Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
David Cameron & the History leading up to him
#1

David Cameron & the History leading up to him (Part 1)

Posted in "Terrorism", Geo-Political Warfare, Political History, The Corrupt SOB's by earthlinggb on August 16, 2010
1975: All sorts of clandestine operations were taking place in South Africa ranging from a very active Chemical and Biological Warfare (CBW) programme and also advances in nuclear research. All of this activity was being monitored and approved by both the US and UK Governments. It was in this same year that South Africa announced that it had a pilot plant for uranium enrichment at Pelindaba. Ninety-seven pounds of enriched uranium, enough to make seven atomic bombs, was shipped to the plant by the US Nuclear Corporation of Oak Ridge, Tennessee to assist it.
1977: From 1977 onwards, the US policy to South Africa hardened. Because of its exploitation of Namibian uranium, South Africa was removed from its permanent position in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Shortly thereafter, Soviet satellite pictures showing South Africa preparing to detonate a nuclear explosive in the Kalahari Desert brought a warning from US president Jimmy Carter not to do so.
1979: Maggie Thatcher came to power and progressively introduced Neo Liberalism during her reign which many believe was the downfall of the United Kingdom. However Thatcher also became involved in some very sinister discussions, one being the trip to South Africa by her errand boy David Cameron. Our current Prime Minister at the tender age of 24 went down to South Africa on an all expenses paid jolly compliments or ARMSCOR. David was accompanied by the only technical person capable of dealing with this very controversial deal (acquisition of three battlefield nuclear bombs) none other than Ken Warren (now Sir Ken Warren) who appears to be the mastermind behind this deal.
1980: It was during the 1980′s that things started to step up a notch both in the area of CBW development and also in South Africa's under the table nuclear weapons research. It was also around this time that development of a "Super Gun" started to emerge all of which was known and supported by both the US and the UK.
Early in the war with Iran, the Iraqi government engaged world- renowned artillery expert Gerald V. Bull, whose lifetime obsession was the construction of a "Supergun," a huge howitzer able to fire satellites into space or launch artillery shells thousands of miles into enemy territory. Bull did not accomplish his dream and was sentenced and jailed for one year in 1980 for illegally selling weapons [encouraged by the CIA] to South Africa. Despite the US arms embargo he did manage to design some of the most effective artillery pieces in the world.
1981: In April, US Secretary of State, Alexander Haig, invited South African Foreign Minister, Pik Botha, to the US, and the French, British and US vetoed four UN resolutions calling for sanctions against South Africa. For the next four years South Africa could count on a more tolerant US attitude and the full support of Britain..
1982: In September, Armscor announced that its G-5 tow and the G-6 SP Gun/Tow could fire nuclear rounds if necessary, but that South Africa did not intend to use such weapons. The existence of the G5 towed artillery piece was revealed to the world and surprise was expressed that such an advanced system could be developed locally. The G6 was revealed in the mid 1980′s. The G6 and G5 are built by LIW, a division of DENEL in South Africa.
It was during the Iraq Iran War that the Iraqi government dispatched a private aircraft to Geneva to take Gerard V. Bull to Baghdad. So began a long association between Bull and the government of Iraq, and its then-defense minister, Saddam Hussein. Bull dealt with Iraq for almost 10 years. Iraq was one of many states with guns developed by Bull. His clients are known to include his native Canada, the United States, South Africa, Iran, Chile, Taiwan, China, and Libya.
Gerard Bull was first contracted by the Iraqi government in 1981. They desperately needed artillery to out-range the enemy in the protracted Iran-Iraq War. The association allowed Bull to yet again seek sponsorship of a space-launch supergun. Sadam Hussein liked the idea, and Project Babylon was born. Throughout the 1980′s Bull's dealings with Iraq had the covert approval of Western governments, who saw Iraq as a counterweight to revolutionary Iran.
1988: Bull received a contract to build two full sized Project Babylon' 1000 mm superguns and one Baby Babylon' 350 mm prototype for a total of $25 million. The project was given the cover designation PC-2′ (Petrochemical Complex-2). British engineer Christopher Cowley was the project manager.
The greatest concern by the international community was Iraq's arsenal of guns developed by Gerald Bull from mid-1981 until he was assassinated by what was believed to be Israeli intelligence on 22 March 1990. Two hundred of these guns, termed GH-N-45 were manufactured in Austria and were shipped to Iraq via Jordan in 1985 for use in the Iran-Iraq war. The remaining 100 were manufactured in South Africa, where they are marketed under the name G-5. The G-5 can deliver a tactical nuclear warhead, chemical shells or any NATO standard 155mm shell.
Our corrupt western governments install or support a west friendly President to carry out their own hidden agenda. In this case Saddam was one such President that had the full support of both the US and UK governments with the intention of keeping the Iraq/ Iran war running as long as possible. This next paragraph explains what was going on at the time. At a later date we would see two inquiries emerge: one being the Scott Inquiry and also the Matrix Churchill inquiry; both of which became a total farce and government cover up with the latter scuppered by the British Government before it even got underway.
The following is an extraction of an article highlighting UK's involvement in the supergun affair:
Iraq used the petrochemical complex two (PC-2) project as a front to purchase components for Gerald Bull's super gun. Matrix Churchill was a long established Midlands based machine tool manufacturer which was purchased in 1987 by an Iraqi controlled company, TMG Engineering Ltd, which was in turn controlled by another Iraqi controlled company, Technology and Development Group Ltd (TDG). The military uses of Matrix-Churchill machines are the prime reason Iraq was interested in purchasing the company. Acquiring Matrix-Churchill gave Iraq access, not only to the machine tools, but also the computer programming, tooling, and other components needed to make a wide variety of munitions as well as other applications in aerospace and nuclear industries. The Iraqi NASSR Establishment for Mechanical Industries contracted with the company for the supply of machine tools for a project, code named "ABA", to manufacture parts for multi launcher rocket systems. In addition, supergun components were fabricated in separate parts by factories in England (Forgemasters in Sheffield), Spain, Holland and Switzerland. Acting on an anonymous tip, British Customs seized the final eight sections of the Super Gun in November 1990. The work skirted the law but remained legal, as illustrated by Britain's unsuccessful prosecution of the case, following the joint British-American sting operation that uncovered key supergun equipment transfers.
The background to this article was created by Tara Davison who dealt with intelligence matters/investigations at the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and who became a whistleblower on the illegal arms trade carried out by the British Government, especially in the Middle East. When one links this scam with the nuclear weapons deal in South Africa one can clearly see that the respective leaders and their governments will do anything to either encourage conflict or to elongate a war in order to gain financial reward for themselves or their political party.
It should also be noted that when certain incidents happen to get into the media the leaders and their government would suddenly duck for cover and embark on covering up their tracks as soon as possible. However, sadly this also entailed the removal of key witnesses by well planned assassinations or the imprisonment of others so as not to allow the vital evidence to reach the court or a public enquiry. Three examples being the arrest and imprisonment of key British figures involved in the super gun deal, the assassination of the designer, Gerald Bull, followed by the South African nuclear weapons scam and the assassination of Dr David Kelly to protect those in high places.
Once, and if, the British media get their teeth into such scams, all hell lets loose. One such report by the BBC appeared in 1990 and said the following:
Customs seize supergun.' Customs officers in Middlesbrough say they have seized what they believe to be the barrel of a massive gun on a ship bound for Iraq.
Exports of parts for a weapon to Iraq would contravene British restrictions on arms sales to President Saddam Hussein's state. Eight pipes were found in crates during a search of the ship at the Teesport Docks. The length of the barrel is said to measure 40 metres (130 feet) when assembled. This would make it by far the largest gun in the world with a range of approximately 600 miles (965 kilometres). The ship where the pipes were found, the Gur Mariner, is being chartered by the Iraqi Maritime Organisation.
The main issue I am trying to raise in my articles is the fact that the leaders and governments on both sides of the pond have been and continue to pull the wool over our eyes to cover up their evil covert ways of manipulating the Geo Politics of this planet. They encourage conflict in order to become involved in areas of hostility such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia etc. They also covertly distribute arms illegally, which in some cases are used against our own forces or those of our allies. The arms manufacturing business is one of the most lucrative in the world and conflict or wars turns over huge amounts of money…….it also has the ability to increase the price of oil and gas which also props up the companies they own. One must also remember that in amongst this mass deceit are private deals going on to which they themselves benefit from or that attract huge sums of money for their own political party to enhance an election or a particular candidate. We will cover one such case later.
One point I would like to make in regard to the pre arranged assassinations of Gerald Bull and Dr David Kelly is to ask the question "Where is the true axis of evil and to what level are they prepared to go"?
We all fully understand they are both linked to illegal arms deals (Super Gun and South African nukes) and that very senior politicians were implicated.. We could also ask some questions about the death of Robin Cooke (Ex British Foreign Minister) and also Michael Todd (Ex Manchester Police Chief) both of whom had some very strong views……the list is endless…….we could also add to this the crash of the Chinook helicopter that mysteriously crashed on the Mull of Kintyre in Scotland with 25 high level security and intelligence experts from Northern Ireland onboard. One should have some serious concerns that the Chinook Inquiry was a cover up by Ministry of Defence with the involvement of the DTI and the British Secret Service.
1994: The following is an extraction from another report regarding more government cover ups: On 11 April 1994 the ambassadors of the US and UK met with President De Klerk. According to Ambassador Princeton Lyman of the United States, who was present during these meetings, the US and UK were concerned that the South African CBW information was "in danger of being acquired by other states, in particular Libya, and that South African scientists could be recruited by these states.
Lyman recalls that after the 1994 election the US and UK waited for De Klerk to brief President Mandela. They believed that this briefing had to take place before Mandela's inauguration. Five days before the inauguration, when the briefing had not taken place, the US "alerted Thabo Mbeki that there was a proliferation matter of great concern that we [the US and UK] would need to address
The continued trips undertaken by Wouter Basson ( cardiologist and former head of the country's secret chemical and biological "Project Coast") to Libya were still a matter of concern to the US and UK.
1995: A third démarche was brought by the governments of the US and UK. Dr Graham Pearson, former Director-General of the UK Defence Ministry's Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment at Porton Down, who was present during the meetings that followed, said that the intention of the démarche was to request the South African government to provide a credible CBM statement to the BTWC. He said that no comment was made about the nature of the programme and no questions were asked about it. Lyman records that the most difficult issue of the meeting was Basson's travels to Libya and elsewhere.
It was also revealed that government bodies were united in their wish to prevent public exposure of the programme and were warned of the threat the hearing posed to foreign relations, not least because documents relating to the 1993 and 1994 démarches of the US and UK were found in the trunks. It was argued that if details of these demarches (political protests) were to emerge, trust between the three countries (US, UK and South Africa) would be severely compromised.
The UK government hoped for a cancellation of the hearing, or at the very least an agreement that the hearing would be conducted in camera. Neither of which were acceptable to the Commission. Finally, in a bid to reduce the potential damage the hearing could cause to foreign relations, the government insisted that a rigorous process be undertaken to identify and approve the documents which could be used in the hearing. A policy was agreed upon: not to make public any documents that could provide technical information to potential proliferators, and the documents pertaining to the démarches would not be made public.
It has often been questioned whether the South Africa programme does indeed offer internationally applicable lessons when measured against the biological weapons and/or chemical programmes of Iraq, the United States, the Soviet Union and Japan which were several orders of magnitude larger and were aimed at the development of large-scale biological weapons for conventional use.
There is evidence to indicate that the intelligence agencies of at least the United States, the United Kingdom and Switzerland were aware of the SADF's interest in chemical and biological warfare and were aware of Basson's role in the programme from the early 1980s. Despite being states parties to the Biological and Toxins Weapons Convention (BTWC) these states chose not to confront the apartheid government with their suspicions about treaty violation until shortly before the 1994 elections because they were neither threatened by the programme nor had much to gain politically from calling Pretoria to account
It should also be noted that a Dr William Augerson (US deputy assistant Secretary of Defence for health resources and programmes), according to Basson's notes, issued a statement indicating that the USA "does in fact do offensive research/have and offensive research capacity" and that "he [Augerson] states that any country with a chemical industry should be able to produce offensive chemicals." Basson also credits Augerson with the opinion that, "chemical attack is an ideal tactical weapon against terrorist organisations"
The US and UK clearly knew enough about the South African CBW program to judge that the CBM submitted by South Africa was inaccurate (why else would they have been concerned about Basson's contact with Libya?). Why, then, did the US and UK choose to do and say nothing to prevent the South African CBW program from continuing during the 1980s and early 1990s? The answer to this question probably lies in US policy towards South Africa during the Cold War.
To conclude this first part: The main intention of this article is to reveal just how corrupt and deceitful our respective leaders, ministers and governments officials have been. It will reveal that behind the scenes it breaches UN resolutions, embargoes, illegal arms trading and frequently encourages/enhances conflict. It will also, hopefully, demonstrate how there is no significant differences in the actions, agendas and corruption of ALL our major parties and their leaders and how each "government" simply flows into the next all the change is, is a change of face.
Both sides of the pond frequently use the term "The Axis of Evil" and yet when one gets the opportunity to investigate this spider's web of deceit we can see the evil that's exist deep within the corridors of power. It became clear that back in the days of Maggie Thatcher and right up to the current time that what we read about and what actually goes on is truly beyond words.
It is apparent that our respective governments and intelligence services create their many false flags to take us to war to either enhance their own position in this crazy geo political world or to control their own hidden agenda of seeking to control the world's resources and markets and at the same time protect the drugs that play such a lucrative part in our economy.
It is also an act of treason and a breach of the Geneva Convention that our governments put not only the populations of the world at risk but also that of our military forces by using Depleted Uranium and actual WMD's that they knowingly contaminate with radiation nano particles.
Part two will continue with more of this deceit when we cover detail of the loss of the South African nuclear weapons, the illegal arms trade and the manipulation of our governments by those that brush their palms with significant amounts of money. One could also include the current Naomi Campbell "Blood Diamond" cover up whereby it was a known fact that diamonds were exchanged for arms from South Africa which in turn fuelled conflict in Liberia and Sierra Leone. It should also be remembered that Charles Taylor who remains at the centre of the current War Crimes Trial was aided and abetted by the CIA in the US….now you can see just how sordid this whole arms dealing becomes. It all comes down to the this; Can you trust your leaders and their governments? We already know the answer to this question.
[Thanks to Peter Eyre who wrote the original of this. I have simply re-published with slight edits]

We now arrive at the time a rather young political researcher by the name of David Cameron paid a totally illegal visit to South Africa, accompanied by a gentleman who has since been Knighted by the name of Ken Warren.
This visit was an all expenses paid trip that was funded by Armscor the Armaments Corporation of South Africa and took place in 1989 when David Cameron was only 24 years of age and still very much attached to the apron strings of is beloved Prime Minister, Maggie Thatcher. It must be fully understood that prior to this visit there were severe sanctions in place by the late 1980s.
A UN Resolution had already been initiated against South Africa, followed by the United States, the United Kingdom and 23 other nations passing laws placing various trade sanctions on South Africa. A divestment movement in many countries was similarly widespread, with individual cities and provinces around the world implementing various laws and local regulations forbidding registered corporations under their jurisdiction from doing business with South African firms, factories, or banks. Despite these restrictions the British Prime Minster authorised these two gentlemen to proceed to South Africa in order to carry out a totally illegal deal, which turned out to be the purchase of three battlefield ready nuclear bombs.
What was also interesting was the fact that the President of the United States and his government were fully aware of this deal and allowed it to take place, all under the UN's radar (who didn't even know that South Africa had any nuclear capability). It was also interesting to note that Israel had also allowed its nuclear technicians to go down to South Africa and help them establish a nuclear weapons capability. This served two purposes:
  • It allowed Israel itself to develop and test fire a nuclear bomb in South Africa and
  • It then allowed this technology to return to Israel and develop their own nuclear weapons industry.
It is important to note that this event really does play a very important part in the current Chilcott Inquiry (Iraq Inquiry) but unfortunately is not covered in the remit. This inquiry is a very well orchestrated performance to show that justice appears to be carried out, even though this enquiry has no legal framework to bring any possible offenders to trial. It was supposed to be an independent inquiry and yet the very control of it took place out of the cabinet office. This meant that all the questions were very carefully worded and that those giving evidence would have known those questions ahead of the hearing and had their well structured answers all lined up. The sheer arrogance of all those taking part is a very clear indication that they had nothing to fear.
So what actually happened in those dark days and who may have been implicated not only in the deal itself but also in the cover up that continues to this day?
Many names have been bounced around some of those being:
Ken Clarke Alan Clarke David Wilshire Jeffrey Howe Michael Hesaltine Malcolm Rifkin Peter Lilley Ken Warren. One could also add more names to the list, such as Lord McAlpine, Stephan Kock Robert Maxwell Mark Thatcher and obviously the person who was directly responsible for signing the weapons off, Dr David Kelly. We must also add that evil man that sexed up the Iraq Dossier and screwed Dr Kelly….the notorious Alistair Campbell.
So what was the sequence of events that led to this total violation of the embargo on South Africa and how were these three nuclear weapons moved from their storage facility in Pelindarba to the Port of Durban and onwards to Oman? How were these nukes manifested and how come they were moved in such a low key operation, with little security, and then moved into a privately owned storage facility that then allowed them to be stolen?
The first thing to remember is that these three weapons were not manifested as nuclear bombs but rather as "Cylinders" and the Margaret Thatcher herself signed them off prior to leaving office under her powers. The process of signing off is covered under the terms of "Urgent Operational Requirement" (UOR) and requires no involvement of the Cabinet or Parliament……..can one even imagine that three nuclear bombs were purchased illegally, moved and stored ready for use in Iraq and Parliament and the people of this country didn't even know? Now one can see just how far the people that run our country are prepared to go!
The company dealing with these weapons, at the British end, was called Astra (the famous British firework manufacturers) under the leadership of Gerald James. However, control of this company was handed over to a Rhodesian national Stephen Kock who also acted as a front man for the British Intelligence Service. The arms dealer John Bredenkamp under his company Casalee became the go between and so the scene was set for one of the most dangerous rip offs ever to take place on this planet.
The money trail for this deal was channeled by the DTI using the MOD as a front and then via the Bank of England using Astra as the go between. It was interesting that the Chairman of Astra, Gerald James had a full account off all the arms dealings which he accurately recorded in his spreadsheets (Sheet Number Six) in which he hoped to reveal in the Matrix Churchill Inquiry, which shall be covered later. The final release of the money for these illegal weapons was to have been after their arrival in Oman and after Dr David Kelly had inspected them and signed them off.
Also in the backdrop of this covert operation were those that had invested in the initial transaction to get the project rolling. One can attribute much of this groundwork being done by non other than dear Maggie's son, Mark Thatcher with the final outcome giving £17.8 million of British Tax Payers money to the Conservative Party Funds for the coming election.
It was interesting to note that during the David Cameron/Ken Warren visit to South Africa in 1989 also happened to be a bumper year for Matrix Churchill having had a turnover of £40 million in 1988. With all of the British Governments illegal arms dealing Matrix Churchil had on its order books for 1989 another £44 million which was a remarkable turnround since this company a few years earlier was knocking on the door of bankruptcy.
It was also in 1989 that they formed another division called Matrix Projects to deal with their new found wealth. It was also around this time that the US also became involved in a takeover. It was very clear that illegal activities had been taking place on both sides of the pond and everyone turned a blind eye until Customs spotted the "Super Gun" barrels in Teesside Docks ready to be loaded for shipment to Baghdad. We will cover both the missing nukes and the super gun cover up later.
One can clearly see that munitions were a thriving business during this time and many of the deals struck up were in total violation of the embargos in place. This meant that the British Government were very much implicated in these covert deals and in some cases were directly involved in them.
As is always the case when one gets caught out the government launches itself on a massive cover up and allows other middle men and companies to take the blame and in the case of the above forces the inquiry to collapse, arrests the middle men or assassinates them.
What became apparent was that after Dr David Kelly had inspected the three nuclear bombs in Oman and after the money had exchanged hands the man that had provided the weapons (John Bredenkamp) again stole them from their insecure storage facility. They were stored in special 20 foot sea containers with a hidden inspection panel to check the core temperature of the nuclear bomb….the three containers were then replaced by three false containers that only contained concrete blocks.
The actual theft was not noticed until the three containers arrived in Chicago and inspection revealed the bombs had been stolen. Basically the arrangement made between South Africa US UK was that the 9 remaining nukes would end up in the US for de commissioning…….6 of these sea containers were sent directly and 3 were sent via Oman and then released when it was realized that there was no requirement for them to be used in Iraq.
It was obvious that neither the US or UK governments could discuss this theft as the entire deal had been a deceitful covert operation. Even to this day both governments and the Israel Government are frantically trying to find out where these bombs ended up. One should also add to these three South African/British missing nukes the three missing nukes that the US lost off the coast of Somalia when a B52 dumped them in the sea during a full in flight emergency. What has since transpired is that North Korea has to date tested two nuclear weapons, one being a US missing nuke and one being a stolen South African/British nuke. Maybe one can now read between the lines as to why the US, UK and Israeli Governments are so aggressive towards Iran and North Korea!
As its stands at the moment John Bredenkamp's assets have been frozen and there is an urgent drive to try to prosecute him for some other incident in order to get him into custody and interrogate him for information on those missing nukes……we must remember that in both cases it was the governments on both sides of the pond that allowed this mishap to happen by their gross neglect. John Bredenkamp received tons of gold for the US weapons and much money from the British for the South African Weapons……as they say what goes around comes around…..I can assure you that there are many senior past and current political figures that are extremely nervous, should these facts come to the surface and reach the world's media. That is why the Matrix Churchill collapsed, why the Scott Inquiry was a dead duck, why the Hutton inquiry covered up the death of Dr Kelly and why the current Chilcott inquiry is a total scam. We will now look at these inquires and try to see what has happened and what moves have been made at government level to try to protect those involved.
Following the first Gulf War of 1991 there was interest as to what extent British companies had been supplying Saddam Hussein's regime with the materials to enhance the war. Four directors of the British machine tools manufacturer Matrix Churchill were put on trial for supplying equipment and knowledge to Iraq, but in 1992 the trial collapsed, as it was revealed that the company had been advised by the government on how to sell arms to Iraq.
When the Matrix Churchill trial began the government realised that if they called Gerald James, former Chairman of Astra and the man who wrote the book; In the Public Interest', they realised that because the deal was part of the trade and Industry contract, the Judge would have asked for all the relevant files.
Just before the trial began in November 1992, ministers signed Public Interest Immunity certificates declaring that certain government documents could not be passed over without imperilling national security. These documents were considered vital to the defence case that the company was acting in the knowledge and support of the security services which wanted information about Iraq's plans. But the judge refused to accept the certificates and the trial collapsed. This was later described as gagging orders. The ministers who signed the gagging orders were: Michael Heseltine Malcolm Rifkind Alan Clarke Peter Lilly Kenneth Clarke all of whom were obviously implicated in the entire episode.
It should be noted that three executive of Matrix Churchill were charged with illegally supplying arms-making equipment to Iraq. The case went to trial but the prosecution collapsed after Alan Clarke, the former Minister of State for Defence Procurement, admitted in cross examination that he supported the allegedly unlawful sale. The collapse of the trial led to allegations that some ministers had been prepared to allow innocent men to go to prison rather than allow their change in policy to become public. This then led to the Scott Inquiry when the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, appointed Sir Richard Scott to investigate the affair.
The main reason for this dramatic change and push by the British Government was when they realised that the star witness at the Matrix Churchill trial would have been Gerald James, the former Chairman of Astra. Gerald had in his possession the ledger sheet which would have shown in great detail the payments made to Casalee (John Bredenkamp). It was also interesting to note that the government raided the offices of Gerald James and removed all the office filing cabinets.
One can clearly see the sordid way our governments operate and it is clear that, despite any UN sanctions, if it is of economic gain then they turn a blind eye. What was to follow was yet again another fiasco called the Scott Inquiry. Senior Tories, including former foreign secretaries Lord Howe and Douglas Hurd have criticised Scott for employing a technique that was unfair to witnesses who were not given the opportunity to cross-examine other witnesses. Scott was accused of being prosecutor, judge and jury in an inquiry. The spin off from all these totally corrupt inquires raises the following questions:
  • Did the Government have a separate policy for the sale of British arms to Iraq?
  • Did some ministers tell lies in Parliament about the policy or arms sales?
  • Did the Government fail to act promptly on information it received about the Iraqi "Super-gun" project?
  • Did the Government allow businessmen to be prosecuted (over Supergun, Ordtech and Matrix Churchill) for activities that had been privately condoned by officials or ministers?
  • Was it right for ministers to issue Public Interest Immunity Certificates so-called gagging orders to try to withhold documents that could be useful to the defence in the Matrix Churchill trial?
  • Did ministers conspire to mislead the British public?
We can now add to the list of senior figures that of John Major, Tony Blair and later Gordon Brown who were either aware or involved in all of the above and thus carried out an act of deceit or withheld the truth.
What I find totally unacceptable is the fact that every government is professing to be totally transparent in its dealings. We had a classic case back in those dark years whereby the government of the day could rip off the British Tax Payer to the tune of £17.8 million, send it to an offshore banking outlet, and then bring it back into the country to prop up the Conservative Party Election Fund. This fraud was monitored by Margaret Thatcher, John Major,David Cameron, Tony Blair and many other senior political and yet to this day has still not been accounted for. Tony Blair himself received £1 million fromBernie Ecclestone, the Formula One chief which was covered up as a donation from the tobacco industry. It should also be remembered that Dr David Kelly was the only person in mainstream UK MoD tasked with being in the loop for that covert offshore procurement of battlefield nukes from Apartheid South Africa. Basically his future was clearly mapped out for him once he decided to become a whistleblower!!
This is an Hansard account on how this was raised in the Houses of Parliement:
Extract taken from HANSARD 22[SUP]nd[/SUP] June 1993.
Tory funding of their 1992 General Election Campaign
Origins of Mystery Donation of £17.8 millions Column 197:
Mr. Hoyle: If the hon. Gentleman will allow me, I shall tell him what information is now given to us. We understand the expenditure and what Tory central office receives. In 1992, central office received £20.7 million. When we asked about that and about company donations, the Tory party told us to look at company accounts.
I repeat: in 1992, the Tories received £20.7 million. When the records were checked by Companies house, only £2.9 million was shown in company accounts. That means that there is a deficit of £17.8 million. We want to know where that £17.8 million came from.
Mr. Tim Smith: The hon. Gentleman has made the suggestion about the accounts of the Conservative party that was made by a member of the Select Committee last week: that no accounts had been published between 1979 and 1983. They were published, and I undertook to send copies to the Select Committee.
Mr. Hoyle: I gave way to the hon. Gentleman because I expected him to tell me where the difference of £17.8 million came from. I shall give way again to him.
I am told that he is a treasurer of the Conservative party. I give way to him now so that he can stand up and tell us where the £17.8 million came from. Does the hon. Gentleman care to do that? I am waiting. I do not think that we shall get the information from the horse's mouth. We certainly did not get it from the Secretary of State.
-
Mr. Hoyle: That is a very useful piece of information, which has added to my knowledge. Does the hon. Gentleman now care to tell us, taking just 1992, where the almost £18 million that is unaccounted for came from? We know that the funding
Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley): This is boring.
Mr. Hoyle: It may be boring, but it is nevertheless true. In fact, it is not boring to my colleagues, because we should like a little light shone on the matter. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman can help us.
Mr. Mike O'Brien (Warwickshire, North): As a member of the Select Committee on Home Affairs, I have to tell my hon. Friend that he is being very unfair to us on the Conservative Board of Finance and who represented 84 constituencies. He said:
"Over £67 million of expenditure was recorded by the Conservative Party in my fours years on the Committee, but no one had to account for a penny of it to the Conservative Board of Finance nor to any other elected body." Conservative Members do not know the answers; nor does anyone else."
Mr. Hoyle: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that intervention. Perhaps only two people know where the funding came from. One is Lord McAlpine, whom the unfortunate President of the Board of Trade (Heseltine) apparently saw on his visit to Venice. I join the Secretary of State for Employment in hoping that the right hon. Gentleman has a speedy and full recovery and is soon back in the House.
However, the President of the Board of Trade (Heseltine) visited Lord McAlpine, and Lord McAlpine is one of the men who knows.
The other person is perhaps someone to whom my right hon. Friend the Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) referredSir Brian Wyldbore-Smith. He is apparently a director of the Conservative Board of Financea curious name, but a curious job, too. Apparently, Sir Brian used private addresses to receive chequesthey were not sent directly to central office. They were made out to him personally, eventually passed on and often paid into an offshore account in Jersey, a tax haven.
They eventually landed at central office with Lord McAlpine, whose office, I understand, was always kept locked except when he was in it, so that the secrets could not be given to the rank and file or to members of the Cabinet. Therefore, my hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire, North (Mr. O'Brien) is right to say that Conservative Members do not know where the funding came from.
I wonder why there is no inquiry into the source of this fund and why governments are always pursuing tax fraud cheats but do nothing about this particular case.
Finally we come to events leading up to the Iraq War, the suicide (assassination) of Dr David Kelly and yet another scam the "Hutton Inquiry" and the current "Chilcott Inquiry" which will be covered in Part 3 of this current series.
[Written by Peter Eyre and republished with minor edits]
http://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2010/08...im-part-2/
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Reply
#2
Magda Hassan Wrote:What I find totally unacceptable is the fact that every government is professing to be totally transparent in its dealings. We had a classic case back in those dark years whereby the government of the day could rip off the British Tax Payer to the tune of £17.8 million, send it to an offshore banking outlet, and then bring it back into the country to prop up the Conservative Party Election Fund. This fraud was monitored by Margaret Thatcher, John Major,David Cameron, Tony Blair and many other senior political and yet to this day has still not been accounted for. Tony Blair himself received £1 million fromBernie Ecclestone, the Formula One chief which was covered up as a donation from the tobacco industry. It should also be remembered that Dr David Kelly was the only person in mainstream UK MoD tasked with being in the loop for that covert offshore procurement of battlefield nukes from Apartheid South Africa. Basically his future was clearly mapped out for him once he decided to become a whistleblower!!
This is an Hansard account on how this was raised in the Houses of Parliement:
Extract taken from HANSARD 22[SUP]nd[/SUP] June 1993.
Tory funding of their 1992 General Election Campaign
Origins of Mystery Donation of £17.8 millions Column 197:
Mr. Hoyle: If the hon. Gentleman will allow me, I shall tell him what information is now given to us. We understand the expenditure and what Tory central office receives. In 1992, central office received £20.7 million. When we asked about that and about company donations, the Tory party told us to look at company accounts.
I repeat: in 1992, the Tories received £20.7 million. When the records were checked by Companies house, only £2.9 million was shown in company accounts. That means that there is a deficit of £17.8 million. We want to know where that £17.8 million came from.
Mr. Tim Smith: The hon. Gentleman has made the suggestion about the accounts of the Conservative party that was made by a member of the Select Committee last week: that no accounts had been published between 1979 and 1983. They were published, and I undertook to send copies to the Select Committee.
Mr. Hoyle: I gave way to the hon. Gentleman because I expected him to tell me where the difference of £17.8 million came from. I shall give way again to him.
I am told that he is a treasurer of the Conservative party. I give way to him now so that he can stand up and tell us where the £17.8 million came from. Does the hon. Gentleman care to do that? I am waiting. I do not think that we shall get the information from the horse's mouth. We certainly did not get it from the Secretary of State.
-
Mr. Hoyle: That is a very useful piece of information, which has added to my knowledge. Does the hon. Gentleman now care to tell us, taking just 1992, where the almost £18 million that is unaccounted for came from? We know that the funding
Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley): This is boring.
Mr. Hoyle: It may be boring, but it is nevertheless true. In fact, it is not boring to my colleagues, because we should like a little light shone on the matter. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman can help us.
Mr. Mike O'Brien (Warwickshire, North): As a member of the Select Committee on Home Affairs, I have to tell my hon. Friend that he is being very unfair to us on the Conservative Board of Finance and who represented 84 constituencies. He said:
"Over £67 million of expenditure was recorded by the Conservative Party in my fours years on the Committee, but no one had to account for a penny of it to the Conservative Board of Finance nor to any other elected body." Conservative Members do not know the answers; nor does anyone else."
Mr. Hoyle: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that intervention. Perhaps only two people know where the funding came from. One is Lord McAlpine, whom the unfortunate President of the Board of Trade (Heseltine) apparently saw on his visit to Venice. I join the Secretary of State for Employment in hoping that the right hon. Gentleman has a speedy and full recovery and is soon back in the House.
However, the President of the Board of Trade (Heseltine) visited Lord McAlpine, and Lord McAlpine is one of the men who knows.
The other person is perhaps someone to whom my right hon. Friend the Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) referredSir Brian Wyldbore-Smith. He is apparently a director of the Conservative Board of Financea curious name, but a curious job, too. Apparently, Sir Brian used private addresses to receive chequesthey were not sent directly to central office. They were made out to him personally, eventually passed on and often paid into an offshore account in Jersey, a tax haven.
They eventually landed at central office with Lord McAlpine, whose office, I understand, was always kept locked except when he was in it, so that the secrets could not be given to the rank and file or to members of the Cabinet. Therefore, my hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshire, North (Mr. O'Brien) is right to say that Conservative Members do not know where the funding came from.
I wonder why there is no inquiry into the source of this fund and why governments are always pursuing tax fraud cheats but do nothing about this particular case.
Finally we come to events leading up to the Iraq War, the suicide (assassination) of Dr David Kelly and yet another scam the "Hutton Inquiry" and the current "Chilcott Inquiry" which will be covered in Part 3 of this current series.
[Written by Peter Eyre and republished with minor edits]
http://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2010/08...im-part-2/


In the following post, McAlpine claims the moral high ground....

:monkeypiss:
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War."

Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon

"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
Reply
#3
hmmmm


Quote:Tory party 'has moral duty' to return £440,000 in donations from Polly Peck

Former party treasurer says if David Cameron 'is an honourable man' he will give back cash received from Asil Nadir's company



Andrew Sparrow and agencies

guardian.co.uk, Friday 24 August 2012 11.22 BST


A former Conservative treasurer has said that the party has a "moral duty" to return the £440,000 it received from Asil Nadir's Polly Peck company in the 1980s.

After Nadir received a 10-year jail sentence on Thursday for stealing almost £29m from the company he built up to be a global player, Lord McAlpine said the donation was "tainted" and had to be returned.

McAlpine, who was Conservative party treasurer from 1975 to 1990, told the Daily Mail that when Polly Peck first donated to the party, Nadir was "a dashing figure who was admired across Europe for his business flair".

"But frankly the moment [Nadir] fled the country in 1993, to avoid criminal charges, it was obvious to me he was a complete conman. Frankly, the Tories should have given the money back in 1993.

"Today the case is even clearer. There is a moral imperative for the money to be returned. The money was not Asil Nadir's to give although we thought it was at the time.

"Therefore the Tory party has a duty to return it. It will speak volumes about the character of the modern Tory party if they don't do the right thing. I trust that David Cameron is an honourable man."

McAlpine, who left the Conservatives before the 1997 election to campaign for the Referendum party before later rejoining the Tories, also said Lady Thatcher would have wanted the money returned.

"If Margaret Thatcher was still leader of the party I am absolutely certain she would have ordered the party to repay the lot. I can hear her barking down the phone: 'Alistair, we can't keep that man's money'," he said.

But on Friday, the Conservatives rejected McAlpine's call for the money to be returned. "The Conservative party has no record of having received donations from Asil Nadir," a spokesman said. "Donations were received from Polly Peck companies more than 22 years ago; these were accepted in good faith from what was then considered to be a leading British company.

"We have seen no evidence that money donated to the Conservative party from the Polly Peck group was stolen. But we have consistently said, as Norman Fowler, then party chairman, did in 1993, 'obviously if it is proved that that money was stolen it will be returned'."

The Labour MP Simon Danczuk, who also wants the Tories to return the money, has written to the party highlighting newspaper reports saying that Touche Ross, the Polly Peck administrators, warned the party in 1993 that £365,000 of the £440,000 it received came from money defrauded from the Polly Peck empire.

But a party spokesman said it was not aware of the Touche Ross report. He also questioned whether it ever existed.
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War."

Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon

"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
Reply
#4
If their own book keeping and accounting is so sloppy as to some how end up with a few million pounds and they have 'no idea' where it comes from it brings into doubt their ability to run a a chook raffle let alone a nation. The same applies if they know perfectly well what is happening and are hiding it.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  FOIA releases William Colby's official history as CIA director, 1973 - 76. Anthony Thorne 0 2,129 18-12-2016, 06:28 AM
Last Post: Anthony Thorne
  Did Cameron do a bit for MI5 at uni? Paul Rigby 2 2,458 10-06-2010, 04:15 PM
Last Post: Paul Rigby
  The History of the Honey Trap Ed Jewett 6 3,967 18-03-2010, 05:03 AM
Last Post: Ed Jewett
  Report of the Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Death of Dr David Kelly C.M.G. Magda Hassan 1 3,756 05-02-2010, 02:01 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  CIA's History of Lying to Congress (Lisa Pease) Dawn Meredith 0 2,136 10-07-2009, 07:37 PM
Last Post: Dawn Meredith
  David Rockerfeller Magda Hassan 7 6,018 27-05-2009, 07:17 AM
Last Post: Ed Jewett
  Obama and Civil Liberties - Those who forget history, are doomed to.... Peter Lemkin 0 2,709 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  The History of Wirt Dexter Walker: Russell & Company, the CIA and 9/11 Ed Jewett 0 2,573 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  Iran Contra Connections to the Oklahoma City Bombing, by David Hoffman and Alex Constantine Magda Hassan 0 3,228 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  Fascism Nothing New In America, Sadly. Those who do not learn the lessons of history.... Peter Lemkin 0 3,464 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)