Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Aug 17, 2010 12:01:26 GMT -5
If he looked so awful then that is proof that it came as an unwelcome shock to him. It would not be the first time that 'Intelligence' has acted on its own initiative against the public and government interest. I remember when everybody thought Harold Wilson was losing it (and in fact he was) coming up with a fantastic conspiracy theory involving the South Africa and Israeli secret services with MI5/6 out to get him and Jeremy Thorpe - and it all turned out to be even worse than he thought with a cabal inside MI planning a fascist take-over.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 17, 2010 12:26:29 GMT -5
If Blair thought he alone was in control, he was a fool. But that said, I would not be surprised if he gave the nod. Perhaps he was expecting the hit to take place at a better time.
|
|
|
Post by sadie on Aug 17, 2010 14:17:50 GMT -5
A better place and time? Do you mean like.........with Professor Plum in the billiard room with the candlestick?
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Aug 17, 2010 14:44:46 GMT -5
If Blair thought he alone was in control, he was a fool. But that said, I would not be surprised if he gave the nod. Perhaps he was expecting the hit to take place at a better time. It's quite possible that he gave the nod to something he did not expect to be a hit. He could well have assumed that they would buy Kelly off or threaten him in other ways but when it came to murder he realised that they had implicated him as well and put him in their power. Who knows what else he knew that they knew about and nobody else ever did or will? The trouble with secret services is the tendency to turn into secret empires. Who really knows back in the days of Philby, Burgess and Maclaine whether they were working for the KGB with full approval and all sides doing their best to share information so that nobody would have an advantage tempting them to a first strike? On that score, look how influential the KGB has been in Russian politics: Andropov was close in with Gorbachev as a reformer (and allegedly Brezhnev's chosen successor), Putin is still playing tweedle-dum tweedle-dee with Myedyedev. Who knows whether they hadn't decided that the old system had to be replaced?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 17, 2010 14:54:39 GMT -5
If Blair thought he alone was in control, he was a fool. But that said, I would not be surprised if he gave the nod. Perhaps he was expecting the hit to take place at a better time. It's quite possible that he gave the nod to something he did not expect to be a hit. He could well have assumed that they would buy Kelly off or threaten him in other ways but when it came to murder he realised that they had implicated him as well and put him in their power. Who knows what else he knew that they knew about and nobody else ever did or will? The trouble with secret services is the tendency to turn into secret empires. Who really knows back in the days of Philby, Burgess and Maclaine whether they were working for the KGB with full approval and all sides doing their best to share information so that nobody would have an advantage tempting them to a first strike? On that score, look how influential the KGB has been in Russian politics: Andropov was close in with Gorbachev as a reformer (and allegedly Brezhnev's chosen successor), Putin is still playing tweedle-dum tweedle-dee with Myedyedev. Who knows whether they hadn't decided that the old system had to be replaced? As Rumsfeld once opined, there are unknown unknowns. I doubt we'll ever get the truth on Kelly's demise. You trust your government at your peril.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 17, 2010 14:55:35 GMT -5
A better place and time? Do you mean like.........with Professor Plum in the billiard room with the candlestick? Sadie, really! It was Colonel Mustard in the library with the lead piping.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 17, 2010 15:38:28 GMT -5
If he looked so awful then that is proof that it came as an unwelcome shock to him. . i doubt it was a shock as such..i cannot explain it...it was like he had been stripped bare.....it wasnt suprise shock...it was some thing more than that....he was shaken ridgid...
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 17, 2010 15:43:22 GMT -5
The gravity of the path Blair chose to take came home to him.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 17, 2010 20:08:14 GMT -5
When you think about it, it was a very sloppy job. Well, of course, it worked - he didn't survive - but consider that ordinary people with no special knowledge read the details next day in the newspaper and said (collectively) "No Way". Starts to sound like our CIA attempts to assassinate Castro, etc.. IF it had been planned and carried out in a professional .. or even an intelligent .. manner, most of us would have shrugged and said, "poor man, perhaps he was ill". No, it was heavy-handed and lax. Does that tell us anything?
|
|
|
Post by sadie on Aug 17, 2010 20:24:22 GMT -5
I don't know......the fact that absolutely nothing has been done about it says they knew they had enough power to do whatever they wanted and get away with it. That says high up in government.
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Aug 17, 2010 22:25:03 GMT -5
No - it says that it felt free of 'government' that might be called to account - and that is really frightening. Who is the real government? I would immediatly think the Forbes 500 or FTSE 100 whatever it is that's persuaded us that elected political government is only a choice of Area Managers for the Corporate Global State , but maybe there are even deeper workings than them.
Trotsky has a good quote from Mussolini about the difference between Soviet and Fascist State control, in that while the Soviet State owns and directs corporate business and appoints managers, the Fascist directs and acts as a go-between and facilitator, but does not own or manage. In other words, how we have become accustomed to Government putting The Economy (that is, Corporate Business) above all else and wringing its hands helpless when expected to do some actual governing to protect its electorate from Corporate Warlords.
The EU is much better at protecting individual freedoms against Corporate - which is why Anglo-American fascists like UKIP and BNP oppose it, just as American Republicans oppose Federal government strong enough to protect The People against them.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Sept 1, 2010 16:48:53 GMT -5
This link will lead you right into an excellent video. Worth a watch. David Kelly case
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2010 16:54:08 GMT -5
Erasmus, I respectfully wish to disagree with you.
As someone who regularly votes UKIP in the European elections but who would NEVER contemplate voting BNP in ANY type of election I resent the attempt to associate the two parties.
Like UKIP, I would like my country to withdraw from the EU. I disagree with the party on almost every other issue but on the European one they represent my own position.
The EU is not only USELESS at protecting ANYONE'S freedom but has actually REDUCED our liberties.
I am not, nor ever have been, in any shape or form a supporter of ANY kind of fascism.
Incidentally, the most dangerous fascist we've seen in Britain over the last fifty years was Tony Benn.
|
|