THE LEAST OF THEIR CRIMES.

There's no archiving, here, it's all too sporadic, too scattergun but if there was,  all the many Hissing Jack Torture posts and comments would be easily summonsed and make comfortable reading; we have known for decades, for all of his career, that  he is a horrible bastard and no mistake even by the filthy, sewer standards  of NewLabour. That Jack  has now been revealed in just one tiny aspect of his criminality is, I guess, better than nothing.

I watched Straw, lying his face off at the United Nations as Hans Blix insisted that Iraq was in compliance with international demands to decommission and permit the inspection of its rusty old shit bucket weaponry.  Hissing Jack knew better; relishing his role as international statesman,  


War?  Yes, great, I am minded to say, let's kill some niggers, 
present company excepted, in my judgement.

Jack knew that, for his career, his place in history, war was better than peace, knew that this was his big chance to lick the arse of Power.  

Some of the younger Labour women MPs let me fuck them, if I force them,  strictly in the interests of their careers, you understand;
I don't suppose you are minded to....

It is curious that the bigger the honourable member's villainy the higher is the regard in which they are held by their colleagues;  all then present in the House of Commons applauded the crook, Blair, as he left to collect his rewards from GlobaDeath - no wonder  they don't want the Chilcott Report published. The ghastly, cowardly wretches are now falling all over themselves to hosannah the career of the freak, Hague, as he departs, ahead of God knows what scandal; he and his late mistress, Whiskey Maggie, both up to their septic arses in institutionalised beasting and covering-up, in the widespread City corruption of Conrad and Barbara Black whom Hague, in his wisdom, ennobled.

I watched a select committee, discussing Hague's anti-democratic role as Leader of the House, refusing and sidelining debates, misleading and thwarting the will of the Commons, feeble as it is;  save for Jacob Rees-Mogg, it was as though all, even Bill Cash, were anxious to crawl beneath the tables and take their turns fellating the boy lover, the man who shares a bed with a relative child, purely to save money.

Even George Showbusiness Galloway, in a recent debate, stressed his admiration for Hissing Jack and his disappointment in him; most of us rumbled Straw 


back when he had his tongue up  Barbara Castle's ancient, scabby arse;
 it took Armageddon to bring George to his senses about Jack but then he's not the brightest of men, Sheikh bin Galloway.

Malcolm Shouty, too, he and his wife's misuse of MPs' expenses should have seen him thrown-out on his arse and kicked up and down the Mall 

Taxi? To the corner shop?
Yes, dear, the voters'll pay,
'swhat they're for

but no, to compensate him for his embarrassment,  they put a crook, a  noisy, bullying blackguard, in charge of overseeing national security matters, so that he might sell them on to the highest bidders. 

Now that  millions are burned, dead, limbless, refugee  and now that innocents, at home and abroad, lose their heads to Jack's creatures, ISIL, now that Northern Labour is rightly seen as the beast-friendly, vote-rigging corruption that it is, now that the Rednecks are revealed as the hallowed home of tax evasion and money-laundering, the Filth-O-Graph and Channel Four  now take some pains, now arrange some subterfuge in order to tell us what we already know about this pair.

It is true that in the US, Mr Al Capone, a minor gangster by Straw's standards, was finally arraigned and imprisoned on charges relating to his income tax and some might now think that as a result of these similarly relatively minor crimes, Straw and Rifkind will see their uppances finally come, they won't.

Both of these filthsters, unlike Dennis McShane, are in the charmed circle and aside from a little discomfort nothing will happen to them. 

Anyone else, of course, would go to jail on charges of bribery and corruption in public office.   
Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt should have gone straight to jail in the last such cash-for-access sting, nothing happened then and nothing will happen now; haven't both of these criminals referred themselves to a committee of their chums, hasn't Hissing Jack Torture suspended himself  - what is this shit, suspended himself, is there any point whatsoever to Ed Miliband? - from the Labour party? 

 And isn't all this just a measure of how very right honourable these gentlemen are, how fortunate we are to have criminals of such distinction and nobility shitting in our faces? 

Gosh, if only common burglars and bank robbers could temporarily suspend themselves from their guilds, until things blew over. 

No, no, the drug dealing was just boyish high spirits, not as though he was working class, living on a council estate, one of the Underclass. 

And I was the home seckatry.

Yes, a working class kid would have quite properly, in my judgement, gone to jail. 

He was a good kid, actually, Will. 

And I'm minded to say that he'll make a splendid Labour MP. 

A bigger cunt than me, even.

Rifkind, like so many Tories in parliament,  is just a grubby, gobby crook, three years in jail would settle his hash. Straw, though, however lawyerly his excuses, smug his demeanour, superscilious his sneer is a nonce-protector, a vote-rigger, a major war criminal, a thief and a torturer and on his rapsheet this lobbying stuff is neither here nor there;  we should not be sidetracked into thinking that this is important, Jack Straw is no mere hustler;  Jack Straw, alone, without any assistance from MediaMinster's crime family, makes a compelling case for Up against the wall, motherfuckerism.

THE UNACCEPTABLE FACE OF STUDENT PROTEST.

From the Filth-O-Graph, 4.11 pm

For God's sake, find this man a safe seat.

Aaron Porter, NUS President,  escorted away from his own members.

C'mon my son, you're one of us now, but then you always were.

"Hundreds of protesters called for his resignation, directing their anger towards him as he made his way towards the students’ union building.

Campaigners shouted: "Students, workers, hear our shout! We want Aaron Porter out!" and "Aaron Porter we know you, you're a fucking  Tory too!"

Mr Porter is facing calls to step down as NUS president by members of the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts.

Saturday’s demonstrations in London and Manchester were organised in protest against public spending cuts and rising tuition fees.

The protests – attended by thousands of students – began peacefully but around 150 demonstrators broke off from the agreed route and headed towards the city centre, where they targeted Mr Porter."

Speaking on BBC Radio Shit, I mean Four, former NUS President, Mr Jack Torture said  "It's very important, Martha,  for listeners to listen to me , you see Mr Porter was doing what many young people have done, he was using his feigned concern for his fellow students as a stepping-stone to a highly lucrative career as a politician, no, do let me finish, because this is very important.  Can you imagine British politics without the likes of, well, me

A young Mr Jack Torture as president of the NUS

and so all I woild say to your listeners, and many of them are not as clever as me, is that Mr Porter is in the great tradition of myself and Trevor Phillips and David Aaronobitch, you know, the fat bloke with the nonce's beard and my good friend Mr Charles Fatty Clarke  and lots of other rotten, stinking hypocrites and I think that's worth many people getting beaten up by the police for - if you and your listeners will forgive the split infinitive - which, I understand, is happening even as we speak, and those great professional  British bobbies are doing it with  great commitment, even though most of them have, for some reason, forgotten to put their ID numbers on,  just like  we tell them to. I am sure that Mr Porter has a glowing future ahead of him in one of the political parties, which, as I'm sure listeners will know, are much the same. Obedience, that's the thing. Obedience and Torture, served me well."

WHAT THE PAPERS SAY, THE GUARDIAN, JACK TORTURE.

Thursday, 15 July 2010

HEROES OF  NEWLABOUR 

RT. HON. JACK TORTURE MP

The torture files: Downing Street's role (SM21)

These documents show Downing Street's interventions to deny consular services to detainees held in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere. A telegram despatched by the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, to the embassy in Washington, shows that the government supported the transfer of British detainees to Guantanamo Bay.

Covert words that paint a vivid picture of complicity in torture

• Foreign Office and No 10 interventions revealed
• Emails and memos began months after September 11

• Ian Cobain and Owen Bowcott
• guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 14 July 2010 20.43 BST
• Article history

Reports sent by an MI5 officer reveal a clear awareness of the mistreatment of Omar Deghayes, pictured. Photograph: Lucie Goodayle for the Guardian

Early January 2002. The Taliban regime in Kabul had been toppled, Nato forces were spreading out across Afghanistan, and the initial military response to the events of September 11 appeared to be running smoothly.
But in Whitehall – and particularly at the Foreign Office – there were the first signs of nervousness over the proposed manner of dealing with one problem that had arisen in the country: a small number of British citizens and residents, all Muslims, had been detained by US forces.
A mass of documents disclosed during high court proceedings show how rapidly the government became involved in the abduction and torture of these individuals in its attempts to secure the UK against attack by al-Qaida.
They also appear to show how little regard was given within the government to the illegality of its own actions.
On 4 January 2002, a memo circulated to the secretaries of the junior Foreign Office ministers Ben Bradshaw and Lady Amos, as well as to the Foreign Office press office and the department's senior legal adviser, Sir Michael Wood, notes: "Public opinion has on the whole shown little concern about the welfare of the British detainees, or the legal terms of their detention. But the issue is clearly of sensitivity to Muslim opinion in the UK and abroad."
It adds that the FCO should be "seen as applying our normal standards of consular assistance as far as possible". Consular officials had not seen these detainees, however, and "our holding line, that we are first seeking to establish identity details, is wearing thin", not least because extensive reports about one individual had already appeared in the press.
At this time, the fact that "rendition" – abducting an individual and moving them against their will from one country to another – was illegal appears not to have been a concern. A document disclosed by the Foreign Office, dated 10 January 2002 and entitled Afghanistan UK Detainees, expresses the government's "preferred options". It states: "Transfer of United Kingdom nationals held by US forces in Afghanistan to a United States base in Guantánamo is the best way to meet our counter-terrorism objectives, to ensure they are securely held." The "only alternative", the document adds, would be to place these individuals in the custody of British forces in Afghanistan, or to return them to the UK.
At around the same time Jack Straw, then foreign secretary, was sending a telegram to several British diplomatic missions around the world in which he signalled his agreement with this policy, but made clear that he did not wish to see the British nationals moved from Afghanistan before they could be interrogated.
"A specialist team is currently in Afghanistan seeking to interview any detainees with a UK connection to obtain information on their terrorist activities and connections," Straw wrote.
"We therefore hope that all those detainees they wish to interview will remain in Afghanistan and will not be among the first groups to be transferred to Guantánamo. A week's delay should suffice. UK nationals should be transferred as soon as possible thereafter."
In the event, the "interview" process in Afghanistan took considerably longer. The manner in which some were conducted is revealed within the reports that an MI5 officer sent to London after each of his encounters with Omar Deghayes, a Libyan-born British resident who was being held at the US air base at Bagram, north of Kabul, in June and July that year. Deghayes is one of the men currently suing the government.

The MI5 interrogators were clearly aware of the manner in which Deghayes was being mistreated. Their only emotional reaction to his plight appears to have been disgust at his physical condition. Considering him to be insufficiently forthcoming, they decided to abandon him to further treatment at US hands.
Some of the disclosed documents are fragmentary and partially intelligible.
Much to the anger of lawyers representing those men suing the government, a number have been blacked out completely, leaving only a date.

A page of one document bears the MI5 letter head and logo, but has been so heavily redacted that only one word, "conclusion", remains visible. Among the papers is a handwritten note, headed "Warriors 14/1", that appears to relate to the state of a detainee in Afghanistan. It states: "Interview conditions: cold beaten up." According to one of the claimants' lawyers it dates from a period when MI5 officers were interviewing detainees in Kabul. The note appears to end with a list of options which includes "collusive deportation extradition".
There is a clear account of the fate of Martin Mubanga, another of the men suing the government, despite the large amounts of black ink that were used to conceal parts of the documents relating to his case before they were handed over.
A joint Zambian-British citizen, Mubanga travelled after 9/11 from Afghanistan to Zambia, where he was detained in March 2002 by Zambian officials accompanied by Americans. A number of messages between the British high commission in Lusaka and the Foreign Office in London show that Blair's office had decided that "under no circumstances should Mubanga be allowed to return to the UK". Should consular officials obtain access, however, there was a danger that the Zambians would hand Mubanga over to the British.
The exchanges become increasingly irate, with one official complaining about "the schizophrenic way in which policy on this whole case was handled in London": one half of the Foreign Office was insisting that Mubanga was entitled to consular assistance, and the other half was saying it should not take responsibility for him.

It had put the British high commission in Lusaka "in an impossible position", and there was a need for "co-ordinated thinking" to avoid such problems arising in future.
The documents show that there had been a proposal to put Mubanga on trial in the UK, but as a consequence of the British decision to wash their hands of him he was flown to Guantánamo, where he spent the next 33 months.
It was not the only time the prime minister's office intervened to thwart attempts by Foreign Office officials to obtain a degree of protection for British citizens, according to the documents.
Minutes prepared for the Home Office terrorism and protection unit after a meeting in April 2002 of officials including John Gieve, the Home Office permanent under-secretary, state that the American authorities had been informed that the British government might begin making public requests for legal access to British men held at Guantánamo. "FCO had wanted to do this (and wanted to be seen to be doing it) but had been overruled by No 10," the minutes say.

The same minutes show that while consideration was being given to the prosecution in the UK of some individuals in Afghanistan, David Blunkett, home secretary, warned there would be questions about the public interest in prosecuting "young and ill-informed individuals who may have been manipulated by others".


Missing from the documents so far disclosed is a copy of the secret policy that governed MI5 and MI6 officers interrogating detainees held overseas between mid-2004 and earlier this month, when it was revised on the orders of the coalition government.
The court had ordered that it be handed over by last Friday, but it failed to materialise. Instead, lawyers for the six men were given the chapter from MI6's manual that deals with detainee operations. This explains that MI6 officers are involved in detaining suspects or helping others do so; interviewing; and preparing reports based on details passed by overseas agencies.
When detaining suspects themselves, officers should consult superiors and consider where the detainee will be held and how they will be treated. There is another consideration. "Is it clear that detention, rather than killing, is the object of the operation?" the manual asks.
This document was handed over instead of one that is known to be extraordinarily sensitive. Ministers of the last government repeatedly insisted that the secret interrogation policy of recent years should never be made public.
The former foreign secretary David Miliband even indicated to a Commons select committee that to do so would "give succour" to the nation's enemies.

Redactions

The black ink that obscures parts of Security Service and Foreign Office papers has frustrated lawyers for the six claimants. Known as redactions, the boxes hide information deemed too sensitive to release on national security grounds. Sapna Malik, representing Binyam Mohamed, complains that they make it hard to reach a settlement and avoid protracted litigation. Any assessment is made "very difficult by the limited nature of the disclosure provided to date, the heavy redaction of the handful of potentially relevant documents … and the refusal of the [government] to provide meaningful answers to the claimants' requests for further information".
Nonetheless, despite so much being withheld, the release of security service reports of interviews with detainees in Guantánamo Bay and other overseas detention centres is almost unprecedented.

THE TORTURERS' WALTZ.

One two-three, one two-three...



You know I'm going to be famous?
Yes, dear.
An MP?
Yes, dear.
In the cabinet?
Yes, dear.
I'll probably be home secretary?
Yes, dear.
And foreign secretary?
Yes, dear.
And have people tortured?
Yes, dear.
And I'll probably be Lord Chancellor?
Yes, dear.
And have people tortured?
Yes, dear.
And Leader of the House?
Yes, dear.
And Justice minister?
Yes, dear.
And have people tortured?
Yes, dear.
So, you'll be glad to come outside and have sex with me?
You must be out of your spotty mind, you horrible fucking bastard, fuck off before I call a policeman.

UPDATE: JACK TORTURE: I AM A DIFFERENT PERSON TO MYSELF.

THE CHILBLAIN ENQUIRY, JACK TORTURE UPDATE

A MOTHER'S LAMENT

OLD MOTHER TORTURE: MA SON, JACKIE'S, A REET LYIN' BASTID AND I SHOULDA DROONED THE FUCKING SHITBAG AT BIRTH, AYE, BONNIE LORD CHILBLAIN, AH SHOULDA, HE'S REET GUDE FER FUCK ALL, THE SMARMY FUCKING TOERAG. AND THAT GRANDSON, WILLIAM, FUCK ME, JESUS, WHAT A FUCKING MONSTER HE IS.

The mother of the Obedience Minister, Mr Jack Torture, today told the Chilcot enquiry that her son was a waste a fuckin' space and she wished that she'd a burned him and kept the afterbirth, couldna been worse than this piece a shit's turned oot to be.

Sir Michael Wood, senior legal adviser at the Foreign Office when Straw was mincing around like fucking Goebbbels, echoed Mrs Straw, he's a lying bastard and no mistake, I told him the war was illegal and he just fucked me off, look, here's his letter: Dear Sir Michael, I hear what you say but I am minded to tell you to fuck off, we wanna war and we want it now, so bollocks. He was the same at the home office, legal advisers'd tell the spotty cunt that so and so was illegal and he took no notice and now he comes here bleating about his conscience. Man's a fucking Nazi. Up against the wall, motherfucker.

THE CHILBLAIN ENQUIRY. PRAT INSISTS, I AM VERY IMPORTANT

Jack Torture supported the Iraq war only “very reluctantly”, he said yesterday.

He knew that he could have stopped Tony Blair going ahead with his intention of joining the US invasion."I am minded to say that I am an extremely important person and your listeners must understand that I could have stopped the war anytime but I didn't because I am a very different person to myself, or is it from, accountancy was never my long suit."

The former Foreign Secretary said he warned the Prime Minister that it would be illegal simply to overthrow Saddam Hussein and pressed for the United Nations to resolve the crisis peacefully. He told the Iraq inquiry that he had presented Mr Blair with an alternative plan on the eve of the crucial Commons vote on war that did not involve committing British troops.Only he took no notice of me, having his head up Mr Bush's arse.

Mr Torture repeatedly appeared to suggest that his hopes of avoiding war were at odds with those of Mr Blair, who wanted a large British force to join the invasion to prove that he had as big a cock as Mr Bush, the Executioner.

The Justice Secretary said that the Government was haunted by an error in an intelligence document that said Saddam could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes. The most senior politician yet to face the inquiry expressed “deep regret” about the war and acknowledged that if he had refused to support the invasion Mr Blair would have been unable to carry the Government or Parliament. "I am a very important person, more important, probably, even than myself. "

“I was fully aware that my support for military action was critical,” he said. “If I had refused that, the UK’s participation in the military action would not in practice have been possible.” He described his decision to back military action in March 2003 as “the most difficult I have ever faced in my life”, which posed a “moral as well as political dilemma. I am a very moral as well as a very important person, that is why I want to take everybody's rights away and put them in prison if they don't vote for me. Or, in due course my son William, the boss-eyed one, who was not a drug dealer, but a good kid, really."

He had agonised over a decision to vote for invasion at a Cabinet meeting. He had discussions with Gordon Brown and Robin Cook, his predecessor as Foreign Secretary, who resigned as Leader of the House, before having a heart attack up a fucking mountain.

Pressed on whether he had considered leaving the Cabinet, Mr Torture replied: “Did I ever think, ‘I’m going to resign over this’? No, I didn’t. I was far too important. Especially since the prime minister took no notice of me at all” He confirmed that he had drawn up contingency plans in case the Government lost the Commons vote, making British participation impossible. They included offering the US intelligence and logistics support as well as the use of the air base on the British Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. “I prepared a paper for Mr Blair — I talked to him about it, and he wiped his arse on it” he said.

Throughout his three hours of evidence and in a 25-page note from his Mum Mr Torture emphasised that he hoped the crisis could be resolved peacefully. I am a very peaceful and important person."He appeared to distance himself from a secret letter that Mr Blair wrote to President Bush in July 2002, which is believed to refer to Britain joining the invasion. Sir Roderic Lyne, a former diplomat, asked Mr Torture if he felt “entirely comfortable” with the way Mr Blair had expressed himself. Mr Torture eventually admitted: “Mainly. Would I have written the memo in the same way? Probably not, because I am a different person. And far more important. Than either Mr Blair or myself.”

He admitted that it had been an error not to make clear in the dossier published in September 2002 that a claim that Saddam had WMDs that could be launched in 45 minutes did not refer to missiles." But it doesn't matter. When important people such as myself make errors it's not as though they are really errors, how could they be ? And actually, I am minded to say that there is not exactly a great deal of difference in being able to launch WMDs in forty-five minutes and not being able to launch them. It is, really, Mr Chairman, a matter of semantics"

Asked why there were so many differences of opinion emerging between himselves and the then prime minister he said that it was probably because Mr Blair was being paid so much more than him by the American WarsRUs Corporation. Asked by Lord Chilblain how much the figure was the Obedience Seckatry said "You will have to ask Mr Blair because we are different people but it was at least twenty million dollars for the first year after he went to work for the Americans full-time."

Asked about his much publicised relationship with then Secretary of State Condoleezza RicePussy the Obedience Minister said "Rice? Pussy? Never heard of her."

MORE DANCING WITH THE DEVIL

 

HELLO, MY NAME IS DEATH.
IS THAT WHY YOU HAVE SUCH BAD BREATH?

Resign ? No, I’m minded to say that I’m very nearly perfect. And, if I may say, because it’s very important that your listeners understand, if I didn’t resign over lying like a cunt to the UN, over endorsing those so-called rendition flights and over the admissibility in English and Welsh courts of evidence obtained in Morocco by Ahmed and his electrodes, then, and I do want your listeners to understand this because everything about me is terribly important, even my farts, it is not likely is it, I put it to you with great respect, that I am going to resign over a couple of frog students carved up like salami by a pair of nutters, not when I can blame some young tart of a probation officer.


HELLO, MUMMY, MY NAME IS DEATH
YES,SON, I KNOW, I KNEW I SHOULD'VE STRANGLED YOU AT BIRTH.