economists predict inflation will rise above 3pc this month, reflecting the reversal of the VAT cut on January 1.
At that point Mervyn King, the Bank’s Governor, would be required to write a letter to the Chancellor, explaining why inflation was more than a percentage point above the target.
It comes at a difficult time for Britain’s consumers, who face the prospect of rising taxes, rising interest rates, and spending cuts as a fragile economic gets underway following the worst post-war recession.
The retail prices index (RPI) – which includes housing costs – rose even more sharply, to 2.4pc from 0.3pc in November.
Inflation in Britain has remained consistently higher than other countries during the recession, which economists partly attribute to the pound’s weakness, which has driven up the cost of foreign goods.
Pimco’s decision to sell UK gilts this year will be seen as a financial vote of no-confidence in the Government’s handling of the economy.
FEARS that Gordon Brown has left Britain on the brink of bankruptcy intensified last night as investors withdrew from backing the Treasury’s soaring debt.
US-based investment group Pimco, one of the world’s leading bond houses, said it will sell its UK government gilts this year.
It will be a hammer blow to the Treasury’s attempt to raise up to £200billion of government borrowing amid the deficit crisis.
The embarrassment is all the more acute because the younger brother of Cabinet minister Ed Balls is overseeing the gilt sale.
Labour’s Ed Balls’ younger brother Andrew is overseeing the Pimco pullout
As head of Pimco’s European investment team, Andrew Balls is spearheading the exit from investment in the Government.
The Tories seized on the announcement as evidence that Mr Brown’s soaring borrowing is threatening the UK with the worst debt crisis since the 1970s.
Shadow Chief Secretary Philip Hammond said:“This announcement by the world’s biggest bond house is a damning verdict on Gordon Brown’s handling of the economy and raises yet more questions about where the Government is going to borrow the £178billion it needs over the next 12 months.
“To restore confidence to the bond markets, keep mortgages down and get the economy growing, Britain needs a credible plan to get the deficit down.
“Instead we have a Prime Minister and Chancellor at loggerheads over tax and spending. We can’t go on like this.” Concern has been growing in the City and on international money markets at the unprecedented scale of the British government’s debt crisis. The Treasury is on course to borrow £178billion this year and the national debt is tipped to reach a colossal £1.5trillion for the first time in our history.
Mr Brown made clear that he will portray Labour as the party of investment in the general election
Gordon Brown was accused today of indulging in “fantasy” over the state of the public finances after he promised that Labour would continue to invest in skills and schools in spite of demands that he reduce Britain’s record deficit.
The Prime Minister used his first interview of the new year to warn that the Tory plan to cut debt would damage the economic recovery.
He made a series of new spending commitments to boost science and education and insisted there was still money available to invest in Labour’s priorities.
But Mr Brown risked re-opening bitter internal divisions by claiming that public spending would rise by 0.8 per cent a year. This figure was denounced when he used it last year because it includes debt interest payments and social security, leaving government departments expecting real-terms cuts of between 10 and 20 per cent.
Mr Brown claimed that the rises in national insurance and the ending of pension tax reliefs, along with lower- than-expected unemployment, would bring down the deficit. Now was not the time for a comprehensive spending review, which would lay out the scale of departmental cuts, he said.
This drew fire from Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, who said that cuts were already being implemented in Whitehall spending.
“This is a rather unconvincing attempt to draw an artificial dividing line. It’s simple fantasy to imagine painful decisions can be avoided in public spending, with some departments already talking about 10 per cent,” Mr Cable said.
“Lord Mandelson has already undermined the Prime Minister by making very deep cuts in the university and science budgets, with some of the best scientists in the country losing their job. This leaves Mr Brown looking very foolish.”
Those full-body scanners will soon be installed everywhere!
An employee at Schiphol airport, Amsterdam, tests the new body scanners. Photograph: Cynthia Boll/AP
Jan. 3 (Bloomberg) — U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said British airports will introduce full-body scanners to prevent terrorists smuggling explosives on board planes.
“This is a new type of threat,” Brown told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show today. “We recognize there are new weapons being used by al-Qaeda and we need to respond.”
The prime minister said the machines are part of a response to “a new form of explosive that was not being detected by ordinary machines.” The body scanners will be introduced gradually and other new technology will employed that can detect explosives directly, he said.
Extra body searches, extended restriction on leaving seats, and a greater use of explosive-sniffing dogs are additional measures being considered, Transport Secretary Andrew Adonis said in a separate interview with the Sunday Times.
Governments around the world are reviewing airport security after an attempt to blow up a passenger airliner over Detroit on Christmas Day. In the U.S., President Barack Obama ordered a review of terrorist intelligence gathering and aviation security after the accused attacker, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a 23- year-old Nigerian, allegedly smuggled explosives onboard the airliner even after being on a U.S. government list of people with suspected ties to terrorism.