WHITE HELMETS: THE ‘OLD ETONIAN’ CARTEL PROTECTION RACKET

Vanessa Beeley 
21st Century Wire

Nepotism and corruption are nothing new, particularly in the corporate or political sphere. In 2013 Boris Johnson’s brother Jo was appointed head of No 10’s policy unit under David Cameron. As the Guardian article noted, this appointment did not appear to be a crucial necessity:  “it’s not as if anyone had complained of a dire shortage of Johnsons in the public eye, or of Old Etonians in the cabinet.” 

Bullingdon Club, Oxford 1987. Boris Johnson seated on right, Cameron second from left standing at back. (Photo: Telegraph)

 
Cameron and Johnson are both “Old Etonians” and shared the notoriety of being members of the elite Bullingdon Club at Oxford, whose members were renonwned for ostentatious displays of wealth, raucous, hard-drinking dinners and the exclusion of women from their ranks.

I am not going to dwell upon the vagaries of such clubs and networks that united the establishment elite into an exclusive consortium of wealth and privilege that has served them well throughout their careers and countless falls from grace.

However, now the White Helmets are involved believe it or not in a way that fully exposes the nepotism and corruption at the highest levels of policy making and intervention into the affairs of a sovereign nation, in this case, Syria.

 Read more

Manchester Attack Briefing: Blurring the lines between 'blowback' and complicity

Mark Curtis and Nafeez Ahmed
Insurge Intelligence

(This briefing will be updated as more evidence emerges. Sources are overwhelmingly from mainstream media, except where clearly stated).

A PDF version of this briefing is available here

Introduction

 

The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments. The British state therefore has a serious case to answer. We focus primarily here on UK policies towards Libya but also touch on some of those related to Iraq and Syria.

Summary

 

In summary, the evidence so far shows that there are six inter-related aspects of blowback:

1. Salman Abedi and his father were members of a Libyan dissident group — the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) — covertly supported by the UK to assassinate Qadafi in 1996. At this time, the LIFG was an affiliate of Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda and LIFG leaders had various connections to this terror network.
2. Members of the LIFG were facilitated by the British 'security services' to travel to Libya to fight Qadafi in 2011. Both Salman Abedi and his father, Ramadan, were among those who travelled to fight at this time (although there is no evidence that their travel was personally facilitated or encouraged by the security services).
3. A large number of LIFG fighters in Libya in 2011 had earlier fought alongside the Islamic State of Iraq — the al-Qaeda entity which later established a presence in Syria and became the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). These fighters were among those recruited into the British-backed anti-Qadafi rebellion.
4. UK covert action in Libya in 2011 included approval of and support to Qatar's arming and backing of opposition forces, which included support to hardline Islamist groups; this fuelled jihadism in Libya.
5. One of the groups armed/supported by Qatar in 2011 was the February 17th Martyrs Brigade which, some reports suggest, was the organisation which Ramadan Abedi joined in 2011 to fight Qadafi.
6. Qatar's arms supplies to Libya in 2011 also found their way to Islamist fighters in Syria, including groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS.

 

Conclusions

 

The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups.

Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May — who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi — clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed.

The evidence suggests that British actions in three different theatres — Libya, Iraq and Syria — cannot be viewed in isolation:

• In Libya, US and UK led intervention destroyed the functioning state and created a vacuum allowing hardline Islamist fighters to consolidate their foothold in the country. This paved the way for the empowerment of ISIS. The direct line between Libyan and Syrian Islamist rebels fuelled jihadism in both countries.
• In Iraq, US and UK led intervention also destroyed the existing state infrastructure and fuelled an Islamist insurgency which incubated al-Qaeda in Iraq and culminated in the emergence of ISIS.
• In Syria, US and UK covert action, again in partnership with Gulf states such as Qatar, and Turkey, has had the effect of augmenting the role of al-Qaeda in the rebel movement.

Read more

David Cameron rules out second EU referendum after Brexit

Independent 

 

The Prime Minister’s spokesperson said that holding another vote was “not remotely on the cards”. The clarification comes amid a petition calling for a re-run in the event of a close result and following speculation that the government may go to the country again once the terms of Britain’s new relationship have been agreed. 

 

Mr Cameron chaired the first Cabinet meeting since the Brexit vote at midday on Monday, where ministers confirmed plans for a special government unit to draw up options for Britain’s renegotiation with the EU. 

 

However, formal negotiations cannot start until Britain activates Article 50 – initiating the formal two-year procedure for withdrawing from the EU. Mr Cameron has said this will be a task for the next Prime Minister, who will not be in place until a Conservative leadership election has concluded by October. 

 

And also on Monday, the head of the Brexit campaign said it was important to delay the formal process of leaving the EU because people need to "go away on holiday". 

 

Vote Leave chief executive Matthew Elliott welcomed Mr Cameron's decision to delay the "divorce" for several months, despite pressure from Brussels for a rapid departure.

Read More

¡Basta ya, Brussels! British voters give EU corporate slavestate the shaft

Mike Whitney
Counterpunch

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must undergo the fatigue of supporting it."

— Thomas Paine

British voters delivered a savage deathblow to the EU corporate superstate on Thursday sending global markets tumbling and forcing Prime Minister David Cameron to announce his resignation. The narrow victory, which caught the prognosticators by surprise, is the strongest sign yet that working people across the continent are awakening to economic and political disaster that has been created in the name of European integration. Not only has the EU failed to live up to its promise of lifting all boats and widening prosperity, it has also transformed the region into a low-growth, high unemployment charnel house where bankers and their corporate allies siphon off the wealth of the weaker states to enrich high-flying speculators and voracious bondholders. And while the referendum's outcome will surely be challenged in the months to come, it represents a critical turning point in the public's attitude towards a thoroughly reactionary and odious institution that is solely responsible for the abysmal state of the economy, the progressive erosion of living standards, and steady rise of right wing extremism. Here's a short clip from Raul Ilargi Meijer explaining what Brexit really means:

"Nobody seems to understand it's not about Cameron or Nigel Farage, or Michael Gove vs Boris Johnson, it's about voting for or against the EU, for or against Juncker and Tusk and five other unelected presidents having a say in one's life.

And that's not all either. It's about voting to leave, or remain in, a Union that is already dead and preserved only in a zombie state. Brexit is just one vote and many more will inevitably follow. Brexit is not the first, Grexit had that 'honor' last year. Later this month, elections in Italy and Spain have the potential to turn into preliminary Italix and Spexit votes. And then there will be more.

The reason why these things are taking place, and will be, going forward, is that the economies of all these countries are fast deteriorating. The sole reason why people have accepted the rule of Brussels coming from far away over their daily lives, is the promise that it would make those lives better and more comfortable. That promise has been shattered. The EU has made things worse for most Europeans, not improved them. And when seen in that light, why should people agree to continue to be told what to do by those who've made them poorer? There's no democratic model in which that remotely makes sense. There are only undemocratic models left....

An economy in decline means the end of centralization and the end of existing political power structures. This is inevitable." ("Murder, Lifeboats, an Iceberg and an Orchestra", Automatic Earth)

The Brexit referendum represents a fundamental rejection of austerity for working people and subsidies (QE) for the markets. It is an indictment of the destructive policies that have thrust a broad swathe of southern Europe into a permanent depression while bankers in Paris and Berlin make out like bandits. Even now the loathsome European Central Bank continues to run up massive debts (ECB-QE is $80 billion per month) just to line the pockets of corporate CEOs who offload their toxic bonds with the clear intention of using the money to buyback their own shares further enriching themselves and their swinish shareholders at the expense of ordinary investors. This Ponzi-rip off is what passes as economic policy in the EU. Brexit threatens put an end to this huckster's swindle. Here's a little more background from the World Socialist Web Site: 


Read more
 

Drone ‘kill list’ could leave MPs, military & spies ‘facing murder charges’

Comment: Good luck with bringing those guys to court...

--------------------

RT 

Britain’s drone ‘kill list’ could leave politicians, pilots and intelligence personnel facing murder charges unless rules of engagement are quickly clarified, a parliamentary report has warned.

The joint committee on human rights warned on Tuesday that killing with drones outside warzones could lead to “criminal prosecution for murder or complicity in murder.”

The report also warned that the widely-used term “targeted killing” sounded “uncomfortably close to assassination“ and took the view that the UK pursues an active policy “to use lethal force abroad outside armed conflict” under the banner of “counter-terrorism.”

The committee acknowledged the likelihood of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) pursuing a case is slim, but said authorities in other countries may if their citizens are killed.

Chaired by Labour‘s Harriet Harman, the committee also said the UK owed it “to all those involved in the chain of command for such uses of lethal force to provide them with absolute clarity about the circumstances in which they will have a defense against any possible future criminal prosecution.”

The investigation began in August 2014 after it was announced a UK targeted drone strike had killed British Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) fighter Reyaad Khan in Syria.

The killing took place prior to December’s parliamentary vote on military action in the country. The US had developed a pattern of carrying out drone strikes in regions which are not official warzones such as Yemen and Pakistan, a trend which critics find worrying.

Harman’s panel said it is “vital that the legal line between counter-terrorism law enforcement and the waging of war by military means does not become blurred, leading to the use of lethal force in circumstances not permitted by law.”

Human rights NGO Reprieve warned on Tuesday the report highlighted some of the risks involved in an assassination policy.

Reprieve staff attorney Jennifer Gibson said “this is a wakeup call.”

She warned there is a “very real danger that the UK is following the US down the slippery slope of kill lists and targeted killings.”

“This is alarming, given the CIA’s secret drone war has killed hundreds of civilians and been described as a ‘failed strategy’ by [US President Barack] Obama’s own former head of defense intelligence,” she added.

While UK Prime Minister David Cameron acknowledged at the time that the Khan killing was a “new departure,” the government maintains it only uses such methods in cases where there is an “immediate” or “imminent” threat to the UK.

Camouflage of British War Crimes in Iraq: Chilcot Inquiry Publication Delayed: “ to Avoid Embarrassing Tony Blair.”

Felicity Arbuthnot 
Global Research

 “Nothing justifies killing of innocent people.” (Tony Blair, CNN, 15th January 2015.)

The publication of the Chilcot Inquiry which began in 2009 and concluded three years ago, investigating the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq, so far costing a reported £10,375,000, is to be delayed until after the 23rd June UK European Union referendum on whether Britain stays in or leaves the EU.

According to the Daily Telegraph (1) Prime Minister David Cameron is “delaying (the) Chilcot Report to avoid embarrassing Tony Blair”, whose government’s “dodgy dossiers”, produced when he was Prime Minister, were such an integral part of America’s excuse to invade, overthrow and murder many of a sovereign government – with the UK tagging along as the fig leaf “coalition.”

One dossier of special significance was that of 24^th September 2002, published on the day Parliament was recalled to discuss its fictional “findings.” Fairy stories contained within included a government “investigation” in to weapons of mass destruction stating that Iraq possessed WMDs including chemical and biological weapons and that they had again developed a nuclear weapons programme. As was quickly established after the invasion, the all was entirely untrue..

Also included was the claim that Iraq had sought to acquire “significant quantities of uranium from Africa” (2) another claim also found to be complete nonsense.

In fact, had Iraq determined to have a nuclear programme it had no need to purchase uranium from anywhere, it has extensive deposits – which were discovered by the British in the 1950s, documentation of which must be somewhere in government records.

The forward to this piece of fiction was written by Blair and reads:

“The document discloses that his (Saddam Hussein’s) military planning allows for some of the WMD to be ready within 45 minutes of an order to use them.”

Read more

Cameron brags of ‘brilliant’ UK arms trade as EU embargoes Saudi

RT

European ministers have embarrassed David Cameron by voting to impose an arms embargo on Saudi Arabia on the same day the British prime minister praised the UK for selling “brilliant” arms to the country.

Speaking at a BAE Systems factory in Preston, the prime minister said the UK had pushed the sale of Eurofighter Typhoons to countries in the Middle East, including Oman and Saudi Arabia. 

His comments come as a report by Amnesty International reveals that EU and US arms trading provided Saudi Arabia with arms worth billions of dollars in 2015. The Saudis are engaged in a military offensive against Houthi rebels in Yemen. The latest figures from Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) suggest some 6,400 civilians have been killed or injured in the conflict.

Cameron’s speech in Preston came at the same time the European Parliament voted to impose an EU-wide ban on arms exports to Saudi Arabia, citing criticism from the UN of its bombing in Yemen.

Asked at the talks how he was helping to export the planes, Cameron said: “With the Typhoon there is an alliance of countries: the Italians, Germans and ourselves. We spend a lot of time trying to work out who is best placed to win these export orders. We’ve got hopefully good news coming from Kuwait. 

The Italians have been doing a lot of work there. The British have been working very hard in Oman.”
The vote will not force EU members to comply with the ban, but will force the government to examine its relationship with Saudi Arabia.

In the last year the British government has sold £3 billion (US$4.18 billion) worth of arms and military kit to the Gulf state, as well as providing training to Saudi forces.

A report released by Amnesty International on Friday called the ongoing trade with Saudi Arabia “truly sickening,” and urged governments to attend meetings in Geneva on Monday to discuss the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

The report names the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the US as having issued licenses for arms to Saudi Arabia worth more than £18 billion in 2015.

The arms sold include drones, bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles, which have been used by Saudi Arabia and its allies for gross violations of human rights and possible war crimes during aerial and ground attacks in Yemen, the campaign group said.

Control Arms Director Anna Macdonald said: “Governments such as the UK and France were leaders in seeking to secure an ATT – and now they are undermining the commitments they made to reduce human suffering by supplying Saudi Arabia with some of the deadliest weapons in the world. It’s truly sickening.”

Putin makes an example of Turkey's back-stabbing: Why the US and West should pay close attention

Steven C. Wolf
Caravansaray Posts

First the facts: the toll is settled. Two Russians are dead, and a Su-24 fighter-bomber and Russian helicopter that arrived in relief are down. A marine from that effort died, as did the pilot of the jet. The second pilot of the jet was rescued, evidently in a joint effort by Russian, Hezbollah and Syrian forces . When they bailed, the pilots were shot at by the rebel militants. It is not clear whether the Russian pilot was killed in the air or once he hit the ground but either way, "our moderates" committed war crimes. In the gruesome video, someone is reported saying, "We should have burned him before he died." The Russians have followed the downing with massive aerial bombardments of the rebel positions, and the Syrian Arab Army has made further advances.

As for the war of words and images: As my first two posts on this indicate, there was confusion about the path of the Russian jet. The Turkish version emerged first, and this was picked up by al-Jazeera, the Qatari voice of the Western alliance. We may remember that when the Russian passenger jet exploded over Sinai, "ambivalent alliance" bosses Cameron and Obama were practically sure within hours 'whodunnit' and how. The Russians took their time and looked at the evidence — which they have not revealed, it should be remembered. Similarly, when the Russian radar video came out, it fairly convincingly belied that of Turkey. Others have commented that for Turkey's story to be correct the planes had to be flying at stall speed. Turkish reports that 10 warnings in 5 minutes preceded the takedown are refuted point blank by the surviving Russian pilot who said they were flying at 6000 feet, not 15,000, on paths well within Syria he had flown many times. He said they did not even have time to make evasive maneuvers when they were hit in the tail section. Parties from several sides are calling this a planned provocation.

The West has not acknowledged many Russian charges. The US is trying to play both sides, saying Turkey was within its rights, but "made a bad mistake" shooting down the Russian fighters. Western leaders — and Erdogan is Western in spades (especially in his cynical use of religious sentiment) — have isolated themselves and their countries within a propaganda fanfare fortress. Sometimes it is not clear whether they believe their own propaganda. As I mentioned at the time of the UNGA70 speeches by Putin and Obama, the authors of official and slightly-less-than official pronouncements generally do not care how their lies resound around the world, but generally address their own political constituencies, their domestic audience, and their allies.

Putin has ramped up the pressure considerably since the shoot-down, and in some unexpected ways. First, unsurprisingly, with his military in the field. He is now situating S-400 anti-aircraft missiles, the best in the world, such that any similar incident will be immediately followed by the takedown of the Turkish jet, even if it has returned to Turkey. Erdogan takes this as an act of war. It is now clear why he began his Syrian buildup quickly, but actually quite moderately, with a few dozen planes, and no ground forces or other hardware. Evidently he understood the trigger-happy idiots that run the Western alliance — including Erdogan's best friends in the US like Gen Allen former "ISIS czar" and Gen Breedlove, NATO commander — would make some blunder that made a further buildup a foregone conclusion and one that could evoke no complaint. What is more surprising is that Putin is not just blaming Turkey, but the US for the affair, and rightly so. I will come back to that.

Russia's provincial authorities played out the betrayal Russians feel. Thirty-nine Turkish businessmen were arrested, retained a while, and fined for minor visa irregularities. Russian PM Dmitry Medvedev has given the DUMA two days to assemble suggested economic reprisals. Certainly, the Turkstream oil project, Putin's major 'carrot' offering to Turkey last fall, is dead in the water. So is the nuclear power plant deal, and the accelerating upward trends in Turkish-Russian business activity over the last decade. Poof! Thanks, Erdogan, I'm sure many businessmen are saying, echoing German businessmen, who say, thanks, Merkel, for sanctions which cut us off from our most natural business partner and neighbor.

Putin charged Turkey the first day with being an accessory to terrorism and of backing ISIS with the shootdown. Erdogan, who refuses to apologize for the incident ("why apologize if I'm right?"), was "outraged" and deemed this "slander". As he has said before many times, "Everybody knows our commitment in the war against ISIS". (How right he is). But courageous Turkish newspapers continue to dare the ban on publishing untoward information about the Glorious Leader and One-Party "Democracy". Turkish journalists put to shame the US press, which has pathetically cowered before power for decades. The NYTimes wags its tongue as the military-industrial-banking complex wags the dog of government.As mentioned in my last posts, the Turkish press did manage to convey the gist of Putin's complaints.

If Erdogan feels slandered by the charges, then, as Putin said in his press conference with Hollande, it is "theoretically" possible he did not know about the lines of ISIS oil tankers that continually stretch from the horizon to the Turkish border, "a living pipeline". In the same press conference, the leader of another NATO ambivalent alliance member, Francois Hollande announced that he and Putin had agreed to strike only terrorists, and not to strike those who are fighting terrorists. Good, I'm glad they got that far. Practically, it does mean Hollande has promised not to hit Assad's troops, though moments earlier, his eyes glazed over and he pronounced the Western mantra: "Assad must go."He then went on "I authorized strikes against ISIS in September, because I knew the terrorists that hit us in Paris were organizing in Raqqa."(He knew in September?)

As for more duplicitous NATO members, Putin said in the same press conference, "once we had quickly developing economic relations with Turkey, we considered them partners, almost allies". He then walked the audience through Erdogan's lies about the downed Russian jet and the plain fact that ISIS lives on Turkish support and US collusion. "Well, that is their choice" he said as he left the podium.

The Russian press too has steadily released information and reporting on the Turkish ISIS connections. The 'rebels' who were bombed in this region are only a part Turkman, many of these are directly backed by Turkey, and they are led by Turkish officials. They certainly are not "moderate" as the video of their treatment of the dead Russian makes plain, and as usual, the usual murderous takfiri extremists Jubhat al-Nusra, are strong in this area. Or were. They have been bombed into oblivion in the last two days.


Read more

David Cameron and Syria – A Tale of Deception and Hypocrisy

Adeyinka Makinde

David Cameron wanted to bomb Syria two years ago but suffered a humiliating defeat in a vote before Parliament. Let us be clear about one thing: if Cameron and others had got their way two years ago, the so-called Islamic State and a range of Jihadi groups would be in control of Syria today.

And if 'control' is too strong a word, it would be in as much chaos as Libya is today. The Libyan enterprise by NATO to overthrow Gaddafi was firmly backed by Cameron who used British Special Forces to train and guide Islamist rebels in attaining this objective.

After the chemical attack in Ghouta, a dubious event which was likely perpetrated by either Saudi or Turkish intelligence in order to provoke President Obama to make good on his ill-fated assertion about "red lines", the idea was to bomb and 'degrade' the capabilities of the Assad government which the West and its Middle East Sunni allies were keen to blame.

Now Cameron wants to bomb Islamic State insurgents.

A few British fighter jets have been part of the patently phony war waged against Islamic State for over a year by the US and its Middle East allies. The Russian effort in two months has shown this to be the case.

Need it be reminded that it was Cameron who one day was supporting the Mubarak regime and then when it was toppled, visited the newly installed junta to sell it military weapons.

But it is not only about the hypocrisy of Cameron the man and politician. It is about the hypocrisy and double-dealing of the Western powers specifically in regard to Syria and generally to the Middle East and North Africa geo-political theatre.

The turmoil in Syria was the creation of the Western powers acting in concert with Turkey and the Sunni Gulf monarchies who seek to overthrow the secular government of Bashar al Assad. This is the bottom line reason why the Islamic State and other Jihadi groups have grown so powerful.

But after the tragedy of Paris, Cameron is confident that the United Kingdom's public outrage along with the media's whipping up of the drums of war will get him the Parliamentary rubber stamp to intervene in a conflict which according to former French foreign minister, Roland Dumas, was planned and orchestrated years in advance by British officials along with other Western powers.

Cameron's motives are far from benign. They bear the vestiges of the 'humanitarian bomber' with an insidious agenda. He wants to be part of a campaign which would justify a British presence in Syria which along with French involvement would be utillised in a manner that would in the future attempt to effect the desired overthrow of Assad as well as the dismantling of the Syrian state.

The unquestioning media along with the gullible electorate are complicit in allowing leaders like Cameron to continually get away with such fundamental dishonesty.

(c) Adeyinka Makinde (2015)

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.

Cameron 'vote of no confidence' petition hits 140k+, may be debated in parliament

Comment: As of 12.20pm UK time the total has reached almost 148,000.  This lying sack of excrement - like most politicians - is just another Etonian puppet propping up his own lack of conscience.

----------------------

RT

A petition calling for a vote of no confidence in Prime Minister David Cameron could soon be debated in parliament after exceeding the required 100,000 signatures.

As of Friday afternoon, a total of 121,790 people have signed the online petition, which accuses Cameron of causing "devastation for the poorest in society" since he took office five years ago. 

"We cannot afford another five years of Tory rule, with the recent welfare reform that will cause nothing but immense poverty in the UK," the petition says.

When Cameron became prime minister in 2010, he introduced the e-petition initiative to boost transparency and democratic participation.

 If petitions on the parliamentary website secure 100,000 signatures, MPs are obliged to hold a debate on the subjects raised.

The date for a debate is yet to be confirmed. 

According to a YouGov poll, Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn is one of Britain's most popular public figures while Cameron is the most hated.

Besides provoking public ire through harsh austerity measures, the PM has this week come under fire for holding talks with Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi in Britain.

One human rights activist told RT Cameron betrayed "all of the values Britain holds dear" by inviting Sisi.

"Cameron has invited a man who is responsible for the deaths of thousands, and the unjust imprisonment of tens of thousands, what message does that send to the Egyptian public?" 

UK Government Admits 250,000 Porn Websites Visited On Parliament PCs

Zero Hedge

Prime Minister David Cameron vowed in 2013 to block pornographic material from "the darkest corners of the internet."

Cameron announced in July that most households in the UK would have pornography blocked by their internet provider unless they chose to receive it.

Online pornography was "corroding childhood" and "distorting" children's understanding of sex and relationships, he argued.

The UK's biggest internet service providers have agreed to the filters scheme meaning it should cover 95% of homes.

But one of Mr Cameron's advisers, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, said the plans were "absolutely ridiculous".

It appears he better start at home... 

Thanks to a Freedom of Information request by the Daily Express, RT reports, over 247,000 attempts were made to visit X-rated websites from the UK Parliament’s computer network last year, with the numbers spiking during parliamentary recess in April...

Attempts to access more than 42,000 sites classed as pornographic were made during April alone last year, totaling more than 1,300 each day.

Read more

UK Establishment Closes Ranks on Anti-War Labour Leadership Front Runner

Michaela Whitton
AntiMedia

Anyone peeking behind the smokescreen of the British press this weekend (and not distracted by what the Queen did when she was five  or by David Cameron’s extremism rhetoric) may have noticed that despite the U.K. Parliament’s explicit rejection of military intervention, the U.K. has been involved in the bombing of Syria since September— and Cameron has known the whole time.

Those with eyes to see may have also noticed the establishment closing ranks on veteran left-winger, Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn. After emerging as a front-runner in the Labour leadership campaign, Corbyn appears to have become the victim of a murderous media and political attack, with first prize for slanderous onslaught going to Tory mouthpiece, The Telegraph, and a piece penned by Islam-obsessed Andrew Gilligan.

Sixteen million people chose not to vote in Britain’s general election in May. With many crippled by the thought of another five years of Tory rule, a buzz of hope is in the air at whether Corbyn’s radical spirit can rescue the people from the dark abyss of British politics.

Read more

Scale of child abuse images "shocking", many from predators in positions of power

RT

Authorities convict on average two people each day for child abuse image offences, a child support charity has revealed. The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) demanded urgent action to halt the rise.

Analysis found there had been 1,000 court cases involving indecent images of children since Prime Minister David Cameron pledged to crack down on the issue in 2013. The charity further revealed that a total of 4.5 million child abuse images had been found. One in three offenders was in a position of power, which allowed them to gain access to children.

Nearly two years ago, Cameron said he would put stringent measures in place to catch individuals attempting to access indecent images of children, and promised to ensure internet companies would face legal repercussions if they didn't blacklist key search terms.

Among the offenders were doctors, teachers, police officers, scout leaders, and a magician. Only two of the convicted were women. Some 60 percent of offenders were jailed, the NSPCC said. One convict confessed to viewing indecent photos since the age of 12. More than 25 percent were prosecuted for other crimes of a sexual nature.

Head of child safety online for the NSPCC, Claire Lilley, said: "The scale of the problem is shocking and even more so because of the number of people who hold positions of trust in our communities. This is just a fragment of the hundreds of other similar convictions during the same time.

"It is a myth that there is no harm in just looking at these images. Defenseless babies and children are being molested to feed the appetite of offenders and that demand is just not going away.

"The prime minister made a bold attempt to tackle this problem, but it is clear that, two years after he called for a crackdown, the scale of the problem is proving to be massive. We need urgent action to prevent this horrendous abuse from appearing online," she added.

Karen Bradley, minister for preventing abuse and exploitation, said the government is clamping down on online child sex abuse.

She said Cameron's £10 million of extra funding was being directed towards specialist teams, which work within the National Crime Agency (NCA).

"Measures also include new collaboration between the NCA and GCHQ using the latest techniques to target online offenders, making it illegal to communicate sexually with a child, and technological developments to ensure victims of online abuse can be identified more quickly and offenders are subject to speedier justice," she said.

"The government has also prioritized child sexual abuse as a national threat and is due to make live streaming of abuse images punishable in the same way as recorded images, in order to ensure perpetrators face the toughest possible sentences,"she added.  

France Moves to Make ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Illegal by Government Decree

21st Century Wire

Political elites and super-bureaucrats are worried. It's becoming harder to control consensus reality.

A history stitched together by lies and cover-ups, political assassinations, slight-of-hand false flag deceptions, secret societies, dual loyalties and stolen fortunes - this have been the privilege of ruling elites for centuries.

Putting aside history's 'big ticket' items though, the real reason for this authoritarian trend is much more fundamental. By knocking out their intellectual competition, political elites and their media moguls hope to minimalize, and thus eliminate any alternative analysis and opinion by applying the completely open-ended and arbitrary label of "extremist" to speech. They want to wind back the clock, where a pre-internet, monolithic corporate media cartel held a monopoly on ideas.

Although France has taken the lead in this inter-governmental effort (see below), the preliminary assault began this past fall with British Prime Minster David Cameron publicly announcing on two separate occasions, that all of these so-called 'conspiracy theories' (anything which challenges the official orthodoxy) should be deemed as "extremist" and equivalent to "terrorist" and should be purged from society on the grounds of 'national security'. The first came with Cameron's warped speech at the UN, and afterwards, a similar charge was made by the UK leader against anyone who dares press the issue of institutional paedophilia and child abuse.  

Read more

“Going After” the Islamic State. Guess Who is Behind the Caliphate Project?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research

The Islamic State (IS) is portrayed as an Enemy of America and the Western world. 
With the support of America’s indefectible British ally, President Barack Obama has ordered a series of US bombing raids on Iraq allegedly with a view to defeating the rebel army of the Islamic State (IS). 

“We will not waver in our determination to confront the Islamic State … If terrorists think we will weaken in the face of their threats they could not be more wrong.” (Barack Obama and David Cameron, Strengthening the NATO alliance, op ed published in the London Times, September 4, 2014, emphasis added)

But Who is behind the Islamic State Project?

In a bitter irony,  until recently the rebels of the Islamic State, formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) were heralded as Syria’s “opposition freedom fighters” committed to “restoring democracy” and unseating the secular government of Bashar al Assad.

And who was behind  the jihadist insurgency in Syria?

Those who ordered the bombing campaign are those who are behind the Caliphate Project. 

The Islamic State (IS) militia, which is currently the alleged target of  a US-NATO bombing campaign under a “counter-terrorism” mandate, was and continues to be supported covertly by the United States and its allies. 

In other words, the Islamic State (IS) is a creation of US intelligence with the support of Britain’s MI6, Israel’s Mossad, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency (GIP), Ri’āsat Al-Istikhbārāt Al-’Āmah ( رئاسة الاستخبارات العامة‎). Moreover, according to Israeli intelligence sources (Debka) NATO in liaison with the Turkish High Command has been involved in the recruitment of jihadist mercenaries from the outset of the Syrian crisis in March 2011.

In relation to the Syrian insurgency, the Islamic State  fighters together with the Al Qaeda affiliated jihadist forces of the Al Nusrah Front are the foot soldiers of the Western military alliance. They are covertly supported by US-NATO-Israel. Their  mandate is to wage a terrorist insurgency against the government of Bashar al-Assad. The atrocities committed by Islamic State fighters in Iraq are similar to those committed in Syria.

As a result of media disinformation, Western public opinion is unaware that the Islamic State terrorists have from the very outset been supported by the United States and its allies.

The killings of innocent civilians by the Islamic State terrorists in Iraq are used to create a pretext and a justification for US military intervention on humanitarian grounds.  The bombing raids ordered by Obama, however, are not intended to eliminate the Islamic State, which constitutes a US “intelligence asset”. Quite the opposite, the US is targeting the civilian population as well as the Iraqi resistance movement.

Read more

Britain’s Israel Lobby, The Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) Pressures HM’s Goverment: Is David Cameron Complicit in War Crimes?

Anthony Bellchambers
Global Research

Is David Cameron’s refusal to condemn what is apparently a prima facie war crime by the IDF, in Gaza, worrying evidence that the CFI, Conservative Friends of Israel, (AKA the British branch of the Israel lobby) has infiltrated government to the extent that it now influences UK foreign policy in the same way that AIPAC in America determines the US foreign policy agenda?

Yesterday’s resignation of a former Co-Chairman of the Conservative Party, the talented, ex Minister of State at the Foreign Office, Baroness Warsi, would seem to indicate that such a situation does indeed pertain within the Cameron government to the obvious detriment of democracy; the adherence to international law and the Geneva Conventions and the sanctity of human life – in particular, that of the child.

 

It would appear that David Cameron has made a huge error in allowing an international lobby to cloud his judgement and compromise British values to the extent that not only is he is content to permit the indiscriminate killing of women, children and non-combatants, in times of war, but that he is willing to licence the export of (British) arms knowingly for that very purpose.

 

The British electorate will not to renew his mandate when it has now become clear that he is prepared to accede to demands from a lobby acting for a foreign state rather than to ensure compliance with international human rights.

 

Downing Street accused of cover-up over senior aide Patrick Rock's arrest on child abuse images allegations

The Independent

David Cameron has been accused of a cover-up after one of his most senior aides was arrested on suspicion of possessing child abuse images. 

Patrick Rock, who had been working on a Downing Street policy committee for internet pornography filters, was reportedly told he was under investigation for possessing the images a number of hours before his arrest on 13 February.

He then quietly resigned, and the matter only came to light when officials at Number 10 were questioned about it directly on Monday.

According to a Labour MP the delay has the appearance of a “cover-up” - and the fact that Mr Rock was given advance warning of the allegations was a Government “interfer[ence] with the justice system”.

A spokesperson for the Prime Minister has confirmed Downing Street was first made aware of the alleged offence regarding child abuse imagery on the evening of 12 February.

But speaking in the West Midlands yesterday, Mr Cameron defended the position his office had taken.

“I don't think it would be right to pre-emptively brief out a criminal investigation and that's why we did not do that,” he said.

“But as soon as questions were asked, as questions would inevitably be asked, we have given very full and straightforward answers, which is absolutely the right way to answer this.

“I've been clear right along and I was told about this issue pretty much as soon as it was discovered and I have been very clear we must handle this in an absolutely correct way and I am satisfied that is what No 10 Downing Street has done.”

Backbencher John Mann MP said said it was “mysterious” that the situation had not emerged earlier.

“There has been a bodged attempt at media manipulation which is wholly unacceptable from 10 Downing Street,” he said. “Of course they should have revealed it proactively.”

And he told the Telegraph: “It gives the impression of a clumsy attempt at a cover-up. If Mr Rock was told [of the allegations] before his arrest it an issue, it would interfere with the justice system.”

Mr Rock was arrested at his London home in the early hours of the morning of 13 February.  The matter was immediately referred to the National Crime Agency and he resigned his position as deputy head of the policy unit.

Mr Rock has been an influential figure behind the scenes in the Conservative Party for decades, has made three unsuccessful bids to become an MP, and is reported to have been in line for a peerage.

It emerged this week that he had also been accused of harassing a Downing Street colleague in the past.

Additional reporting by PA

Cameron's internet filter goes far beyond porn - and that was always the plan

New Statesman 

Through secretive negotiations with ISPs, the coalition has divided the internet into 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' categories and cut people off from huge swathes of it at the stroke of a key.

David Cameron visits the offices of Netmums at CP House

in Watford on February 14, 2012. Photograph: Getty Images. 

 

There is no porn filter, and blocking Childline is not an accident

The idea of an internet porn filter has always been a political fiction, a conveniently inaccurate sound bite used to conjure images of hardcore fisting and anal rape in the feverishly overactive imaginations of middle Britain. What activists actually called for - and ISPs were forced to provide - is an 'objectionable content' filter, and there is a vast, damp and aching chasm between the two.

The language of the mythical 'porn filter' is so insidious, so pervasive, that even those of us opposed to it have been sucked into its slippery embrace. And so even when it turns out that O2 are blocking the Childline and Refuge websites, or that BT are blocking gay and lesbian content, we tend to regard them as collateral damage – accidental victims of a well-meaning (if misguided) attempt to protect out children from the evils of cock.

But this was never the case. As Wired reported back in July, Cameron’s ambitions extended far beyond porn. Working through secretive negotiations with ISPs, the coalition has put in place a set of filters and restrictions as ambitious as anything this side of China, dividing the internet into 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' categories, and cutting people off from huge swathes of it at the stroke of a key.

"As well as pornography, users may automatically be opted in to blocks on "violent material", "extremist related content", "anorexia and eating disorder websites" and "suicide related websites", "alcohol" and "smoking". But the list doesn't stop there. It even extends to blocking "web forums" and "esoteric material", whatever that is. "Web blocking circumvention tools" is also included, of course."

And the restrictions go further still. Over the weekend, people were appalled to discover that BT filters supported homophobia, with a category blocking, "sites where the main purpose is to provide information on subjects such as respect for a partner, abortion, gay and lesbian lifestyle, contraceptive, sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy."

Read more

 

Caught on camera: top lobbyists boasting how they influence the PM

Independent

SEE VIDEO

Special undercover investigation: Executives from Bell Pottinger reveal 'dark arts' they use to burnish reputations of countries accused of human rights violations

One of Britain's largest lobbying companies has been secretly recorded boasting about its access to the heart of the Government and how it uses the "dark arts" to bury bad coverage and influence public opinion. An undercover investigation by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, published in The Independent today, has taped senior executives at Bell Pottinger:

* Claiming they have used their access to Downing Street to get David Cameron to speak to the Chinese premier on behalf of one of their business clients within 24 hours of asking him to do so;

* Boasting about Bell Pottinger's access to the Foreign Secretary William Hague, to Mr Cameron's chief of staff Ed Llewellyn and to Mr Cameron's old friend and closest No 10 adviser Steve Hilton;

* Suggesting that the company could manipulate Google results to "drown" out negative coverage of human rights violations and child labour;

* Revealing that Bell Pottinger has a team which "sorts" negative Wikipedia coverage of clients;

* Saying it was possible to use MPs known to be critical of investigative programmes to attack their reporting for minor errors.

Read more

 

 

The Camerons, the Blairs, the Obamas are the extremists says John Pilger

Stop the War

The Camerons, the Blairs and the Obamas fear that the millions over the world, who represent decency, sanity and outrage, will call them to account for the slaughter and suffering of so many innocent people.

 oday at the very moment that we're here the United States, Britain and France are bombing a city in Libya called Sirte where there are 100,000 people.

Day and night Presidential buildings, clinics, schools have been hit with fragmentation bombs and hellfire missiles, which are also called vacuum bombs, that means they suck the air out of your lungs. 

The media refer to Sirte as 'pro Gaddafi stronghold'. The Channel 4 reporter in Libya describes the attacks as 'cutting off the head of the snake'. 

For such heroic journalists, there are two types of humanity in war: there are worthy victims and unworthy victims. 

The people of Sirte are unworthy victims and therefore they're expendable both as people and as news. 

In Iraq the people of Fallujah were also unworthy victims. American marines, helped by the British, killed some 5,000 people there. Last year I used footage of what had happened in Fallujah in a film of mine. It was shocking. It was almost a vision of Hiroshima. 

Not a frame of this film was broadcast when all this happened 6 years earlier, although it was offered and it was rejected. 

As Harold Pinter would say (and he often spoke up here) none of it happened, it didn't happen even as it was happening - it didn't matter. 

Everything was used in Fallujah - cluster bombs, white phosphorous. Cancer is now rampant in that city. 

In Afghanistan I filmed a woman called 'Orafa', kneeling beside the graves of her husband and seven other members of her family, including six children. An American F-16 pilot had dropped a 500 pound bomb on her small home, which was made of mud and straw. I walked into the crater and saw pieces of human bone. 

We've had 10 years of such crimes that didn't happen, that didn't matter - 10 years. The revision is now well underway, and I'm not referring to the Sun of the Daily Mail - yesterday the Guardian said that the invasion of Afghanistan was 'understandable' and to wage a short war was 'unavoidable'. Understandable? Unavoidable? 

No mention that Al-Qaeda had left Afghanistan when the invasion began. No mention that the Clinton administration had been secretly dealing with the Taliban regime for an oil pipeline, even inviting the Taliban on a secret trip to Washington. 

No mention that the Taliban were lavishly entertained in the Texas mansion of the CEO of the oil company Unocal. No mention that the attack on Afghanistan almost certainly had been planned before 9/11: as Pakistan's foreign minister later revealed, he was told in July of that year that Washington had decided to get rid of the Taliban regime because they were 'unreliable'. 

Some people who ought to have known better swallowed the lies about Afghanistan being unavoidable, understandable. Many in the women's movement in the United States who listened to Hillary Clinton that an attack on Afghanistan would liberate woman. When this excuse wore thin drugs became the issue. No mention that the Taliban had actually eliminated the opium trade. 

Today young people on the streets of British cities are addicted to heroin thanks to British and American deals that allowed their favourite warlords to restore the opium trade. 

The war in Afghanistan was a fraud from the beginning. Just as the attack on Iraq was a fraud, and the invasion of Libya is a fraud. 

According to evidence published in France but not in this country, the so-called National Transitional Council in Libya promised around 35 percent of oil concessions to the French company Total in exchange for France's military involvement. 

And here's David Cameron boasting that Libya is the model - the 'model' - for humanitarian intervention all over the world. 

Your presence today is so important because you and millions like you all over the world represent decency, sanity, outrage. The Camerons, the Blairs, the Straws, the Obamas, the Bushes represent extremism. They are the enemy. 

For what can be more extreme than the slaughter and suffering of so many innocent people. Never lose faith in your own power, for they are not invincible. They fear this power, they and their apologists fear you calling them to account. 

Above all they fear you disobeying their atrocious rules and believing their atrocious propaganda. Because from Egypt to Chile, from Wall Street to right here in Trafalgar Square, there's only one way now and you know what that is: it's called civil disobedience.