Wednesday 30 September 2009


For those of you who haven't heard about or seen this yet, it's the best piece of news the Country has had in years - Rupert Murdoch has decided that enough is enough and given his support back to the Conservatives after 12 years of backing "New" Labour. We have yet to see if this change of direction will also apply to Sky News but I do find it somewhat encouraging that losing the support of The Sun newspaper, was described as "the last nail in the coffin" by Adam Boulton - the most direct language I have heard him use regarding Labour in quite some time.

Here are some of the main points of The Sun's front page story.

The real story of the Labour years is one of under-achievement, rank failure and a vast expansion of wasteful government interference in everyone's lives. They cannot disguise the failures of Labour in Government over the last 12 years, many of them embarrassingly laid bare by the PM's own words yesterday.

Britain feels broken . . . and the Government is out of excuses. 

Labour FAILED on law and order. Knife murders are soaring, smirking criminals routinely walk free in the name of political correctness, while decent people live in a virtual police state of snooping cameras and petty officials empowered to spy and to punish.  

Labour FAILED on schools. Four in 10 kids leave those shiny new classrooms still unable to read, write or add up properly. We are plummeting down international league tables for maths and literacy, but every year "grade inflation" ensures record GCSE and A-level passes to fuel Government propaganda. 

Labour FAILED on health - spending billions on clipboard-ticking target managers instead of on frontline care.

Labour FAILED on immigration, opening our borders without any regard to the consequences. Illegal migrants and bogus asylum seekers poured in.

Labour FAILED the children they claimed to have made their priority. After 12 years of Blair and Brown, Britain is officially the WORST country in the developed world in which to grow up.

Most disgracefully of all, Labour FAILED our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving them to die through chronic under-funding and the shambolic leadership of dismal Defence Secretaries like Bob Ainsworth. 

Billions blown employing a useless layer of public service middle-managers like those who condemned Baby P to die.

Billions more spent, insanely, making benefits more lucrative than a pay cheque - creating a huge, idle underclass for whom work is a dirty word. And all along the Government has had one overriding concern: Itself.

Labour's driving ambition has not been to improve Britain. It has been to retain power at all costs - with no lie judged too great in its ruthless and relentless self-promotion.

They promised a referendum on Europe. They claimed they had ended "boom and bust". They tried to con the public with promises of endless investment, when they knew they would have to cut. 

They have had that chance and failed.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tuesday 29 September 2009


This Ipsos-Mori poll on the eve of McDoom's speech at the Labour Memorial Service Brighton Conference will not make very good reading for the pill-popping, pant-pissing, foul-tempered, Nokia-throwing, totalitarian communist twat! I would suggest that those attending the conference give him a wide berth tomorrow as he will be on the fucking rampage until his ultra-large dose of happy medicine has kicked in properly - you will know when it's safe to approach when you see him smiling inanely at inappropriate times.

Ben Page, CEO of Ipsos-Mori, said in an interview that "Labour is very weak - the mood here is just terrible. Most people who want to vote Labour say they expect Labour to lose". 

Oh, dear, what a pity, never mind.

The results of the poll with 1,003 adults surveyed are:-

CON = 36%, LIB = 25%, LAB = 24%

Labour hasn't been in this position since February, 1982, when they were committed to raising taxes and unilateral disarmament.

We've heard those kind of rumblings again in the last week or two, those old familiar Labour policies of taxing us to death and inviting the rest of the world to bomb the shit out of us any time they like!

In the meantime, a 34-page Labour document titled, "General Election Handbook Part 1 -- A day-by-day planner for your general election campaign", was issued to candidates and campaign chiefs this week at the conference. The document’s description of an April campaign suggests that Brown is planning to hold the general election the same day as voting for local officials.

Justin Fisher, professor of political science at Brunel University and an expert on election campaigns said that
"This would appear to confirm a May 6 election".

So it would seem that the cat is out of the bag and we get rid of the bastards a month earlier than we thought we would - that's only another seven months, folks. I just hope we can all take it until then!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday 28 September 2009


If this is Labour's so-called "fightback", then it looks like the bout is going to end in the first round with a knockout win to the Conservatives. The hall really is half empty and the local Brighton people have clearly not been persuaded to take up Labour's bribe offer of free tickets. They may have tried to spread their audience around the auditorium to try and help the overall appearance but the empty seats are still glaringly obvious - there are nearly as many people on the stage as there are in the front row. You really would need to have a heart of stone not to laugh - things can only get better!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday 26 September 2009


There is something very wrong with this picture! 
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Friday 25 September 2009



Thursday 24 September 2009


Feeling a bit tired and sleepy tonight but to keep you entertained, I take great pleasure in posting this following story from The Grauniad - yes, really, The Grandiau!! And I've included an extract from the FT which also makes dismal reading for McFuckwit - how I laughed!!

Gordon Brown lurched from being hailed as a global statesman to intense embarrassment tonight, after it emerged US President Barack Obama had turned down no fewer than five requests from Downing Street to hold a bilateral meeting at the United Nations in New York or at the G20 summit starting in Pittsburgh today.
The prime minister, eager to portray himself as a leading player on the international stage in America this week, was also forced to play down suggestions from inside his own party that he might step down early, either due to ill health or deteriorating eyesight.
There have been tensions between the White House and No 10 for weeks over Brown's handling of the Scottish government's decision to release the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.
Brown's efforts to secure a prestigious primetime slot for his keynote speech at the general assembly in New York were also thwarted when the Libyan leader, Colonel Gaddafi, delivered a 100-minute speech to the UN, massively running over Brown's 15 minute slot.
Brown had not only been seeking a bilateral meeting with Obama, but feelers were also sent out to hold a joint press conference, an event that would have boosted Brown's efforts to offer himself as a linchpin of international diplomacy. Government sources said that Britain even changed its policy on swine flu immunisation in Africa to match that of the Obama administration last week, in an attempt to rebuild relations.
No 10 denied there had been any hint of a snub, saying Obama and Brown had plenty of chances to talk as they sat next to one another at the summits. They insisted they were working hand-in-glove, (a boxing glove, perhaps), on issues such as future economic regulation, bankers' bonuses, nuclear non-proliferation and climate change. Brown himself insisted: "I do say that the special relationship is strong, it continues to strengthen."
But Obama has held bilateral meetings in New York with the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, and the new Japanese prime minister, Yukio Hatoyama.
News of the five spurned approaches compounded a miserable day for Brown at home which saw a parliamentary aide resign over the prime minister's refusal to sack Lady Scotland, the attorney general, after she was fined £5,000 for employing an illegal immigrant, as well as a withering attack by the former home secretary Charles Clarke.
Stephen Hesford, Labour MP for Wirral West, told Brown in a resignation letter: "In my view, the facts of the case do not matter. It is the principle which counts, particularly at a time when the public's trust of Whitehall is uncertain to say the least. We have to be seen to be accountable."
Brown was also savaged by Charles Clarke, who told the Evening Standard that in his view Brown's leadership risked letting "the whole Labour ship crash on to the rocks of May 2010 [the expected date of the general election] and sink for a very long time".
He said he hoped rumours that Brown would quit would come true. "I think his own dignity ought to look to that kind of solution."

Labour’s lead over the Conservatives in the north of England, its traditional electoral stronghold, has collapsed under Gordon Brown, according to Financial Times research that shows David Cameron on course for a clear majority of English seats.
The loss of Labour’s northern bulwark is a fresh blow for the prime minister ahead of a potentially difficult and rebellious party conference next week.
The FT’s analysis of the most recent aggregated polling data, which allows sufficiently large sample sizes to show reliable regional and demographic trends, paints a bleak picture for Labour.
The Tories have built a narrow four-point lead in the north, eradicating the 19-point Labour lead in the region that underpinned Tony Blair’s last general election victory, the research shows. The 11.5 percentage point swing from Labour to the Tories in the north since the May 2005 poll is the largest for any region of Britain.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tuesday 22 September 2009




Monday 21 September 2009


Some of you may remember a while back when I found an article by Peter Oborne in the Daily Mail which informed us that we were going to receive some unexpected help from Germany as they had referred the Lisbon Treaty back to their Constitutional Court. They have still not managed to amend the treaty to their satisfaction and, as we all know, whatever amendments they make in order to keep the sovereign powers that they do not wish to relinquish to the EU will be null and void as soon as the Treaty has been ratified.

Now we are going to get even more help from the Czech Republic as you can see in the following report from The Times. Many thanks to Quiet Man for pointing me in the right direction - he's rather made my day.

Czech Republic 'planning to delay signing Lisbon treaty'

EU leaders are said to be furious that the Czech Republic is planning to delay signing the Lisbon treaty for up to six months even if the Irish vote "yes" in their referendum next month.

The country might even try to delay it until after the British general election campaign when a Tory victory would see the question put to voters by David Cameron.

Nicolas Sarkozy, who helped to draw up the treaty after the French and Dutch voted against its predecessor, the EU Constitution, has warned Prague that it faces "consequences" if it does not swiftly follow an Irish "yes" with its own ratification.

The outburst followed a private warning from Jan Fischer, the Czech caretaker Prime Minister, to his EU counterparts over dinner at their summit in Brussels last Thursday, it has emerged.

Mr Fischer said that Václav Klaus, the country's unpredictable President, was planning to have a group of loyal senators in the Czech Upper House refer the treaty back to the country's constitutional court for a second time, which could delay ratification for between three and six months.

This would mean that the treaty could still be unratified going into the British general election campaign, expected next April or May. Mr Cameron has pledged that, if the document remained a live issue, even though Britain has completed its own ratification, he would call a referendum on it. This prospect horrifies most EU leaders, given the strong vein of Euroscepticism in Britain.

Tensions are already running high among EU leaders over whether the Irish will vote in favour of the treaty on October 2 after a close-run referendum campaign. They are desperate that the momentum of a "yes" is not lost on the eurosceptic Czech and Polish presidents, the final two signatures required for EU ratification.

The treaty further erodes national powers to veto EU decisions, and a Tory government would campaign against it. President Klaus is understood to have told allies that he wants to wait if possible to see if Mr Cameron wins the next election.

Speaking after last Thursday's dinner, Mr Sarkozy said: "I stated clearly that if the Irish say 'yes', there is no question that we will accept to stay in a no-man’s land with a Europe that does not have the institutions to cope with the crisis,” he said.

Asked about what could be done to persuade President Klaus to sign, he added: "It will be necessary to draw the consequences — but those will be the subject of another meeting."

Mr Fischer is acting as caretaker Prime Minister after the Government of Mirek Topolánek fell in the summer and while fresh elections are organised. He has warned privately that he has little control over the country's headstrong President. Speaking to Czech journalists after last week's summit, he admitted: "It is certainly a fact that several government leaders perceive the ratification process in the Czech Republic with a degree of nervousness."

Notice the same old threats from Sarkozy about "consequences" just as the people of Ireland were told if they vote "NO"!! Cameron may yet have to grow a set and give us our referendum as all three parties promised us they would in their 2005 election manifestos - another fucking lie.

President Klaus and the Czech Republic may yet turn the tide on the EU monster and buy us enough time for our own resounding "NO" vote. Then Cameron must ensure that the EU is dead in the water once and for all!

I don't know about you but this is the best news I've read on the subject for some time.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Sunday 20 September 2009


Voters demand EU referendum if David Cameron becomes PM

The Tories have come under fierce pressure on Europe as a poll shows that 70 per cent of voters want a Conservative government to offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, even if it is already law when they come to power.

So far, the Tories have made only vague promises not to 'stand idly by' if the treaty has already become law across the EU

An ICM survey for The Sunday Telegraph also found that 40 per cent want Britain to leave the European Union altogether, a higher percentage than in other recent polls.

Asked which of the four leading member states did best out of EU membership, 43 per cent said France while 25 per cent chose Germany. Britain was selected by 10 per cent, followed by Italy on eight per cent. Even among voters who identify more with Labour than with any other party, 64 per cent want the Conservatives, if elected, to offer a referendum on the treaty, which will establish an EU president and further entrench the decision-making powers of Brussels.

So far, the Tories have made only vague promises not to “stand idly by” if the treaty has already become law across the EU when they win power. However, David Cameron’s efforts to play down the issue take a further blow today as Edward McMillan-Scott, the senior Conservative MEP expelled from the party last week, accuses the Opposition leader in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph of trying to “smear” his name.

Meanwhile, Labour divisions were also highlighted with Gisela Stuart, a former minister who helped to draw up the treaty’s original blueprint, warning that ratifying Lisbon across the EU would create a “democratic deficit”.  

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday 19 September 2009


More voters trust the Tories to improve the NHS than Labour, a poll revealed yesterday.

The survey also gave the Conservatives a lead on almost every major political issue.

Thirty seven per cent favoured David Cameron’s healthcare policies, three points ahead of Labour.

The Populus poll showed 56 per cent thought Mr Cameron was substantial compared with 38 per cent for Mr Brown. Most said the Prime Minister was dithering and dull while almost three-quarters thought Mr Cameron was likeable or charismatic.

The Tories were also in the lead on managing the economy, improving standards in schools, getting the ­balance right between taxes and spending, dealing with crime and anti-social behaviour, tackling immigration and asylum, and reforming the political system.

It now seems certain that whatever he does, whatever happens, the British public have simply stopped listening to McDoom, his minions and his master, Lord Fondlebum of Boys. The Labour conference could very well be a complete disaster and the inside information going around at the moment is that so many of the Labour rabble are staying at home, because they are resigned to losing the election and are totally demoralised, that the venue is going to look extremely empty on television, and the thought of that is scaring them rigid. So much so, in fact, that they have been trying to bribe the locals in Brighton with free tickets to attend the conference so they can make the hall look full for the TV cameras! What a fucking laugh!!

It also appears that the local people have not exactly been stampeding to get the tickets either so what would be really funny is if the tickets ended up going to people who are not Labour supporters at all and who cause them yet more embarrassment at the conference with heckling, anti-Labour banners and all the other wonderful stuff that goes along with a good protest demo - now that really would be fucking hilarious!

Well that conference will be happening very soon and I'm going to stop letting my imagination run away with me - whatever happens, it will be a dismal affair resembling something more like a funeral or a wake, and this is Browneye's last chance to impress the party. If his performance at the TUC conference a few days ago is anything to go by, this next one will be a real stinker - I think I can already smell it coming our way - he's doomed, I tell you, doomed!

Could he get the chop in the next few weeks? It's not beyond the realms of possibility if Mandelson says it's time for him to go and then the pressure for a snap election would surely be too great to resist for a second time. We can't have two unelected PMs in a row can we - that would just be undemocratic!!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Friday 18 September 2009


Wednesday 16 September 2009



Tuesday 15 September 2009


Is Hattie Harman Mobilising?


Harriet Harman just made a speech on reforms to clean up Parliament in the wake of the MPs' expenses scandal. But maybe just as interesting is her canvassing of Labour party members. In what is being seen by at least one Labour MP as a possible prelude to another leadership bid, Ms Harman's volunteers have been asking the following questions:

"Who do you think is the best person to sell the Labour party?"

"On a scale of 0 to 5, how do you rate Harriet Harman?"

A spokeswoman for Ms Harman insists it is something the Deputy Labour leader has been doing for some time:

"When she won the deputy leadership campaign, she pledged that she would keep in contact with party activists and she has done that ever since.

As part of that commitment, she has a team of volunteer activists who regularly ring around to hear the opinions of grassroot activists. It’s a very useful and important means to keep Harriet in touch with the party and it’s something that is appreciated by party activists.” 

Sue Thomas, a constituency party secretary in Ipswich, tells me that she was asked to rate not just Harriet's performance but also, on a scale of 1 to 5, that of G Brown himself. Sue insists that the questions were not put in the form of "Harriet v Gordon" or phrased as a leadership bid in any way. 

A spokeswoman for Ms Harman says the plain and simple answer to the question in the title of this blogpost is: "An unambiguous 'No'."

"Harriet is doing the job that she was elected to do - to maintain party engagement and it's entirely legitimate for her to do this as part of that process."

"This is a regular activity, not something started with any ulterior motive. Harriet is a loyal deputy to the Prime Minister and it's utter rubbish to suggest otherwise or to suggest that she's building some kind of database of emails and information."  


So,  Mad Hattie's leadership ambitions are showing no signs of diminishing - as if! Although she and her supporters constantly deny that she is actively campaigning for the job, many Labour MPs and Ministers refute these denials. I remember not so long ago either reading or hearing on a news programme that her ideal outcome in a leadership election would place her as PM and Alan Johnson as her Deputy - I don't imagine she would get much trouble from him! 

Insiders said, "everyone knows that Harriet is building a base among members - everything she does is about positioning for the leadership." Her actions came to light as Labour insiders say the party is starting to look beyond Mr Brown. One backbencher said: “You can’t find anyone outside No 10 who thinks we can win the next election, so it’s all about who takes over as leader after we lose and Gordon goes.” 

Many Labour MPs believe that Brown can hold on until the election and I, for one, would be extremely happy if that is indeed the case, however, senior members foresee no improvement in Labour's poll ratings if Brown remains in place and, as such, want a leadership challenge after the Labour conference in a few weeks time. I truly hope they botch this third attempt to oust him because he is our best hope for a complete Labour meltdown come election time and that is our best hope to turn Britain back into the place where we used to live in freedom from these socialist monsters and their partners in crime, the damned socialist EU! 

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday 14 September 2009



Sunday 13 September 2009


Labour's Master Election Planners Turn Their Backs On Ranting Brown

Gordon Brown’s bid to cling on to power has been dealt another savage blow after it emerged that the Labour Party’s leading campaigners are boycotting his Election team.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


In another nasty story about Labour, (is there any other kind?), a deal was stitched up by Jack Straw in Libya when he was Foreign Secretary in 2006 over the murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in London, shot by someone inside the embassy in 1984. Agreement was reached secretly in Tripoli that any trial for her murder would take place in Libya. Needless to say, trade deals worth hundreds of millions of pounds were being negotiated at the time and this was part of those negotiations.

Tory MP Daniel Kawczynski, chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on Libya, said ministers had never disclosed the deal. He said, "I think they deliberately misled us and I find it extraordinary that the Foreign Office have tried to mislead myself and the Fletcher family."

Queenie Fletcher, Yvonne's mother, said she had not been informed of a deal. "They should have informed us. We were never told they'd agreed to this. No, never."

Shadow foreign secretary William Hague said: "This is yet further evidence of the need for an independent inquiry into the Government's handling of this whole affair."

You can find the whole story at THE SUNDAY EXPRESS.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Saturday 12 September 2009


The following video will tell you everything that neither BBC Pravda, RTE nor any other European state broadcaster will not tell you for one very good reason - it lays bare the duplicity behind the "YES" campaign in the upcoming rerun of the referendum. This European dictatorship will not take "NO" for an answer, which you have already witnessed for yourselves with the previous French, Dutch and Irish referenda and now you are also being pressured into giving them the "correct" answer that will kill off democracy in Europe forever - you should be afraid - you should be very afraid!

Please take the time to watch this excellent video or feel free to download it and watch it later - it can't do any harm and it will most probably do a lot of good - and by the time you've watched it, you will at least know fully what you are getting yourselves and everyone else into if you vote "YES". Don't take my word for it - just click on the link below to watch the video.

Rate the movie here:

To email us your review click here

"We set out to make a video about the pros and cons of the Lisbon Treaty and found out to our horror the lies, manipulations and deceit behind the EU. From MEPs, legal experts and EU researches the true nature of the EU unfolded, how it really operates from behind closed doors and away from prying eyes. We discovered the massive power grab away from citizens and nations to the elites that is being proposed in this treaty.

Most shocking of all was how our elected representatives are willingly handing us over to this emerging Totalitarian Superstate by deception , propaganda and outright lies.This video details how the structures of the EU really operate, what the full significance of the Lisbon Treaty is and how it is the end of Nations within in the EU. MEPs describe their experience in Brussels and how they are undermined by the real power of the unelected and unaccountable Eurocrats who run the organization. How the politicians are working together for their own selfish needs while being used for a bigger agenda".

The Youtube trailer for this documentary can be found here:

Feel free to download and share this documentary

There is a very easy solution for downloading the video. Download the latest Real Player (click here) and then view the movie, hover your mouse over it and on the top right you’ll see a new download button popup. Real Player will download this to your PC as a flash video (flv) which can now play in Real Player.

Translate End of Nations
If you would like to translate this documentary in to another language please contact us.

© Wise Up Journal 2009 wise up tv - issues - about - contact - legal notice

This next video by a learned Russian who has only, relatively speaking, recently got out of the frying pan does not want to see us all jumping straight into the fire and exposes the comparisons between the EU and the Soviet Union.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Friday 11 September 2009


Two more excellent cartoons from the absolutely brilliant Peter Brookes in The Times which I hope you will find amusing - and if you like these , you can click on the links to see some more.

Thursday 10 September 2009


A British soldier, an interpreter and two civilians were killed in a dawn raid to free Stephen Farrell, the reporter held captive by Taliban militants.


Gunmen had seized Mr Farrell and his interpreter, Sultan Munadi, on Saturday while they were working in a village south of Kunduz. Mr Munadi, a father-of-two, died in a hail of bullets. Farrell was unharmed but another man and a woman were killed in the crossfire and as he left, Farrell said he saw the body of his colleague. He said: “He was lying in the same position as he fell. That’s all I know. I saw him go down in front of me. He did not move. He’s dead. He was so close, he was just two feet in front of me when he dropped.”

Gordon Brown has praised the "greatest courage" of the soldier, believed to be a paratrooper, who was killed in the operation. Announcing the death of the British solder, the Prime Minister said his thoughts were with man's family and said his bravery would not be forgotten.

Farrell, 46, was kidnapped en route to the site of a controversial Nato airstrike on two hijacked fuel tankers in Kunduz province four days ago. It is the second time Farrell has been kidnapped. In April 2004, while on assignment for The Times, he was kidnapped at gunpoint by bandits near Fallujah in Iraq.

I haven't posted anything for the last couple of days because nothing awful had happened to Brown, which would have pleased me greatly, and nothing else had happened to make me angry enough to write about it. True to form, though, McFuckwit hasn't kept his incompetent hands away from trouble for long.

Stephen Farrell, a reporter for the New York Times was repeatedly warned that this area in Kunduz province was crawling with Taliban after the NATO airstrike on two fuel tankers there four days ago but he chose to ignore those warnings and go there anyway and was kidnapped, because of his own arrogance/stupidity, along with his interpreter. This man has been kidnapped before in Iraq so has already gone through the experience of being held hostage - one would think, not unreasonably, that he should have learned a valuable lesson from his abduction in Fallujah and take advice from the people who knew the situation in Kunduz better than he did.

Although negotiations were well under way and a deal to release this "serial" hostage had almost been reached, McDoom then decided to jump in with all of his usual finesse, (probably in a bid to ingratiate himself with Obama because of his previous double-dealing fuck-up over the Lockerbie bomber), and order a raid to free Farrell which resulted in the death of a British soldier, the interpreter and two other innocent civilians.

Farrell got himself into that mess and it should have been left to the negotiations to get him out of it, if possible - other than that, he'd asked for it and should have been left to face the consequences of his foolhardiness. Brown's was a typical knee-jerk reaction from the man whose mental stability has come under even more scrutiny and suspicion over the last few days and has resulted in the unnecessary deaths of four people.

Someone in the lily-livered Labour Party needs to find the courage to relieve Brown of his job before he can do any more damage, especially if the recent reports about his taking of banned anti-depressants are true.

Fucking brilliant, Gordon, you twat!

Sunday 6 September 2009


Gordon Brown vetoes Libyan payout to IRA victims


GORDON BROWN personally vetoed an attempt to force Colonel Muammar Gadaffi to compensate IRA bomb victims because it might have jeopardised British oil deals with Libya.

Documents passed to The Sunday Times reveal how the prime minister took a close interest in a campaign to secure payouts for the 2,500 families of those blown up by the Libyan-supplied Semtex explosive used by republican bombers.

However, Brown refused to help the victims because of government concerns that putting pressure on Gadaffi might lead to Libya withdrawing co-operation over trade and the war against Islamic terrorism.

The documents will cause embarrassment for Brown as he faces new questions over the early release of the convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi.

In a further damaging twist, Jack Straw, the justice secretary, was last night accused by the Tories of misleading the public over the prime minister’s role in talks about the decision to free the terminally ill Libyan terrorist.

The Sunday Times has established that Straw wrote to Brown warning the Libyans might block a multi-million-pound BP oil deal unless the bomber was released. The disclosure contradicts remarks Straw made in a newspaper interview published yesterday in which he insisted there had been “no paper trail” to No 10.

Campaigners claim the official letters about IRA compensation highlight the government’s preoccupation with trading relations with Libya at the expense of bomb victims.

A letter from Bill Rammell, then the Middle East minister, sent on November 6, 2008 to Jonathan Ganesh, who was injured in the 1996 Docklands bomb and now campaigns for IRA victims, states that oil contracts were a factor in the government’s failure to act.

Brown said in a letter to Jason McCue, the victims’ lawyer, dated October 7, 2008: “The UK government does not consider it appropriate to enter into a bilateral discussion with Libya on this matter.”

Responding to claims that the government had been swayed by narrow commercial interests, Brown insisted that “trade” was not the “core reason” for his refusal to act over victims’ compensation.

However, in the letter he went on to acknowledge that it had been one of the factors: “While the UK-Libya relationship does indeed include trade, bilateral co-operation is now wide-ranging on many levels, particularly in the fight against terrorism. I believe it is in all our interests for this co-operation to continue.”

Libya shipped Semtex and arms to the IRA for several years from 1985. Lawyers representing
British victims have evidence that the Semtex was used in a series of IRA atrocities, including the Enniskillen bomb of 1987, the Manchester bomb in 1996 and several explosions in London.

Daniel Kawcynski, chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on Libya, said the interests of BP “should never trump the demands of justice for the victims of terrorism”.

You can
also find this story dealing with Blair's part in all the double dealing at the INDEPENDENT ON SUNDAY.

And now I think I need to take a day off and have a nice relaxed Sunday, complete with traditional Sunday dinner and far too much wine - so, if I do find myself tempted towards the computer tomorrow and end up talking shit, you'll know exactly what's wrong with me! I'll see you all on Monday.

Saturday 5 September 2009


Jack Straw has reignited the row over the release of the Lockerbie bomber by admitting for the first time that trade and oil were an essential part of the Government’s decision to include him in a prisoner transfer deal with Libya. 

The Justice Secretary said he was unapologetic about including Abdelbaset al Megrahi in the agreement, citing a multi-million-pound oil deal signed by BP and Libya six weeks later.

The admission directly contradicts Gordon Brown's insistence only days ago that oil deals were not a factor in the prisoner's release.

Mr Brown has been accused of putting Britain’s trade interests before justice for the Lockerbie victims.

Earlier this week, the outcry forced him to say: “There was no conspiracy, no cover-up, no double dealing, no deal on oil, no attempt to instruct Scottish ministers, no private assurances.”

In his interview today, Mr Straw admits that when he was considering in 2007 whether the bomber should be included in a prisoner transfer agreement (PTA) with Libya, Britain’s trade interests were a crucial factor.

Documents published this week showed Mr Straw originally promised that a PTA would only be reached with Libya if Megrahi was excluded. But he later caved in to Libyan demands to include Megrahi. It followed a warning from BP that a failure to include the bomber could hurt the oil giant’s business interests.

When asked in the interview if trade and BP were factors, Mr Straw admits: “Yes, [it was] a very big part of that. I’m unapologetic about that... Libya was a rogue state.

“We wanted to bring it back into the fold. And yes, that included trade because trade is an essential part of it and subsequently there was the BP deal.”

Mr Straw also claims today that Mr Brown had nothing to do with his change of heart over the PTA, adding: “I certainly didn’t talk to the PM. There is no paper trail to suggest he was involved at all.”

Friday 4 September 2009