British Airport security - the rationale

[Magda Hassan]

Well, they can shove it up their Khyber Pass then. Why do people tolerate this? I mean, it looks you and many others wont be going next time. It seems more fun to get a group and hit the ball around yourselves and have a picnic.

[Ed Encho]

This just gives the pigs that run this fascist system more justification to scare the BeJesus out of the rubes here in Murka and begin rolling out those naked body scanners in sports stadiums and shopping malls. Anyone who questions any of this in Der Heimat never gets to do so in the state controlled corporate media and must do so on the blogs, boards, podcasts or whatever which reaches a limited audience. Not to worry though, our fine protectors in the OBushma administration and DARPA along with moles like the heinous Joseph Lieberman will soon be launching their cyber witch hunt. Saw this link the other day, now we are going to have Pre Crime just like in Minority Report:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/27/pentago...l?hpt=Sbin

It will of course be selectively enforced so the browshirts, thugs and winged monkeys that are duped by religion and millionaire shills like Herr Beck and Herr Limbaugh will be able to conduct their pogroms with impunity.

The transformation of this country from what it was a bit over a decade ago is unbelievable, the police state infrastructure, the economic diaspora and the growing anger and dumbness and soon to be hyperinflation after Helicopter Ben's QE2 on Wednesday before the scumbaggers and their promoters in the corporate media are done sucking themselves off with triumph is going to launch our very own Weimar era.

All that these clueless, economically screwed, fear-filled, racist swine are waiting for is their Hitler (or Hitlerina such as moose meat mama, the Joan of Arc for fear filled Sally Soccer Mom) to arrive. The anger and racism here is downright eerie and is everywhere.

EE

[Jan Klimkowski]

Andrew Rawnsley is a sometime lobby correspondent, privy to the propaganda, smears and lies of senior politicians, so long as he plays the game and uses phrases such as "sources close to Peter Mandelson" when he means "Mandelson told me".

So, his piece below should be read with a critical, deep political, eye.

However, the notion that the "securicats" in British intelligence are trying to scare politicians with their furrowed brow "if you knew what we knew" nonsense, may represent one element of the sinister games currently playing out.

The tawdry political aspect is that, during their election campaign, the LibDems pledged to abolish control orders and 28 day detention orders. MI5/6 are refusing, calling this a "red line".

Of course, the evidence (partly laid out in the article) clearly establishes that there is absolutely no justification for either control orders or 28 day detention orders.

The spooks clearly need to scare the politicians and the public some more, and the Volkland Security hired hands are continuing to tour the media studios drumming their pathetic and tawdry beat in anticipation of the next piece of false flag waving...

The fierce battle behind the scenes for the coalition's soul

A raging argument over counterterror laws is putting their commitment to human rights to a crucial test

Andrew Rawnsley The Observer, Sunday 31 October 2010

In the headlines, the thwarting of a transatlantic terror plot. Playing out behind the scenes in Whitehall, a story that the government doesn't want you to read. An intense internal battle is being waged over how to respond to terrorism without compromising fundamental principles of justice and civil liberties. It is dividing the intelligence services, splitting the cabinet and has left David Cameron and Nick Clegg in a state of alarmed semi-paralysis. It is a big test of the unity of their partnership, their leadership mettle and their willingness to honour the promises they made in opposition.

A commitment to liberty is supposed to be the essential glue that binds the Tories and the Lib Dems. An early token of that was the decision to cancel identity cards. ID cards were unpopular and they were expensive. So that was an easy way to make a united assertion of their liberal credentials and honour manifesto commitments. A much harder challenge is striking the right balance between preserving civil liberties and protecting the public from terrorism. In opposition, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats were agreed that New Labour got that balance very wrong: core human rights were too often sacrificed in the name of the fight against murderous fanatics. The result was too much anti-terror legislation which was unjust, ineffective and counterproductive.

When they reached government, they commissioned a review. To oversee this review, they appointed Ken Macdonald, the former director of public prosecutions, who is now a Liberal Democrat peer. That appointment was taken as a signal of intent to repeal or reform those laws that are most offensive to the principles of justice. The former DPP was a particularly potent critic of "control orders" and 28-day detention without charge.

Control orders are a form of house arrest for alleged terrorist suspects who are confined without charge for indefinite periods on the basis of secret material which it is virtually impossible for the accused to challenge. Courts have delivered a series of stinging judgments which have struck down the validity of orders. As well as undermining the presumption of innocence, control orders have failed to protect the public from individuals who may be genuinely dangerous. An embarrassingly significant proportion of controlees have absconded. In opposition, the Lib Dems were robust. Every year that the legislation came up for renewal, they voted against. Nick Clegg condemned the "control order regime" in these terms: "It removes the pressure to charge and prosecute the criminals whom we all want to see apprehended. It diverts energy and attention away from other important innovations that we should be examining to strengthen our criminal justice system, and it infringes the most fundamental principles of due process and human rights." The Liberal Democrat manifesto pledged to abolish control orders on the grounds that: "The best way to combat terrorism is to prosecute terrorists, not give away hard-won British freedoms."

The Conservatives have historically been divided between their authoritarian impulses and their liberal tendencies. The Tories abstained on the renewal votes. But they, too, repeatedly expressed opposition to control orders. Pauline Neville-Jones, a former chairwoman of the Joint Intelligence Committee who is now the security minister, told the Lords that the Conservatives would take office "with the aim, if we possibly can, of eliminating the control order regime". Dominic Grieve, now the attorney-general, described them as "a departure from our established principles [which] threaten our liberties greatly".

No other state in the world that can be called a democracy gives the police the power to hold terror suspects without charge for anything like as long as 28 days. When that legislation was passed five years ago, it was justified on the grounds that it was essential in order for the police to deal with complex plots. In fact, 28 days has been activated just three times. In one case, the charges were dropped; in a second, the accused was acquitted on the direction of the judge; in the third, the accused was acquitted by the jury. It is another draconian provision which corrodes Britain's reputation for justice while offering no palpable advantage in the struggle against terrorism. Even some of the architects of this legislation are repenting. Tony McNulty, security minister in the last government, now says that control orders and 28-day detention should be scrapped.

The assumption was that the coalition would do this after it appointed Lord Macdonald. But here's the rub. The review may be associated with him, but it has actually been conducted by the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, a unit based in the Home Office staffed by active or former members of the security services. The head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, wants to keep control orders. He used a speech last month to lobby publicly for the governing parties to break their promises to the voters. One senior figure with a ringside seat for this battle remarks: 'This is what they always do. When Jonathan Evans eyeballs the prime minister and says, 'I can't guarantee that the public will be safe from terrorism if you don't give me this', it is hard for the prime minister to stand up to that."

The head of MI5 does a vital and difficult job. He knows a lot more than most of us about the nature of the terror threat. But that shouldn't make him the supreme arbiter of the balance between protection and civil liberties. Nor is he an infallible authority on the appropriate policy response to terrorism. Mr Evans's predecessor at MI5, Eliza Manningham-Buller, took the opposite view: she was deeply sceptical about control orders and downright hostile to extended detention without charge.

The Evans line has prevailed within the Home Office. The review has gone to ministers with the recommendation that control orders should be retained. It proposes that detention without charge should be reduced to 14 days, but with an option for suspects to be put on a further 14 days of "very restricted bail", which would introduce the control order concept into another part of the law.

The review's conclusions were supposed to have been made public at the end of September. Then publication was kicked back to the end of October. That is because weeks of fierce internal argument have resulted in deadlock. Lord Macdonald has not changed his views. He recently warned the home secretary that he will write a dissenting report. This has put Theresa May in a funk. A surprise choice for home secretary, she came to the job with no history of engaging in the delicate judgments the role demands. She has already signed off on two new control orders. Insiders believe an inexperienced home secretary has been easily captured by securicrats who are always reluctant to give up powers once they have them. She has come down on their side, but knows it will be hugely embarrassing for the government if it publishes their recommendations only for Lord Macdonald then to denounce them. Ms May went to Number 10 a fortnight ago for a difficult meeting with David Cameron and Nick Clegg. When she revealed that they had hit this impasse, both men were horrified. David Cameron told the meeting: "We are heading for a fucking car crash."

So they are. And it will be a multiple pile-up, for this question also profoundly splits the cabinet. The Lib Dems around the table pledged to abolish control orders and they have Tory allies. The justice secretary, Ken Clarke, hasn't budged in his opposition. Mr Clarke has been round the Whitehall block several times in his long career. He has been home secretary. He is not intimidated by the heavy breathing of the head of MI5. He understands that politicians should be attentive to the advice of the security services, but not slaves to them. Nick Clegg knows that he will look terrible and his party will be in uproar if he dishonours the pledges he made in opposition. One colleague describes the Lib Dem leader as "caught in the headlights". David Cameron, scared of rupturing his coalition, yet fearful of over-ruling the securicrats, is just playing for time. I have learned that the publication date for the review has been put back yet again towards the end of the year.

There is a route out of their dilemma. That is to stick to their promises, scrap control orders, charge those suspected of terrorism in open court and lift the ban on the use of intercept evidence to give prosecutions a better chance of success. To resistant members of the security agencies, the prime minister should say, and will have the support of many professionals in saying it, that they ought to concentrate on the intelligence-led approach to countering terrorism which has proved to be the most effective method of stopping bombers.

To do otherwise would be to betray their promises and the belief in liberty which is supposed to be the animating and binding value of the coalition. If they cannot hold true to their pledges on such fundamentals as justice and human rights, it will be hard to resist the conclusion that they can't be trusted with anything.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/...orism-laws

David Cameron told the meeting: "We are heading for a fucking car crash."
:damnmate:

[Jan Klimkowski]

Here's the MSM scientific line on PETN:

PETN: the explosive of choice

Major ingredient of Semtex is one of the most powerful, and difficult to detect, explosives available to terrorists

Robin McKie guardian.co.uk, Saturday 30 October 2010 16.50 BST

Pentaerythritol tetranitrate, or PETN, is a major ingredient of Semtex and belongs to the same chemical family as nitroglycerin. It is one of the most powerful explosives made today and is a favourite among terrorists because its colourless crystals are hard to detect in a sealed container.

PETN is relatively stable and is detonated either by heat or a shockwave. A little more than 100g of PETN could destroy a car, experts say.

Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber", tried to set off a PETN device on an American Airlines jet to Miami in 2001, and this summer a suicide bomber tried to assassinate a member of the Saudi royal family with a PETN-based bomb inside his body.

"If you can lay your hands on a reliable source, it would be the explosive of choice," said Hans Michels, an explosives expert at Imperial College, London.

In December, PETN was found in the possession of 23-year-old Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. According to US security officials he had attempted to blow up Northwest Airlines flight 253 as it approached Detroit airport from Amersterdam. Abdulmutallab was in a window seat and had the device strapped to his left leg, against the body of the plane. The idea was almost certainly to blow a hole in the aircraft so decompression would tear it apart.

Abdulmutallab's bomb involved a syringe and a soft plastic container filled with 80g of PETN. Experts believe the syringe may have been converted into an electrical detonator or, more likely, it was was filled with a liquid detonator, such as nitroglycerin, which would have made the device extremely hard to detect through the usual airport security measures.

Abdulmutallab cleared security in Lagos and Amsterdam after passing through a metal detector and having had x-rays done of his hand luggage. The lack of an explosion on the flight meant there was almost certainly a failure between the primary and the main charge so that the PETN did not fully detonate.

However, a test explosion on a decommissioned Boeing 747 in March showed that the flight would have landed safely even if Abdulmutallab's bomb had detonated successfully. In the test, carried out by Dr John Wyatt, an explosives adviser to the UN, the plane's fuselage did not break open. However experts say the test blast showed the suspected bomber and the passenger next to him would have been killed.

I found this little scientific nugget on Fox News (amazingly enough):

What is the Explosive PETN?
PETN: easy to ship, hard to detonate

Updated: Monday, 28 Dec 2009, 10:32 PM CST
Published : Monday, 28 Dec 2009, 10:32 PM CST

MINNEAPOLIS - There have been many questions surrounding the explosive, PETN, which the terrorist attempted to use on the plane to Detroit.

Chris Cramer is a chemistry professor at the University of Minnesota, and used to be a chemical weapons officer for the U.S. Army. He says PETN or penttaerythritol terannitrate was a challenging choice for the terrorist aboard flight 253.

“It wasn't a very well chosen approach from a terroristic standpoint because PETN is hard to make detonate,” said Cramer.

Cramer says powder PETN is commonly used as a military and industrial explosive for that very reason. While it is extremely powerful it's not as shock sensitive as other explosives.

“The reason they are readily available is because they are hard to detonate you can ship them in 18-wheeler trucks.”

Back in 2001, Richard Reid also tried to use PETN on a plane, and hid the explosive in his shoe. But all he set off was more safety precautions.

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/dpp/news/...ec-28-2009

The false flags, my friend, are blowing in the wind.....

[Peter Lemkin]

I think all falls into place nicely when one uses the paradigm of 'terrorism' as 'political theater'.....and sadly a tragedy in all senses of the term.....

...I should add...I feel most has been 'ON BROADWAY'.....not off, off Broadway....if you get my meaning/drift....:marchmellow: Not sure the U.K equivalent terminology.

This one will only 'play' for a week of two at most...then close - making a loss...

[Jan Klimkowski]

This script even has some of the same actors.

On December 14, 2003, Telegraph hack Con Coughlin was the conduit for the following geopolitical nonsense:

Terrorist behind September 11 strike was trained by Saddam

By Con Coughlin
Published: 12:01AM GMT 14 Dec 2003

Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta, the al-Qaeda mastermind of the September 11 attacks against the US, was trained in Baghdad by Abu Nidal, the notorious Palestinian terrorist.

Details of Atta's visit to the Iraqi capital in the summer of 2001, just weeks before he launched the most devastating terrorist attack in US history, are contained in a top secret memo written to Saddam Hussein, the then Iraqi president, by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service.

The handwritten memo, a copy of which has been obtained exclusively by the Telegraph, is dated July 1, 2001 and provides a short resume of a three-day "work programme" Atta had undertaken at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad.

In the memo, Habbush reports that Atta "displayed extraordinary effort" and demonstrated his ability to lead the team that would be "responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy".

The second part of the memo, which is headed "Niger Shipment", contains a report about an unspecified shipment - believed to be uranium - that it says has been transported to Iraq via Libya and Syria.

Although Iraqi officials refused to disclose how and where they had obtained the document, Dr Ayad Allawi, a member of Iraq's ruling seven-man Presidential Committee, said the document was genuine.

"We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda," he said. "But this is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with al-Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks."

Although Atta is believed to have been resident in Florida in the summer of 2001, he is known to have used more than a dozen aliases, and intelligence experts believe he could easily have slipped out of the US to visit Iraq.

Abu Nidal, who was responsible for the failed assassination of the Israeli ambassador to London in 1982, was based in Baghdad for more than two decades.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...addam.html

Now Coughlin provides the officially approved Volkland Security analysis for the current farce:

Yemen: the new breeding ground for terror

The explosive devices intercepted en route to the US started their journey in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Qaeda’s latest stronghold, reports Con Coughlin.

By Con Coughlin
Published: 10:27PM BST 30 Oct 2010

For an organisation that is supposed to be the poor relation of Osama bin Laden’s terror network, the sheer sophistication of the plot to plant two bombs on cargo planes en route to the US demonstrates that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is rapidly emerging as a major threat to Western security. Not since the 1988 Lockerbie bombing of Pan Am flight 103, which killed 270 people, has a terror group sought to smuggle primed explosive devices in the cargo holds of commercial aircraft.

The fact that al-Qaeda’s Yemen-based branch appears – according to the initial reports, at least – to have been able to plant a number of explosive devices on aircraft whose ultimate destination was the United States is a graphic illustration of the sophisticated techniques it is able to employ in its attempts to wreak havoc on the streets of Western cities.

The main focus of the war against Islamist terrorism is focused on the lawless border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda’s main command structure continues to be based in spite of the massive military operation being undertaken by Nato and Pakistani forces. Senior Western intelligence officials, though, are becoming increasingly concerned about the rapid emergence of the off-shoot organisation that has successfully established itself in Yemen.

Acknowledging the emergence of terror groups based in Yemen as a major threat to Western security, Sir John Sawers, the head of Britain’s MI6 foreign intelligence-gathering operation, last week singled out Anwar

al-Awlaki, the American-born terrorist who is believed to be the head of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), as posing a grave threat to British security. He described him as a key al-Qaeda leader operating “from his remote base in Yemen”, who “broadcasts propaganda and terrorist instruction in fluent English, over the internet”.

Since the group formed in Yemen in January 2009, it has been responsible for a number of high-profile terror plots, the majority involving the use of the powerful high explosive pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN).

In August 2009, the organisation tried to kill Saudi Arabia’s security chief, Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, when an al-Qaeda bomber managed to trick his way into the prince’s private office to then detonate a bomb made from PETN that had been concealed inside his body.

PETN was again used by the group during their failed bomb attack on a Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit last Christmas. On that occasion, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian student who had previously studied mechanical engineering at University College London, tried to ignite a quantity of the explosive that had been hidden in his underpants.

Now it seems the group has used the same explosive on these cargo planes, just as Americans prepare to vote in next week’s mid-term Congressional elections. The device found in the cargo hold of an aircraft at East Midlands airport was so sophisticated that security officials failed to detect it when they conducted their initial search. It was only when they carried out a second examination after another potential bomb had been discovered in Dubai that a further examination revealed explosive material.

“Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is rapidly emerging as a major security threat to rival the traditional al-Qaeda organisation that is based in northern Pakistan,” explained a senior British security official. “Its ability to devise increasingly sophisticated plots to attack Western targets is now a serious concern.”

Following last December’s failed aircraft bombing at Detroit, President Obama launched a massive operation against AQAP. American forces have supported operations by the Yemeni government to root out al-Qaeda terror cells, which have targeted the organisation’s senior leaders and training camps. The Americans have sent advisers and provided intelligence, as well as deploying unmanned drone aircraft and firing cruise missiles at suspected al-Qaeda targets.

In addition, last April, Mr Obama gave his personal authorisation for US forces to kill or capture al-Awlaki, whom the White House believes is the mastermind behind the group’s recent emergence as a major terrorist threat.

But AQAP has proved to be remarkably resilient to this onslaught. Estimates on the group’s membership vary between a hard core of just 50 fighters to a more sizeable organisation of between 200 and 300 terrorists. And, while the Americans have succeeded in killing several key figures in the movement, it has still managed to maintain its campaign of terror.

Since the start of the year, the group has carried out dozens of armed assaults and bombings against military, civilian and diplomatic targets, killing at least 90 people. One senior Yemeni military official said that the government is now fighting a civil war with the militants.

AQAP’s continued ability to strike at will at key targets, though, has been demonstrated by the two attacks it has so far launched this year against the British Embassy. In April, an al-Qaeda suicide bomber almost succeeded in killing Tim Torlot, Britain’s ambassador to Yemen. Earlier this month, Fiona Gibb, the deputy chief of the UK’s embassy, also had a lucky escape when the convoy escorting her to the embassy compound came under attack.

AQAP’s leadership has also managed to sustain its highly effective propaganda activities.

Al-Awlaki continues to broadcast an endless stream of anti-Western vitriol over the internet, including advice on how to make home-made explosives for use in suicide attacks, as well as publishing articles that provide graphic descriptions of how to inflict maximum civilian casualties during a terror attack. One recent article published by al-Awlaki’s organisation bore the title “How to make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom”.

British security officials are also particularly concerned about the impact al-Awlaki’s radicalisation techniques might have on the estimated 8,000 British Muslims who travel each year to Yemen in pursuit of Islamic studies. “The overwhelming majority of British Muslims who travel to Yemen do so purely for peaceful, religious purposes,” said a senior British security official. “But there is always the risk that, while they are there, they might be susceptible to this kind of jihadist propaganda.”

The fact that AQAP has been able to establish a terrorist stronghold in Yemen is a source of immense frustration to Western intelligence. On one level, the fact that Islamist-inspired terrorists have been forced to relocate to Yemen is a tribute to the success the West has enjoyed in disrupting bin Laden’s terror operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The relentless intelligence-led operations against al-Qaeda’s key leaders have severely limited their ability to undertake a repeat of the September 11 attacks in 2001. As a result, the number of terror plots originating from north Waziristan has fallen from a high of about 90 per cent five years ago to about 50 per cent today.

Al-Qaeda and its affiliates have always flourished in the ungoverned regions of failed or failing Islamic states. Bin Laden’s early training camps were established in Khartoum at the height of the Sudanese civil war, and later moved to countries such as Somalia and Afghanistan, where the governments were unable to enforce their will. The same situation exists in Yemen, where the government struggles to impose its writ much beyond Sana’a, the country’s capital.

Al-Qaeda has had an active terrorist presence in Yemen for more than a decade. In 2000, an al-Qaeda cell was responsible for the suicide boat attack on the American warship USS Cole in the port of Aden, which killed 17 US sailors. But the emergence of AQAP can be traced back to February 2006, when 23 suspected al-Qaeda members managed to escape from a prison in Sana’a, including the alleged mastermind of USS Cole attack.

Nasser Abdul Karim al-Wuhayshi, a former personal assistant to bin Laden in Afghanistan, was another escaper . Wuhayshi had joined bin Laden in the late 1990s, and fought with him at Tora Bora before fleeing across the Iranian border.

Wuhayshi was one of the driving forces behind the creation of AQAP. Towards the end of 2008, the group was strengthened by the arrival of scores of Saudi jihadists who had waged a terror campaign to overthrow the Saudi royal family. To Washington’s deep embarrassment, two of the Saudis were former inmates of the controversial Guantanamo detention facility, who had been released at the request of the Saudi government to take part in the Saudi government’s “deradicalisation” programme for militants.

The presence of al-Awlaki, who returned to live permanently in Yemen in 2004 after a spell preaching in radical mosques in Britain, has also been a major factor in the development of AQAP as a major terror organisation. Having spent more than a decade studying in American schools and universities, al-Awlaki’s fluency in English enables the organisation to articulate its message to potential Islamic recruits in both Europe and America.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/t...error.html

[David Guyatt]

Bravo Con Coughlin and also the Rt. Hon, John Reid, former Home Secretary and late of th Ministry of Defence who came out earlier in the week to promote greater airport security in the wake of calls (see above) to lower the level of same. Transatlantic hand puppets and intell gofors both.

[David Guyatt]

From Jan's post 23 above:

So they are. And it will be a multiple pile-up, for this question also profoundly splits the cabinet. The Lib Dems around the table pledged to abolish control orders and they have Tory allies. The justice secretary, Ken Clarke, hasn't budged in his opposition. Mr Clarke has been round the Whitehall block several times in his long career. He has been home secretary. He is not intimidated by the heavy breathing of the head of MI5. He understands that politicians should be attentive to the advice of the security services, but not slaves to them. Nick Clegg knows that he will look terrible and his party will be in uproar if he dishonours the pledges he made in opposition. One colleague describes the Lib Dem leader as "caught in the headlights". David Cameron, scared of rupturing his coalition, yet fearful of over-ruling the securicrats, is just playing for time. I have learned that the publication date for the review has been put back yet again towards the end of the year.

Cameron and Clegg must be vacating themselves. Neither can effectively overrule the security establishment as doing so has a way of resulting in unexpected front-page media scandals that ruin political careers. On the other hand, not doing something breaks promises and looks to the public like weakness or duplicity.

But then again, the history of politics is strewn with broken promises...

The Defence of the Realm boys don't take prisoners.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Cameron and Clegg must be vacating themselves. Neither can effectively overrule the security establishment as doing so has a way of resulting in unexpected front-page media scandals that ruin political careers. On the other hand, not doing something breaks promises and looks to the public like weakness or duplicity.

But then again, the history of politics is strewn with broken promises...

The Defence of the Realm boys don't take prisoners.

I can see the headlines now:

SEX SHOCKER: CORPSE OF LIB DEM LEADER FOUND ZIPPED IN SPORTS BAG OF TORY RENT BOY'S BATH

Informed sources close to SIS told this newspaper that the teenage prostitute had the private phone numbers of several Tory MPs, including a "Big Beast" known for wearing hush puppies, and Nick Clegg's blackberry's ringtone had "ritualistic S&M connotations".

Det Supt Plodder of Scotland Yard said: "We believe the answers to his unexplained and tragic death lie solely in Mr Clegg's private life. If you are a greengrocer and recently sold a small orange fruit, such as a tangerine or clementine, to the LibDem leader, I would urge you to contact the Yard immediately."

The decomposing body of Nick Clegg was found in an unknown and pungent liquid but this newspaper has been reliably informed that police are pursuing other leads.

[David Guyatt]

:five:

Yup, that about sums it up.

Love the caption btw.