Monday, April 30, 2007

The argument for internet regulation is nicely put by The Hitch

What do you think of the People's Princess?

The Hitch said...

Mr Daddy
I am inclined to think that it is william that is the stray.
He looks jack shit like a Windsor.
Harry looks like the DoE.
William is just a tall daft mong like his paki shagging slag of a mother.



What is your view on race The Hitch?

One in Eight school pupils doesnt speak English at home !

Its fucking true! , one in fucking eight!!!!!!!!!!

Just look at the father and son above, thats how Brixton families relax at home.

I have always suspected the leftie whinge "they only make up 5% of the population" was bollocks and now we have the truth.

Of course some cunt who "works" for the commission for racial equality has a solution ,

"parents must stop sending their children to schools where most pupils come from similar religious or racial backgrounds"

Most people dont have a choice you cunt!

And when they do they choose to be with their own kind its what all animals do , we feel comfortable with our own group.

How fucking dare all these parasites come to this country and tell us how to live , if you have the secret why are your own countries such fucking shit holes?

This country is fucked , its finished , Poland is probably a great place to live , its fucking empty no darkies and should things get like this country they still have those camps the germans kindly built.

What do you think of Trevor Phillips Head of the Commission for Racial Equality?


Cheeky black twat!
You may recognise this cunt , It Trevor phillips head of the commison for racial equality , for that read commision for fucking over whitey and providing jobs for a load of otherwise unemployable ethnics.
Now a few months ago he almost started to talk sense , he said that the multi cultural "experiment" had failed , I though Fuck me its finally dawned on the Gurdian reading fuckwit class.
Now he has proved just what a dick he really is , he is demanding that supermarkets discriminate against white people and recruit more ethnics , two things here , firstly it just goes to show how fucking useless most ethnics are when they cant even be trusted to shove trolleys around a car park or stack shelves but more importantly isnt his suggestion just a teensy bit racist ??
The supermarkets have come back and told him to fuck off , they recruit on ablility not race , as I say , says a lot when you cant be trusted to stack corn flakes doesnt it?
This btw is the stupid cunt who took a black kid out of an inner london sink school (one of the many he had been expelled from) and placed him in one of Britains best public schools , chance of a life time , what did the kid do?
mugged one pupil then nearly drank himself to death on another occassion resulting in his expulsion, no doubt the boy still dreams of becoming an architect or (a favourite ambition THEY have) a Barrister.
Trev just cut him adrift , wanker!

The Hitch you really are not a very nice man at all are you? Why is Blogspot allowing you to publish such filth?

Cause for celebration...inside Technorati 100,000




I have only had a computer for 14 months and blogging for a lot less time than that, and I set my sights on getting within Technorati's 100,000 by the end of the year. I cracked it within 4 months. I started the day at 100,627 and discovered that a couple of other blogs had linked to a post of mine and then I saw that I was now ranked 98,081. The champagne bottle cork hit the ceiling and now its party time!

I will have to set my self another goal...

UPDATE: Woke up with a bit of a headache this morning. The suffering was somewhat soothed to see that my ranking has gone up overnight to 95,727...

Life's better in jail, say ex-prisoners hit by Aids

















Life's better in jail, say ex-prisoners hit by Aids


By Christopher Munnion in Johannesburg
Last Updated: 1:22am BST 30/04/2007

South African convicts freed on parole are clamouring to go back to prison because they cannot get jobs or the free anti-Aids treatment they received in jail.

"Many thousands" of them are demanding to be allowed to return to their squalid, overcrowded prisons, according to the South African Prisoners Organisation for Human Rights (Saphor)

At a press conference in Johannesburg, some 150 said that they could not find jobs and would be better off inside.

They said that they faced the stark choice of resorting to crime to feed themselves and their families - or simply going back to prison. "I cannot feed myself as there is no work," said Amos, a convicted thief.

"Like most prisoners I am suffering from Aids and I can't get the free treatment I got inside. I really don't want to return to crime but the only alternative for me is to go back to prison."

Others cited the onset of the southern hemisphere winter for their desire to return to the cells. "In the summer, I can sleep outside," said Sipho, a car thief. "It is too cold in winter. In prison there may be too many people but at least it is warm and we get hot meals."

Golden Miles Bhudu, the Saphor organiser, said the demand of parolees to be re-admitted was "a wake-up call" to the authorities.

"They must ensure they put into place a policy to ensure the smooth integration of these offenders into society," he said.

"This group decided to alert the authorities to the very harsh and terrible conditions ex-offenders find themselves in. You just can't put people on parole without support."

The correctional services department said people would go back to prison only if they violated their parole terms.

In theory, most prisoners out on parole have been convicted of what passes in South Africa for minor offences - theft and crimes without violence. Yet because of chronic prison overcrowding, armed robbers and even murderers have been granted parole.

This has done little to ease the pressure on the prison population - now holding double the inmates it has capacity for. More than 40 per cent are infected with HIV or Aids, according to recent surveys.

The Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria has described prison overcrowding in South Africa as "a national crisis". In a report, the institute said: "The situation needs to be addressed urgently in order to promote a long-term and sustainable national response to crime and its associated problems.

In addition, current prison conditions result in unacceptable infringements of prisoners' human rights and freedoms."

President Thabo Mbeki insists that crime is not out of control. But official figures show that South Africa experiences 50 murders every day - and the level of violence used in burglaries and car-jackingings has increased sharply.

Convicts say that most prisons are nothing more than "finishing schools" for criminals, where offenders learn how to join gangs, acquire and use firearms, forge documents and adopt the finer points of robbing banks and breaking into houses.

In an editorial, The Citizen in Johannesburg said the disclosure that so many criminals wanted to go back behind bars "speaks volumes about conditions in jail compared to life on the outside".

The newspaper said the move raised serious questions about South Africa's prison system and the possibility of ever defeating crime.

"For these offenders, prison is no disincentive. In the absence of more severe punishment, can it be true that crime does not pay?", the editorial asked.

UPDATE: Iain Dale's Diary has linked to this tragic story here. It is worth noting that heroin addiction was rife within South African prisons during the 1970s, and did not reach British prisons until the early 90s. Now it is a large scale problem over here. Also, there are many in prison in this country who are unable to cope outside of prison and prefer to live inside with the security of having their lives controlled for them by the routine of the regime. Another disturbing similarity is that because of the overcrowding over here prisoners are getting released who perhaps should not be.

SAPHOR website here.

Lord Goldsmith found guilty over Saudi arms deal

Arabs feast on British sacrificial lamb


The Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, has been found guilty by the Commons foreign affairs committee of damaging Britain's reputation in the eyes of the rest of the world. According to Tony Blair, the out-going Prime Minister, the decision not to proceed with a prosecution meant that Britain still has good relations with Saudi Arabia.

Well, that's alright then...is it?

UPDATE: More here.

Sunday, April 29, 2007

US aircrews show Taliban no mercy


US aircrews show Taliban no mercy

By Gethin Chamberlain in Kandahar, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 1:17am BST 29/04/2007

Caught in the middle of the Helmand river, the fleeing Taliban were paddling their boat back to shore for dear life.

Smoke from the ambush they had just sprung on American special forces still hung in the air, but their attention was fixed on the two helicopter gunships that had appeared above them as their leader, the tallest man in the group, struggled to pull what appeared to be a burqa over his head.

As the boat reached the shore, Captain Larry Staley tilted the nose of the lead Apache gunship downwards into a dive. One of the men turned to face the helicopter and sank to his knees. Capt Staley's gunner pressed the trigger and the man disappeared in a cloud of smoke and dust.

By the time the gunships had finished, 21 minutes later, military officials say 14 Taliban were confirmed dead, including one of their key commanders in Helmand.

The mission is typical of a new, aggressive, approach adopted by American forces in southern Afghanistan and particularly in Helmand, where British troops last year bore the brunt of some of the heaviest fighting since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.

American commanders believe that the uncompromising use of airpower in recent weeks has been a key factor in preventing the Taliban from launching their expected full-scale spring offensive against coalition forces and forcing them to rethink their tactics.

Aircrews say they have been told to show no mercy, but to press home their advantage until all their targets have been destroyed. The Apache attack was one of five in three days in -Helmand, where British troops operate alongside a much smaller contingent of American infantry and special forces.

Capt Staley, the commander of the Apache unit based at Kandahar airfield, described how his helicopters had arrived just after an ambush by Taliban fighters with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns, on a detachment of American special forces and an infantry unit. In the second Apache, 1st Lt Jack Denton, 26, was in radio contact with the special forces unit, Scorpion 36, on the ground.

The soldiers said they had information that the Taliban were escaping across the river. "Look out for any boats," they said. He spotted a small aluminium fishing boat pushing out from the eastern shore of the 200-yard-wide river. In it were six or seven people. When they caught sight of the Apaches, they started to paddle back towards shore.

The aircrew hesitated. "It seemed a little premature," said Lt Denton. "We didn't have hostile intent or a positive ID from the ground commander." But the special forces soldiers were adamant that, although they could not themselves see the men on the boat, they must be the Taliban who had attacked them. That, said Lt Denton, was good enough for the Apache crews.

By then, most of the men were ashore, walking quickly towards the tree line. They appeared to be pulling clothing over their heads - burqas, Capt Staley thought, and Lt Denton concurred. As the helicopters came in to attack, Lt Denton said, one of the men turned to face him and dropped to his knees. "I think he knew that there was no hope," he said. "He was making his peace."

Capt Staley's helicopter hit them with its rockets while Lt Denton, the gunner in the other helicopter, opened up with his 30mm cannon. Three or four of the Taliban died where they stood and the rest made a dash for the trees. "They were trying to get to their bunkers," Capt Staley said. "We started a diving run and destroyed four of the six people we could see, including the Taliban commander."

From 500ft up, Lt Denton said: "You can see the person but you can't see the features of his face. The 30mm explode when they hit and kick up smoke and dust. You just see a big dust cloud where the person used to be."

As the Apaches came in for another run, Capt Staley said, he saw the muzzle flashes of automatic weapons among the trees. A rocket-propelled grenade screamed towards his helicopter, but it passed by harmlessly.

The Apaches made eight attacking runs and, by the end, the bodies of 14 Taliban littered the shore. Another two were spotted floating down the river. Any survivors did not hang about. "They usually extricate their dead but this time they left them there," Capt Staley said.

American intelligence named the dead commander as Mullah Najibullah, who, they said, had been responsible for leading attacks against British forces in and around the town of Sangin, in Helmand.

The attack, and four other missions against suspected Taliban compounds, are clearly effective, but the stakes are high. Coalition attacks on mistakenly identified targets here, as in Iraq, have left dozens of civilians dead and wounded and can act as a recruiting sergeant for the terrorists.

But Capt Staley said he had no qualms about pressing home such attacks until no one was left standing and claimed that American pilots were more effective than their British Apache counterparts, who he said flew higher and were less ruthless in finishing off their targets. "The Brits are good but they don't have the extreme aggression that we do."

Lt Denton, too, believed they were striking the right balance.

"Usually, right before the engagement, you stop and think, 'Are you sure?', because you are going to be taking someone's life, but everything happens so fast you have to make quick decisions."

On Monday, the Apaches struck again, killing 12 Taliban whom they had caught in the open near Qalat, in Zabul province.

Lt Denton and Capt Staley were in one of the two-man aircraft, escorting two Black Hawk helicopters, when they spotted eight motorcycles, with a rider and passenger on each. It seemed unusual and the Apache broke away to take a closer look.

Dropping to 200ft, it swooped close to the motorcyclists - and the two men could not believe their luck: some of the passengers were holding the parts of a long-barrelled heavy machine-gun.

Six of the bikes slewed to a stop, their passengers leaping off and aiming their weapons at the helicopter in what appeared to be a well-practised drill, while the others took off across country. The Apache banked away to begin its attack run.

"Some of them were trying to get the heavy machine-gun up a small hill to engage us," Lt Denton said. "Capt Staley used the 30mm gun to take out the two guys who had taken off, and then we fixed on the ones with the heavy machine-gun. They were huddled around a large boulder and we shot them. We put as many rounds around it as we could, because if they got to it they could cause us trouble. But they never had a chance to set it up."

Using its cannon and then its rockets, the Apache finished off all the Taliban fighters it could find, then launched nail-filled rockets and dropped white phosphorous to destroy the motorcycles and the machine guns. After the shooting stopped, 12 Taliban were confirmed dead.

Not surprisingly, the Apache assaults have forced the Taliban to adopt a lower profile. For the coalition to continue to be successful, commanders must hope that the Taliban do not get their hands on the weaponry that has made life so perilous for pilots in Iraq, where more than 50 helicopters have been shot down since the start of the war.

But for now, the American airmen are not losing any sleep over it. "When you are on top of the enemy you look, shoot and it's, 'You die, you die, you die'," Lt Denton said.

"The odds are on our side. I really enjoy it. I told my wife, if I could come home every night then this would be the perfect job."

Why is America behaving worse than terrorists?

There is something disturbing about this report. Quite apart from all the references to the so-called Al-Qaeda leader only being thought to have committed terrorist attacks. There are references to his being in custody in a "ghost prison" since last year, and the information has only just become available. Why he has been arrested by the CIA, a so-called intelligence gathering agency, is a mystery. Why his arrest was kept secret for so long is a mystery. Has the suspect been the subject of torture? Was he allowed his phone call to his lawyer? If he is being accused of offences committed in the UK, why is he now being held in custody in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba? Should he not have come under the jurisdiction of UK laws?

When the so-called law-abiding behave worse than criminals there is no justification.

How was I able to get out of a locked cell and walk out of a prison?




"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" (Sherlock Holmes).

In 1973, I was locked in my cell and the door was bolted as per normal at 8pm. The next morning at 6 o'clock when the night staff made their final roll count before the arrival of the day shift it was discovered that I was not in the cell. The alarm was sounded and a security inspection revealed that no cell bars had been cut or removed, and that no bricks had been removed from the walls. The ceiling and floor were likewise undamaged. The lock and bolt on the cell door had not been tampered with. This posed a mystery for the prison authorities. There was no collusion with the night staff letting me out of the cell.

A search of the prison was made and I was nowhere to be found. The grounds were searched, too, and no ladder or rope or any other escape equipment was found either inside or outside of the prison.

Unfortunately, my bid for freedom did not last long. Modern technology had developed and it was just my bad luck that the first police car I saw had computer equipment fitted which produced a photograph of me for the police officers. They returned me back to the prison. I was physically examined by the doctor and he stated that I was not rubber boned nor double jointed and that it was impossible that I could have squeezed between the cell bars.

Q 1: How did I get out of the cell?

Q 2: How did I manage to walk out of the prison?

Additional information. Mick Jagger of the Rolling Stones once spent two nights in this prison. Francis Behan is recorded in the index of prisoners who have stayed there, better known as Brendan Behan the author of The Borstal Boy. Another distinguished visitor to the prison was The Forsyte Saga author John Galsworthy. No prizes for naming the prison.

UPDATE: Link.

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Lord Levy bribed Lord Goldsmith



Why would Lord Levy give Lord Goldsmith a free holiday to Israel and how much did it cost? I think that this is a pertinent question given that Lord Goldsmith is now in a position to decide whether Lord Levy should be prosecuted over the cash for honours affair. It discloses a conflict of interest and any reasonable man who has to reach a reasonable decision cannot reasonably do this. That is why there are now renewed calls for Lord Goldsmith to stand aside from this process.

It is not clear why Lord Levy paid this bribe to Lord Goldsmith, in October 2004, which Lord Goldsmith has not made a secret of this holiday, because it came about before the cash for honours scandal broke. There must have been another reason why Lord Levy would seek to find favour with Lord Goldsmith who is a Law Officer. It's a bit like the motorist being pulled over by the police for speeding and the police officer finding a £50 folded up inside the driving licence!

I would have thought that Lord Goldsmith could have afforded to buy his own holiday on his salary. There does not appear to be any genuine need for him to be accepting charity. It could be that Lord Levy was simply being nice for the sake of being nice and that there was nothing underhanded about the transaction. Was that a pig I just saw flying past my window?

UPDATE: The Telegraph apologises for getting it wrong.

Woof justice

Man who barked at dogs cleared

By Paul Stokes
Last Updated: 3:36am BST 28/04/2007

A teenager who was arrested for barking at two dogs has cleared his name in court in a case that cost the taxpayer £8,000.

Kyle Little turned on the pair of chocolate labradors after being warned by police for using bad language in the street.

He was arrested after he made canine noises at Princess and Ruby, causing them to bark back at him.

Little, 19, a jobless labourer, was charged under the Public Order Act for causing harassment, alarm or distress to the dog's owner, despite her not making a complaint.

Magistrates fined him £50 with £150 costs in January but the conviction has been quashed by a judge, who remarked: "The law is not an ass."

Judge Beatrice Bolton told Newcastle Crown Court: "I'm sure an expert on labradors could explain how distressed the dogs were but I don't think section five of the Public Order Act applies to dogs.

"Growling or barking at a dog does not amount to a section five offence, even if a defendant has been told by the police to curb his language.

"He obviously did curb his language and spoke to the dogs rather than continuing to swear at the police."

The Crown Prosecution Service withdrew its opposition to his appeal in light of the judge's comments and the conviction was overturned.

Stuart Graham, prosecuting, told the court that Little had been abusive to Sgt Douglas Johnston and Pc Daniel Peacock before the incident last August.

He said: "He was told twice to mind his language. He then, in view of the officers, proceeded to walk to the garden where the dog was and was growling at the dog, which agitated the dog.

"The officers' statements were that the householder was distressed at someone growling at the dog."

Little did not attend the hearing.

At his home in Newbiggin Hall, Newcastle, where he lives with his parents Ian and Tracy, Little said he had been with his 16-year-old girlfriend and friends during the evening when he came face-to-face with the dogs.

He said: "I was walking past the lady's house when the dogs came bounding out of the porch and jumped up at the railings, they were both barking their heads off and so I did a daft little growl and went 'woof woof' at them.

"The next thing I knew I had been grabbed by the two police officers who bent my arms up behind my back and handcuffed me.

"They threw me into a van and whisked me off to the police station, where they threw me into a cell for about five hours.

"They said they were going to charge me with a public order offence for barking at the dogs. I couldn't believe it.

"This has been a joke all the way through. I am glad the judge has thrown it out of court. I am shocked it's cost so much money."

Sunita Vedhara, the dogs' owner, said: "He was messing about, being a daft young lad. We didn't want to see him prosecuted but the police said he was being taken to court, which we found surprising. The dogs weren't really upset by it at all."

Friday, April 27, 2007

Guantanamo Bay prisoners' lawyers condemn Bush administration


27 April 2007 15:47

Guantanamo Bay prisoners' lawyers condemn Bush administration

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
Published: 27 April 2007

Lawyers representing some of the hundreds of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay have angrily condemned efforts by the Bush administration to make it more difficult for them to visit their clients. The lawyers say restrictions already in place make their jobs all but impossible.

The US Justice Department has requested that a federal court impose tighter restrictions on the lawyers, claiming their visits with prisoners have "caused intractable problems and threats to security at Guantánamo". In a brief to the court the department claims information passed from prisoners to their lawyers and then given to the media.

Lawyers representing some of the 385 prisoners still held at the US Naval base on Cuba yesterday reacted angrily to the accusations leveled by the department. They said what was really driving the request was the US government's desire to further diminish the already severely limited scrutiny that Guantanamo receives.

Clive Stafford Smith, legal director of the UK-based group Reprieve which represents several dozen prisoners, said of the claims: "They say the lawyers have caused unrest, they say we have caused hunger strikes. This is monumental crap. They say we are inciting them. Of course, we have talked to them about their hunger strikes – that is our jobs. But the hunger strikes are done in reaction to their treatment. And any information we gather has to go through the censors."

He added: "This is being done to stop information coming out of Guantanamo. It's being done to stop any journalists finding out what they did to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others." Under the proposals, filed earlier this month in Washington DC, lawyers would be restricted to just three visits with an existing client, correspondence they sent to their clients would be vetted by military intelligence officers and government officials would be empowered to prevent lawyers from having access to secret evidence used by military tribunals to decide whether the prisoners were "enemy combatants".

Ever since the prison opened in January 2002 – established to hold alleged suspects rounded up in the so-called war on terror – Guantanamo Bay has been the focus of controversy and countless claims of abuse and torture.

Three British prisoners who were eventually released without charge said they were abused and mistreated.The Bush administration has sought to restrict the amount of information available about the prisoners and their treatment. When alleged 9/11 plotters Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other "high value targets" went before tribunals to assess their status in March, all lawyers and journalists were banned from the proceedings on the grounds of national security. Mr Mohammed - who according to a Pentagon transcript of the proceedings claimed responsibility for a series of terror attacks - said he had suffered abuse at the hands of the CIA.

A Justice Department spokesman yesterday declined to comment on the request, saying the filing to the court should speak for itself. Part of that filing claimed: "There is no right on the part of counsel to access to detained aliens on a secure military base in a foreign country."

But lawyers said the government was trying to refuse the prisoners a basic legal right. Jonathan Hafetz of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, told the New York Times: "These rules are an effort to restore Guantánamo to its prior status as a legal black hole."

Campaigners have long been fighting for the prisoners to be brought to trial or else released. They appeared to have won a victory last summer when the Supreme Court ruled that they had the right to challenge their detention. However, the Bush administration passed new legislation to circumvent the ruling.

If you've gotta go...Go Now


Blair may resign as party leader on Tuesday

By Andrew Pierce and Christopher Hope
Last Updated: 7:02am BST 27/04/2007

Tony Blair is considering announcing his resignation as Labour leader before next Thursday's local elections in an attempt to limit the expected electoral damage.

The Daily Telegraph has established that senior advisers close to the Prime Minister have urged him to make a statement just before the May 3 poll, which will be the biggest test of political opinion since the general election.

Most observers have predicted that Mr Blair would announce his resignation after seeing Northern Ireland's new power-sharing executive sworn in at Stormont on May 8.

However, if he agrees to the earlier option, the announcement could could come next Tuesday, May 1, the 10th anniversary of his election as Prime Minister, or the next day, which is the eve of the local elections.

The news would dominate the media for the following 48 hours and overshadow the elections in more than 300 English councils and the contest for the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly.

With opinion polls suggesting Labour's worst performance since 1983, the triggering of a leadership contest would also overshadow any inquest into the defeat.

Even Mr Blair's most loyal supporters concede his unpopularity is so deep that his resignation could actually improve the party's showing, particularly in Scotland which Labour may lose control to the nationalists.

The move could also wrongfoot his opponents and even cushion any political fallout for Gordon Brown if, as expected, there is a rout of Labour in the Chancellor's Scottish backyard.

The eve of poll announcement is being canvassed at a senior level within No 10 to let the Prime Minister regain the political momentum.

If Mr Blair makes no statement about his intentions, and the results are as bad as some predict, the ensuing days will be dominated by speculation about when he will finally trigger the leadership contest.

One source told The Daily Telegraph: "It is a viable option. After the local election results have been digested the question will immediately turn to when will Tony go.

"We will not be able to get any other message out. It will dominate everything until he finally says when. It makes complete sense. But we don't always do things that make sense."

Mr Blair is anxious that he will not take the brunt of the blame if the grim opinion polls are borne out.

He was asked on BBC1's Breakfast programme yesterday if it had "crossed your mind about going before these elections then getting the so-called poison out of the system".

Mr Blair sidestepped the question and said: "You know in the end the important thing for me, because I did after all say I would serve a full term, is to make sure that I just carry on with the job and they get the things done and in the end people make a judgment about you at a later time."

Another source said it was unlikely Mr Blair would want to hang on until May 9. He said: "I think he is going to go early. Politically, it would be a huge boost to the Labour Party."

Weekend reports suggested Mr Blair could confirm his intentions early in the hope, as one Labour aide suggested, that it would "remove one of the main reasons for [the electors] giving Labour a bloody nose".

UPDATE: Number 10 Downing Street claim newspaper reports are wrong.

T.W.A.T. (The War Against Terrorism) Supremo John Reid loses in court again



Court delivers setback to anti-terror strategy

By Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor
Last Updated: 1:26pm BST 27/04/2007

The Government’s anti-terrorism strategy suffered a major setback this morning when a court ruled that two Libyans with links to Islamist terrorist groups could not be sent back to their own country.

Siac, the special anti-terrorist court, found a “real risk” that the un-named men could be tortured or ill-treated in breach of the Human Rights Convention if they were deported — despite an agreement between Libya and Britain signed in 2005.

“There is also real risk that the trial of the appellants would amount to a complete denial of a fair trial,” Siac found.

The two men will be freed within days after Siac granted them bail in principle, pending an application by the Home Secretary for permission to appeal.

Counsel for the Home Office had opposed bail on the grounds the Libyans would abscond if let out of Long Lartin maximum security prison, where they have been under immigration detention.

However, Mr Justice Mitting, the Siac chairman, said keeping the men in detention after they had won their appeal would be on the “cusp of legality”.

The court heard that a strict set of bail conditions had been agreed between the Home Office and lawyers for the two men, including a daily 12-hour curfew.

The addresses at which the pair will be required to live will be finalised in a hearing next Thursday.

At the heart of the Government’s case is a memorandum of understanding between Britain and Libya, which provides for an independent body to monitor the way in which a detained person is treated.

However, the monitoring body is headed by one of Col Gadaffi’s sons.

Siac found that this non-governmental organisation would not be able to prevent abuses by the Libyan dictator or his security organisations.

“The fact that it may be the best NGO in Libya for the task does not make it necessarily sufficient,” Siac said.

There was an “element of unpredictability” about Col Gadaffi’s actions, the court found. “The need in this case to make a large allowance for the unpredictable reaction, which in the short term or occasionally diverges from the pragmatic path on which the Libyans are set, means that we cannot eliminate the real risk we have identified.”

The Home Office said it was “very disappointed” with the decision.

“We believe that the assurances given to us by the Libyans do provide effective safeguards for the proper treatment of individuals being returned and do ensure that their rights will be respected,” a spokesman said.

John Reid, the Home Secretary, would be appealing against the decision, the spokesman added.

However, Mr Justice Mitting said: “My provisional view is that the prospects of successfully applying for permission and of challenging the decision of the commission on a point of law in the Court of Appeal are scant.”

The Home Office said its policy would not change.

“We firmly believe that our policy of seeking assurances from other countries in respect of those considered to pose a threat to national security strikes the right balance between safeguarding their rights and enabling us to protect the British public and Siac has accepted this previously,” the spokesman said.

Mr Justice Ouseley, who heard the appeal last year with two other members of Siac, said in a written ruling this morning that they were required to consider only the risks that the two men could face if they were returned to Libya, “no matter how grave and violent the risks … they pose to the UK”.

That was because Siac was bound to follow a ruling in by the European Court of Human rights from 1996 in a case brought against Britain by a Sikh nationalist, Karamjit Singh Chahal.

That decision, Siac stressed, would have been binding even if Parliament had not passed the Human Rights Act in 1998.

Britain has been trying for more than a year to overturn the Chahal ruling, but there is still no date for a challenge to be heard by the European Court of Human Rights.

The two Libyans who won their appeals are not linked.

The first, known as DD, claimed asylum when he arrived in Britain in January 2004 with his pregnant wife, a Moroccan. He was carrying a Spanish passport in another name.

Siac concluded that he was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, involved in supporting Islamist extremists loosely affiliated to al-Qa’eda.

They were said to have been engaged in terrorist activity for a substantial period of time and well placed to help those who were planning terrorist attacks in Britain and abroad.

The second Libyan, AS, arrived in 2002 and also claimed asylum. He served a brief prison sentence for using a forged Italian identity card and handling a stolen British passport.

He is alleged to be a committed Islamist extremist who had been actively involved in providing logistic support to individuals linked to al-Qa’eda.

Italy sought his extradition for serious terrorist offences but later withdrew the application.

After being tried in his absence in Italy, AS was acquitted of terrorist crimes but convicted of other offences. Siac concluded today that “each appellant is a danger to national security and the Refugee Convention provides no protection against removal”.

But there remained a real risk of breaches of Article 3 of the Human Rights Convention, which prohibits torture and degrading treatment.

“That is because there is too much scope for changes to happen, for things to go wrong; and too little scope for a breach of Article 3 to be deterred or for acts which might lead to a breach of Article 3 to be remedied in time, essentially through effective monitoring.”

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Leak

There has been a leak claiming that the Guardian has got its facts wrong. It is not a leak from the Home Office if misinformation is supplied. It is understood that the Home Office adviser is a former ITN reporter. Moreover, it is understood that the leak originated from within the Met and that there is internal conflicts. There is a feeling of dissatisfaction firstly with the criticisms from the government over the police inquiry into the cash for honours, and secondly that the decision has already been made not to prosecute any of those involved. It is felt that the June announcement date is purely political timing and that the reason not to prosecute as being not in the public interest is described as a falsehood. Further leaks have come from both the Ministry of Defence and the opposition who had been briefed to a large extent.

One wonders why there has been a misleading of Parliament below unless it is pure window dressing?

Link.

Good morning Iraq another Vietnam?



Senate sets Iraq withdrawal date

By Toby Harnden in Washington
Last Updated: 7:29pm BST 26/04/2007

A showdown between the White House and Congress was looming today after the US Senate narrowly passed a bill compelling President George W Bush to withdraw American troops from Iraq by next April.

Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, said the vote, which tied $124.2 billion funding for the war to the withdrawal timetable, “sets us on a new course, away from a civil war with no end in sight toward a responsible phased redeployment”.

Mr Bush has vowed to veto any bill which contains what he calls a “surrender date”, a move that will spark a major showdown with the Democratic-led Congress.

Before the bill was passed by 51-46, Mr Reid said: “If the president refuses to change direction, America risks being bogged down in Iraq for years, not months.

“For a president that took the country to war under false pretences, he now needs the courage to admit his policies have failed and work with us to bring the war to a responsible end. This bill gives him a path forward.”

The White House tonight reaffirmed the president’s intention to veto and accused Democratic leaders of dragging their feet over the debate so that it would fall on the fourth anniversary of his speech on May 1st 2003, in which Mr Bush declared in front of a “mission accomplished” banner that “major combat operations” were at an end.

The vote came after the senior American military commander in Iraq warned that the war was “exceedingly complex and very tough” and that the US challenge in the country “might get harder before it gets easier”.

Gen David Petraeus said that Iraq had become the “central front” for al-Qa’eda, which “remains a formidable foe with considerable resilience and a capability to produce horrific attacks”.

In addition “extremist militias in Iraq also are a substantial problem and must be significantly disrupted”.

But he also emphasised that there had been “some notable successes in the past two months” and that US forces were at the “relatively early stages of our new effort” – a reference to Mr Bush’s “surge” policy of increasing troop levels.

The Iraqi government, he said, was dysfunctional and Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi premier, had a very difficult task.

“He’s not the Tony Blair of Iraq. He does not have a parliamentary majority.

“He does not have his ministers in all of the different ministries. They are from all kinds of different parties. They sometimes sound a bit discordant in their statements to the press and their statements to other countries. It’s a very, very challenging situation in which to lead.”

Gen Petraeus acknowledged that there was an “American clock” which might limit military options in Iraq.

“That clock is moving and it’s moving at a rapid rate of speed, and it reflects the frustration, impatience, disappointment, anger, and a variety of other emotions people feel about the pace in Iraq.”

Exclusive: Ian Huntley denies sex attack


I reported here that Ian Huntley had confessed to a sex attack on an 11 year old girl. The report I published was from the Torygraph. It has since emerged, from a reliable source close to the case, that although Huntley consented to sign the documents presented to him from the police, that he still denies carrying out the sex attack. According to my source, the Legal Services Commission withdrew funding which meant that Huntley was unable to defend the case in court. He also feared that it would be laying himself open to attack as he went to and fro from the court. Faced with this, Huntley decided to sign. Another factor was that Huntley does not have any money to lose and it would not cost him anything if damages are awarded. It has been remarked that Hailey Giblin has already published one book and another is due to be published.

The view from afar...


It's difficult finding news on the Times online website, unlike the Telegraph that has a button which you click and a drop down menu appears and you can pick those stories which tickle your fancy. So, I usually rely on the Fink's Comment Central to see what he has trawled from the newspapers. Not so today, the Times had four stories all about Tony Blair. 'Why?' I wondered. It was not until I read three, and got started on the fourth, did it emerge that today Blair has gone to Washington to meet his master. Sit!

It's not exactly clear from the photo, but Blair and Bush are holding hands like a pair of gay lovers. The Times headline reads "The inside story on Bush, Blair and that special relationship". Usually, a dog cocks its leg and pees on a bush. The difference here is that Bush screws dog. Well and truly screwed. Admittedly, Bush has rewarded the traitor with the US Congressional Gold Medal of Honour for his war crimes. However, the Blair poodle won't fetch it and bring it back. He fears the wrath of his real masters.

Gordon Brown has recently been over to the States, but maintains that he desires to keep a respectable distance from being controlled by the Whitehouse. This is probably a wise move because Blair lost hell of a lot of respect by obeying Bush rather than asking what the electorate over here wanted from him. Cameron upset the Bush administration with his anti-American speech on the 5th anniversary of 9/11. Since then, the Tories have sent over a couple of envoys, first David Davis, and then George Osborne, to try and tell Bush that they are sorry and that they are really nice people after all, but Bush has snubbed both of them.

It would be a shame if at the next election the electorate voted in the Tories just because of this British/American rift. Blair has alienated the people from the Labour Party. However, it is worrying that there are secret links between some Tories and the BNP. I don't accept that the Tories have changed at all. If there is a change, it is not for the better. In the blogosphere it has emerged that a Tory/BNP link exists, and this can only be a change for the worse.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

When your back is against the wall and you come forward nothing is going to stop you.

I don't know what the argument is about with Guido and Tim Ireland and the latter and Iain Dale, but I do know what my arguments are with Guido and Iain Dale. I have certainly seen enough evidence from Tim Ireland which backs up his arguments in relation to sock puppets. Notsaussure recently emailed me this link which helps to explain what Tim has been subjected to, and I have also had this on Guido's and Iain Dale's blogs. I have heard some bloggers on Blogger TV mistakenly refer to this conduct on blogs as "flaming" and the work of "trolls". They are ignorant. This is worse. It's more akin to cyber-terrorism. I am still in two minds about regulation of the internet. Luckily I am a strong enough character and good enough with words to hold my own with these unsavoury elements. I tarnished my reputation in the past, but that is behind me now. I came out of prison with a clean sheet. I don't ask people to like me, I went through much of my life not caring what other people thought. I care what those close to me think, and those I have dealings with. I'm comfortable in a jungle. I can snare prey quite easily. It's those who want to protect their reputations that are vulnerable. It's those who care what others might think that are vulnerable. They are not going to change what my people think of me whatever they say or do.

Bonnyman rules for the Scene in open-records case

Bonnyman rules for the Scene in open-records case
By Walker Duncan

04-25-2007 12:50 PM —
Davidson County Chancellor Claudia Bonnyman this morning ruled in favor the Nashville Scene in its attempt to shed light on the current effort to revise the state's methods of carrying out the death penalty.

As NashvillePost.com recently reported, the Scene filed a lawsuit against the Tennessee Department of Corrections after the dapartment and its commission, George Little, denied an open-records request from the alternative weekly newspaper seeking to lift the hood, so to speak, on the execution review process.

The review follows an executive order from Gov. Bredesen in February staying all executions until new protocols could be devised. The department has until May 2 to establish these new methods.

Soon after the order was handed down, the Scene filed its request under Tennessee's open-records law for information on how the new procedures would be developed.

Though the department offered a copy of the current execution manual and some other documents, other information was held back on the grounds that it was privileged material relating to policy deliberations. Scene editor Liz Garrigan countered: "We're talking about how we're going to go about killing people in this state. We think that ought to be an open discussion."

With today's ruling, it looks as though the DOC will have to cough up the rest of the information.

The department still has the option to appeal. Assistant Attorney General Janet Kleinfelter, representing the Department of Corrections, could not be reached for comment at the time of publication.

Guido Fawkes aka Paul Staines aka Liar.

It can truthfully be reported, here, that Guido Fawkes aka Paul Staines, has been well and truly caught out posting a blatant lie. Like when Michael White challenged Guido to back up his assertions on Newsnight he failed miserably. That makes Guido a compulsive liar. He lied about his BNP connection in Hull, lied on BBC 2 Newsnight, and has now lied about the Levy case.

For your information, Guido, "spot the liar" is non other than the cover name for jailhouselawyer. You have been exposed exposing yourself in public.

UPDATE: Guido responds


Guido Fawkes Esq. said...

Actually, it seems you are correct for once. Calling Guido a liar for skim reading a Google alert that arrived (late) this morning seems a little harsh.

A correction will be made.

You are still a granny killer, that can't be corrected so easily.

3:50 PM, April 25, 2007

There is no public record of my victim being a grandmother. What's your excuse for lying this time?

In the original post, before correcting it, Guido claimed that it was reported in today's papers that the police were sticking close to Lord Levy and that it was not for his protection. Whilst I wish that it was the case, it was far from the truth. Perhaps, Guido should now be called Pinocchio?

A lone voice fights Chinese censorship

A lone voice fights Chinese censorship

By Richard Spencer in Beijing
Last Updated: 11:14am BST 25/04/2007

As China’s censors pronounce ever more draconian edicts against writers, newspapers and even amateur pop singers, one middle-aged woman has staged a vociferous fight-back.

Zhang Yihe, a historian whose latest banned book was a collection of biographies of Peking Opera singers, has sent a flood of open letters and petitions to the government demanding a change to censorship laws.

She has become a ghostly star of the internet: ghostly because the many posts supporting her are removed they minute they appear. But now she has won a rare victory.

The country’s chief book and newspaper censor was unexpectedly replaced on Tuesday, after three months in which Miss Zhang’s campaign has cast him in an unwanted spotlight.

Long Xinmin is being moved to a backroom role. He will be replaced by one of his deputies, Liu Jinbie, a long-time associate of President Hu Jintao who has a reputation as a reformist.

Sitting in a Beijing coffee-shop, Miss Zhang, 65, is careful not to take credit. She points out that Mr Long, whose formal title was director of the General Administration of Press and Publication, was also subject of rumours about financial irregularities.

But she cannot disguise a sense of triumph. “It’s not necessarily connected to my books,” she said.

“But as far as we have discussed it among my friends, we are very pleased.”

Censorship is not new to China, so the controversy caused by the ban on “Past Lives of Peking Opera Stars”, along with seven other books, caught many by surprise.

One factor was a leak that revealed the problem was not so much the book, but Miss Zhang’s record.

Her last book, also banned, was entitled The Past is Not Like Smoke and was a memoir of her father, an author condemned by Chairman Mao as China’s “Number One Rightist” in a political campaign that began 50 years ago this year.

Like much of her writing, it stressed the importance of not allowing history to be forgotten, a deeply sensitive issue.

Why she so offended GAPP becomes clear as she reels off lists of crimes the Communist Party tries to bury.

”People who are fifty know nothing of the anti-rightist campaign; people who are forty know nothing of the Great Famine; people who are thirty know nothing of the Cultural Revolution; people who are twenty know nothing of 1989,” she says, detailing an extensive but by no means complete list of restricted topics.

”The only people who can think about the progress of the nation are over fifty.”

The uproar on the internet forced the authorities to allow existing stocks of the books to be sold, even as editors at their publishing firms were punished.

While criticism was removed from domestic websites, however, it was voluble on uncensored Chinese-language sites and newspapers abroad.

The debate was a reflection of how difficult it has become for the propaganda department, which oversees all censorship bodies, to operate without criticism as China opens to the world.

The broadcast censorship body has come under fire for a series of puritan edicts aimed at making commercial television more “serious”, for example by dictating presenters’ hair styles.

Miss Zhang never received a reply to her letters. But she says she privately has the support of many officials.

”There are people inside the system who want a different life,” she says.

Her latest move is to mount a legal challenge. In theory, she is within her rights, but the court has not said whether the case will be accepted. “They said it is a precedent,” she said.

As the Party tries to change in keeping with the times it seems obvious to many that its authority will come under increasing threat. But that seems to be making the authorities try all the harder to force academics, writers and journalists work to its command.

In a statement that appeared old-fashioned even by its own standards, the politburo on Monday issued a call for the internet to live by Marxist values.

”Development and administration of internet culture must stick to the direction of socialist advanced culture,” it said.

“Consolidate the guiding status of Marxism in the ideological sphere.” ”All China is hired by the Communist Party,” Miss Zhang says.

“But where everyone is a hired worker, there is no way you can have a master craftsman.”

Terror suspect wins freedom bid



Terror suspect wins freedom bid

A Moroccan man accused of being linked to the 11 September US attacks has won his High Court bid for freedom.

Lawyers for Farid Hilali, 36, who was first arrested in the UK in 2003, were granted a writ of habeas corpus to obtain his release.

He was awaiting extradition to Spain on charges of conspiracy to murder.

Lady Justice Smith and Mr Justice Irwin ruled that his incarceration under a European arrest warrant was arbitrary and unjustified.

However, Mr Hilali will not be freed until a decision has been made by law lords about whether or not they will hear the case.

The charges were based on accusations that he was party to a conspiracy in Spain linked to and supportive of the 9/11 attacks on the US.


If the authorities have any evidence against Mr Hilali, let them charge him
Muddassar Arani
Mr Hilali's solicitor

Mr Hilali was originally arrested in September 2003 in Kennington, south London, under the Terrorism Act 2000 and subsequently held on immigration charges.

He was being held in Whitemoor prison in Cambridgeshire.

The judges ruled that his current detention "is unlawful and a writ of habeas corpus must be issued".

The Crown Prosecution Service and Spanish authorities were refused leave to appeal, but the CPS is considering petitioning the House of Lords directly.

Immigration status

The High Court judges also refused to grant him bail in advance of any further court hearing while his immigration status remains unsettled.

They said they had reason to fear he might abscond and that he had used false documents in the past.

Muddassar Arani, Mr Hilali's solicitor, said: "If the authorities have any evidence against Mr Hilali, let them charge him, and bring him before a British jury, rather than his already excessive imprisonment without trial for many months more."

The US criminal justice authorities "have never sought his extradition, and do not believe there is any evidence against him", he added.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Terror chief warns of media leaks



Terror chief warns of media leaks

The UK's counter-terrorism chief has condemned as "beneath contempt" people who leak anti-terrorism intelligence.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke of the Metropolitan Police said there were a "small number of misguided individuals who betray confidences".

By doing so, they had compromised investigations, revealed sources of life-saving intelligence and "put lives at risk" during major investigations.

DAC Clarke also warned of a damaging "lack of public trust" in intelligence.

In a major speech at the Policy Exchange, a think-tank, DAC Clarke said his role as National Co-ordinator of Terrorist Investigations was to bridge the intelligence and policing worlds in an environment that had completely changed in recent years.

Some 100 suspects were awaiting terrorism trials, he said.

But he warned the police's efforts to counter terrorism threats had been damaged by leaks to the media.

"The recent investigation in Birmingham into an allegation that a British serviceman had been targeted by a terrorist network is but one example of this," said DAC Clarke.

"On the morning of the arrests, almost before the detainees had arrived at the police stations to which they were being taken for questioning, it was clear that key details of the investigation and the evidence had been leaked.

"This damaged the interview strategy of the investigators, and undoubtedly raised community tensions.

"I have no idea where the leaks came from, but whoever was responsible should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves."

Public understanding

The counter-terrorism chief said the situation had been made worse by allegations that police were politically "partial" after the parliamentary row over extending the time that terror suspects could be held without charge.

But he also said he was frustrated that while it took a long time to bring complicated terrorism cases to court, the public were losing out in their ability to understand what the security services were trying to tackle.

British law placed restrictions on what officials could say in public and what the media reported. Foreign media, however, were publishing and broadcasting details of the same terrorism cases - details available to the British public via the internet.

"I just wonder if we could be bolder and, dare I say it, trust juries to distinguish the prejudicial from the probative," he said.

"Apart from anything else, I honestly believe that the public are entitled to know why airport security is becoming ever more intrusive and inconvenient," he said.

Al-Qaeda ‘planning big British attack’

From The Sunday Times
April 22, 2007
Al-Qaeda ‘planning big British attack’
Dipesh Gadher

AL-QAEDA leaders in Iraq are planning the first “large-scale” terrorist attacks on Britain and other western targets with the help of supporters in Iran, according to a leaked intelligence report.

Spy chiefs warn that one operative had said he was planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki” in an attempt to “shake the Roman throne”, a reference to the West.

Another plot could be timed to coincide with Tony Blair stepping down as prime minister, an event described by Al-Qaeda planners as a “change in the head of the company”.

The report, produced earlier this month and seen by The Sunday Times, appears to provide evidence that Al-Qaeda is active in Iran and has ambitions far beyond the improvised attacks it has been waging against British and American soldiers in Iraq.

There is no evidence of a formal relationship between Al-Qaeda, a Sunni group, and the Shi’ite regime of President Mah-moud Ahmadinejad, but experts suggest that Iran’s leaders may be turning a blind eye to the terrorist organisation’s activities.

The intelligence report also makes it clear that senior Al-Qaeda figures in the region have been in recent contact with operatives in Britain.

It follows revelations last year that up to 150 Britons had travelled to Iraq to fight as part of Al-Qaeda’s “foreign legion”. A number are thought to have returned to the UK, after receiving terrorist training, to form sleeper cells.

The report was compiled by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) - based at MI5’s London headquarters - and provides a quarterly review of the international terror threat to Britain. It draws a distinction between Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda’s core leadership, who are thought to be hiding on the Afghan-Pakistan border, and affiliated organisations elsewhere.

The document states: “While networks linked to AQ [Al-Qaeda] Core pose the greatest threat to the UK, the intelligence during this quarter has highlighted the potential threat from other areas, particularly AQI [Al-Qaeda in Iraq].”

The report continues: “Recent reporting has described AQI’s Kurdish network in Iran planning what we believe may be a large-scale attack against a western target.

“A member of this network is reportedly involved in an operation which he believes requires AQ Core authorisation. He claims the operation will be on ‘a par with Hiroshima and Naga-saki’ and will ‘shake the Roman throne’. We assess that this operation is most likely to be a large-scale, mass casualty attack against the West.”

The report says there is “no indication” this attack would specifically target Britain, “although we are aware that AQI . . . networks are active in the UK”.

Analysts believe the reference to Hiroshima and Naga-saki, where more than 200,000 people died in nuclear attacks on Japan at the end of the second world war, is unlikely to be a literal boast.

“It could be just a reference to a huge explosion,” said a counter-terrorist source. “They [Al-Qaeda] have got to do something soon that is radical otherwise they start losing credibility.”

Despite aspiring to a nuclear capability, Al-Qaeda is not thought to have acquired weapons grade material. However, several plots involving “dirty bombs” - conventional explosive devices surrounded by radioactive material - have been foiled.

Last year Al-Qaeda’s leader in Iraq called on nuclear scientists to apply their knowledge of biological and radiological weapons to “the field of jihad”.

Details of a separate plot to attack Britain, “ideally” before Blair steps down this summer, were contained in a letter written by Abdul al-Hadi al-Iraqi, an Iraqi Kurd and senior Al-Qaeda commander.

According to the JTAC document, Hadi “stressed the need to take care to ensure that the attack was successful and on a large scale”. The plan was to be relayed to an Iran-based Al-Qaeda facilitator.

The Home Office declined to comment.

Al Qaeda-Linked Group Says It Killed 9 Soldiers in Iraq

Al Qaeda-Linked Group Says It Killed 9 Soldiers in Iraq


By EDWARD WONG
Published: April 25, 2007

BAGHDAD, April 24 — An insurgent umbrella group that includes Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia claimed responsibility today for a suicide bombing that killed nine American soldiers on Monday and wounded at least 20, one of the deadliest attacks against American forces in more than four years of war.

The soldiers were members of the Fifth Squadron, 73rd Cavalry of the Third Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, military officials said. The squadron has been involved in a security push to tamp down on booming insurgent activity in Diyala Province, northeast of Baghdad.

In two Internet postings, the Islamic State of Iraq, the insurgent umbrella group, boasted of carrying out the attack. It said two suicide truck bombers drove into an American base in the area of Al Waqf, according to a translation by the SITE Institute, which tracks jihadist postings. The details of the attack could not be independently confirmed.

Early today, the American military issued a statement saying that the bombing had hit a small outpost. In recent weeks, the Fifth Squadron had been conducting operations in downtrodden villages northeast of Baquba, the provincial capital.

The Islamic State recently announced the creation of a “cabinet” within its group, and it said today that the Ministry of War, led by Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, had planned the attack.

“Let the enemy expect more from the ministry, with power and might from the glorified Allah,” the group said. “The suicide brigades are continually increasing, and so are the ‘intruding brigades.’ ”

The membership of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is made up mostly of Iraqis, with some tribes in the country divided in their loyalties toward the group. Al Qaeda was once most active in Anbar Province, a Sunni Arab bastion, but appears to have shifted much of its efforts to Diyala Province, sandwiched between Iran and Baghdad. The province is a caldron of ethnic and sectarian tensions, with Sunni Arab militants driving Shiites from the provincial capital, Iraqi Army units operating under a general loyal to a Shiite militia and Kurds slowly seizing cities in the north.

Caught in that web are the Americans.

Because of intensifying violence, the American forces there have been bolstered recently by a Stryker battalion. American fatalities in Diyala have surged in recent months.

The Fifth Squadron, led by Lt. Col. Andrew Poppas, lost a lieutenant and a captain, both West Point graduates, last November when it fought with well-trained and well-disciplined insurgents for more than 40 hours in the village of Turki. The Americans had to call in more than 12 hours of air strikes, and at least 72 insurgents were reported killed.

In northern Ramadi, a suicide truck bomber killed at least nine people today and wounded at least 25, some of them policemen, a police colonel said.

In Baghdad, insurgents set off two car bombs in a parking lot opposite the Iranian Embassy, wounding four people. The Iraqi Army and the police sealed off the roads around the embassy, snarling traffic for miles.

A friend of the son of the Iraqi electricity minister was killed when a bomb exploded in the son’s locker at Baghdad University, an Interior Ministry official said. The son, Fadi Kareem Waheed, was wounded along with two other colleagues.

Two concealed bombs exploded on Palestine Street in eastern Baghdad, killing at least two people and wounding at least nine others.

Sunni insurgents blew up a Shiite mosque in the Jihad neighborhood, although no one was injured.

In the town of Jaara, south of Baghdad, gunmen killed seven members of a Shiite family, four of them children, a police official said.

At least seven Iraqis were killed in violence or discovered dead today in Diyala Province.

The American military said a Marine was killed Monday in combat in Anbar Province.

Iraqi employees of The New York Times contributed reporting from Baquba and Ramadi.
More Articles in International »

MPs brand BBC ‘mad’ for axing newsreader Moira Stuart


Michael Settle

BBC chiefs were branded "mad" by MPs yesterday over the axing of popular newsreader Moira Stuart from her regular Sunday morning slot.

Members of the House of Commons Media Committee also raised the allegation that the corporation had been ageist, racist and sexist in its controversial decision.

Such a claim, however, was vehemently denied by Mark Thompson, the BBC's director-general, when he appeared before MPs.
advertisement

He explained that Ms Stuart, 55, had been removed from her regular appearance on Andrew Marr's Sunday AM programme, leaving her with no regular slot, because the role of the traditional newsreader had "virtually died out".

Conservative MP Nigel Evans asked whether the BBC Trust had anything to say about the "appalling decision to sack Moira Stuart". He asked: "Has anyone telephoned you to say: Are you mad? Moira Stuart is one of the most popular newsreaders in the BBC.' We're reading comments that the BBC is ageist."

Mr Thompson praised Ms Stuart, saying she was much loved "by her colleagues as well as the public". He explained: "The question of what happens to Moira in the future is something we're discussing with Moira."

The BBC chief said he wanted to refute the suggestion that either ageism, sexism or racism lay at the root of the decision to drop Ms Stuart. "BBC News, News 24, the radio networks have changed over the years and the traditional role of the newsreader, as opposed to a correspondent or presenter, has virtually died out over the services," said Mr Thompson.

Citing the example of the 10 O'Clock News and BBC Breakfast News, he said: "We tend to use journalists across BBC news programmes to read the news headlines."

The director-general insisted Ms Stuart was "very valued and much-loved". He added: "When she does programmes beyond the news - she did that quite brilliant programme on William Wilberforce - she shows her range of talents."

However, Mr Evans, the MP for Ribble Valley in Lancashire, replied: "If this is how you treat someone that's much-loved, I'd hate to see how you treat someone you don't like."

Since news of her removal emerged last month, demands have been growing for the reinstatement of Britain's first black woman newsreader.

Although she has not said anything publicly, the veteran broadcaster was said to be "very disappointed" to lose her role in what she considered to be her main job. Many popular broadcasters have called for her to be reinstated, including John Humphrys, who presents Radio 4's Today programme.

He noted: "It may be pure coincidence but there do seem to be remarkably few women with a few lines on their faces presenting TV news or current affairs compared with the wrinkled men."

Blair in street fight with next door neighbour

Blair in street fight with next door neighbour

By George Jones, Political Editor
Last Updated: 10:49am BST 24/04/2007

Tony Blair has run into a flurry of objections to the planned renovation of his home in Connaught Square, London, only weeks before he is expected to move out of No 10.

Neighbours of the Grade II listed terrace house have lodged objections about proposals for closed circuit television cameras, solar panels and a roof terrace.

Earlier this year David Cameron, the Tory leader, ran into trouble over plans to install a wind turbine on his house in north Kensington. He was ordered to take it down after the council said it had not been fixed to the chimney as planned.

Mr Blair and his wife Cherie are expected to move out of No 10 at the end of June to make way for his expected successor, Gordon Brown, and his family.

The Blairs want to extend the multi-million-pound property in the exclusive square near Hyde Park into a neighbouring mews house behind the property.

According to an application filed with Westminster city council, they also hope to install a roof terrace, solar panels and extensive CCTV. However, leaked papers to be discussed by the council's planning committee next month suggest they face opposition.

The document, sent to the Tory blogger Iain Dale, notes that objections have been raised by "an adjoining occupier on a number of design, listed building, residential amenity and structural grounds". Other concerns have been lodged over the CCTV, the solar panels and the roof terrace, according to the document.

Council officials have recommended that permission be granted despite the objections. "It is not considered that the scheme will have a significant impact on residential amenity," the officials say.

The planners claim the degree of alteration to the interior of the listed building is relatively small.

"The most significant alteration is the replacement of the library room," they say. "The library room is a modern addition of not historic or architectural quality. Its replacement with a glazed structure linking the two buildings is an improvement."

The document says the CCTV equipment will be "discreet in size, design and colour" and should not be obtrusive.

The solar panels are also approved because they are to be on the roof of the unlisted mews building and screened by a low parapet.

The Blairs are understood to have paid £800,000 for the mews house. They originally paid £3.65 million for the Connaught Square house in 2004. The planning papers are due to be officially published on Thursday before the matter is considered by a sub-committee of councillors on May 3.

Comment: Amended headline.

Ian Huntley confesses to sex assault on 11 year old girl, now 21 she wins right to damages


Huntley sex assault woman wins damages

By Natalie Paris and agencies
Last Updated: 3:24pm BST 24/04/2007

A woman who was sexually assaulted as a schoolgirl by Soham murderer Ian Huntley has won her right to damages.

Hailey Giblin, who is now 21 and has waived her right to anonymity, claimed she was molested by Huntley when she was 11-years-old.

The double murderer initially denied the attack but finally relented yesterday and signed a confession from his police cell.

The admission won Ms Giblin her entitlement to damages in a civil case heard at Manchester Crown Court today.

At a hearing before District Judge Dick Fairclough, the court was formally informed of Huntley's confession.

The judge postponed a ruling on the level of damages to be awarded to Ms Giblin and ordered that a number of police statements should be released to her lawyers.

It is understood that Huntley, 33, who is serving two life sentences for the murders of 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, is insolvent.

Although the amount of damages to be awarded has not yet been finalised, Ms Giblin told reporters outside the court that the ruling is "priceless".

She believes that had police taken action against Huntley over her complaint he would not had been in a position to murder the two 10-year-olds in Soham.

Speaking outside court she said: "I feel a massive sense of relief that Ian Huntley has admitted that in the summer of 1997 he took me, an innocent 11-year-old little girl, from the sanctity of my street to an orchard where I was subject to the most horrific sexual attack at his hands, yet I still feel upset that Huntley was left at large, resulting in the deaths of two innocent children."

She said she hopes that her story will inspire other victims of abuse and added: "This has blighted my life for 10 years now - almost half of my life - and I felt I had no other choice than to fight for justice, and fight for what I believe in."

Ms Giblin, from Barton-upon-Humber, north Lincolnshire, is suing social services for failing to provide suitable aftercare.

She said: "I feel I wasn't just the victim of Ian Huntley but also a victim of Social Services and Humberside Police."

The case was adjourned for six months.

UPDATE: See here.

The trial of Iain Dale - will he choose to plead the 5th?

People being people they will have different thoughts and ways of expressing themselves on issues. I am aware that a spat developed between Guido and Tim Ireland and that somehow Iain Dale became involved in it. Recently, the Tim Ireland/Iain Dale war of words occupied time on 18doughtystreet.com. Then, when Iain finds he cannot win, he refers to Tim in a style from Hogwarts school and the Harry Potter novels "He who's name cannot not be spoken". It is rather childish.

Last night on Blogger TV, Zoe Anne Phillips gave my blog a plug and I imagined Iain Dale and some of his sock puppets spluttering upon hearing this. Give Zoe her due, I have criticised her in the past but she takes it in her stride and does not appear to hold it against me. This morning, I read Iain Dale's blog and a part of this post caught my attention, in particular, "I think I'd better get him on 18 Doughty Street for an interview". 'Mmmmm', I thought, 'what about the time Iain Dale invited me and nothing came of it'? I feel it is a question deserving of an answer. As if by magic, I go down my links and visit Tim Ireland's new attack blog, he is asking basically the same question. Whilst I was reading it, Tim emailed me to notify me that he has posted a question for Iain Dale to answer.

I suspect that Iain Dale will choose to plead the Fifth Amendment. However, now that it is out in the open, perhaps he will have the decency to respond?

UPDATE: Speaking of the devil, Chris Paul has this alternative view of an Iain Dale "Exclusive". If the comment is genuine from the Guardian then it appears that they will be treating what Iain Dale says with a pinch of salt and the Torygraph may follow suit.

UPDATE UPDATE on "Dale-Gate" here.

Lord Woolf fires shot across the bow of Reid and Falconer's Titanic blunder


Former law chief warns over 'scrambled' Home Office split

By Andrew Woodcock, PA
Published: 24 April 2007

Reforms to split the Home Office in two and create a new Ministry of Justice are being rushed through too quickly, the former head of the judiciary in England and Wales warned today.

The former Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf said that the Whitehall shake-up represented a major change in the constitution and should be carefully considered rather than "scrambled" through.

The reform, due to come into effect next month, will move Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer into a new Ministry of Justice with responsibility not only for the judiciary but for prisons, probation and preventing reoffending.

The Home Office, under Home Secretary John Reid, will focus on fighting crime, handling immigration and counter-terrorism.

Lord Woolf told BBC Radio 4's Today programme, in an interview broadcast this morning: "We should work it out beforehand and not wait until we have created the change and then somehow or other try to scramble to get it into place.

"This is a very big change for our constitution."

Lord Woolf's comments come shortly after he warned the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee that the division of the Home Office should be planned carefully to avoid repeating old problems in the new department.

Lord Woolf said that Britain's unwritten constitution, which was the guarantor of individual liberties, was being changed without public consultation.

This left him "concerned for our well-being as a nation", he said.

He told Today that the creation of the new Ministry of Justice threatened relations between the Lord Chancellor and the judiciary.

"My concern in relation to this new Ministry of Justice is that it might, if it is absorbing what was previously the bulk of matters that the Home Office dealt with, be unable to have the sort of relationship we hitherto have had with the Lord Chancellor.

"There is close cooperation on matters where this is appropriate between the Lord Chancellor of the day and the judiciary.

"This arises from what is now history, but is still an important influence - the fact that the Lord Chancellor was head of the judiciary, so it is natural that the judiciary should listen to what he has to say and talk to him in confidence about their concerns.

"If the Lord Chancellor is watered down as to his traditional roles because of these new responsibilities he is being given, that would be worrying from this regard."

Asked if he felt the changes were being introduced too quickly, Lord Woolf replied: "Yes. There has been no debate. Parliament has not considered this, but it is going to apparently happen on May 9.

"I really think with our constitutional arrangements, we should be more careful about how these matters are dealt with.

"We have no written constitution which is entrenched and our constitution works through checks and balances and it is very important that if we are starting to alter the framework of checks and balances, that the matter is looked at carefully.

"I am not saying that it can't be made to work satisfactorily. What I am saying is that we should work it out beforehand and not wait until we have created the change and then somehow or other try to scramble to get it into place.

"This is a very big change for our constitution and I say this for no reason other than that I am concerned for our well-being as a nation."

Lord Woolf warned: "Our constitution protects our individual liberties - and these are not matters of concern of a financial nature, they are concerns about our liberty.

"Furthermore, I would suggest that if you are going to make constitutional changes, they shouldn't come in the form of a press announcement, as has happened in the past, nor should they come in the form of a ministerial announcement without a consultation process with the public taking place before it."

Lord Woolf repeated earlier calls for sentencing policy to be shaped to reflect the availability of prison places, in order to prevent overcrowding.

He suggested that the Sentencing Guidelines Council should be given a similar remit to the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee, which is given an inflation target and then allowed to use interest rate levels as it sees fit in order to meet it.

Lord Woolf said: "Each Government should determine how much of its resources it can afford to give to the question of incarceration.

"It can't be unlimited amounts, because there are so many burdens on the Government from other directions.

"I suggest the Sentencing Guidelines Council should be told 'These are the resources we have available for imprisoning people over the next five years. You give guidelines to ensure that the prison population fits in with the resources we have available'.

"In that way, we could immediately inject common sense into our approach to sentencing. We have to be brave enough to say what we are doing now is not realistic.

"We aren't frank with the public. We don't say we can't afford to imprison everyone they would like to see in prison for the time they want to see them imprisoned."

Grauniad view here.