Saturday, 28 April 2007

Two Libyan Terror Suspects Could Be Released After Winning Appeals Against the Home Office

Two Libyan terror suspects could be released within days after they won appeals against Home Office attempts to deport them. One of the men ,known only as DD, was found with a map marked with the flightpath to Birmingham International Airport.

Not only have they avoided deportation but it looks as though they will also be released on bail. The commission Judge, Mr Justice Mitting, said keeping them in detention after they had won their appeal would be on the "cusp of legality".

The men opposed deportation by arguing they could be jailed and tortured if sent home.
However there is a Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries, whereby Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi pledged not to mistreat anyone deported to Tripoli from the UK.
Under international laws, the UK does not deport people to regimes where they may face persecution.

I personally do not agree with the fact that the UK does not deport people to regimes where they may face persecution. I will be politically incorrect for a moment and say that if terrorists were planning an attack and caught in the process then I have no problem whatsoever with them being deported to a regime where they face persecution. In fact, I would have a much greater problem with them being deported to live a nice happy life in freedom.

Wednesday, 25 April 2007

Leaked Memo of Talks Between Blair and Bush

Blair and Labour have lost the trust of the British people. Therefore it would not be surprising to find that this government has caused the rest of the world to lose trust in the UK as well.

Thankfully the leak of this memo was stopped, but what
happens next time when it is
not? All the more reason to
NOT vote for Labour at the next general
election. Whether we choose to admit it or not
the UK needs the support of our allies
and a breach in trust and/or breakdown of
communication would be disastrous for our country.

Over the past several years Blair and the Labour party have made many poor decisions, broken promises and been involved in more than a few scandals which have caused great embarrassment to the remarkable country we live in. Under Gordon Brown, or any Labour MP who has been a central part of Blair's government, do we really expect this to change?

The latest incident, the leaked memo, could have not only have "raised international tensions," according to Dave Perry QC but he also agreed that it would have"seriously damaged relations with friendly governments" as well as threatening life and public order and the "operational effectiveness of the security of UK or allied forces".

Civil servant David Keogh, 50, and MP's researcher Leo O'Connor, 44 deny three charges under the Official Secrets Act. Mr Keogh is said to have passed the record of the meeting between Blair and Bush to researcher Mr O'Connor. The contents of the memo are so sensitive that they are not being disclosed in open court and much of the trial is being held behind closed doors.

Mr Blair's foreign policy adviser Sir Nigel Sheinwald said a leak would have sparked worldwide anger. Sir Nigel described how the leaking of such a secret and sensitive document could have damaged Britain's alliances within the world and destroyed the trust needed for governments to speak openly to each other and that it would have put UK forces at risk.

Tuesday, 24 April 2007

Ahmadinejad's Announcement Was Misleading - Iran's Nuclear Programme Facing Severe Difficulties

Iran's nuclear programme is apparently facing severe technical difficulties. Experts now say that it could take four years to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for one bomb.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's April 9th announcement that uranium enrichment on an "industrial scale" had begun was "misleading" and the time-scale for success is likely to be longer than early estimates suggested. Ahmadinejad was simply grandstanding, not that it is any surprise.

"It's very difficult to enrich uranium," said Norman Dombey, emeritus professor of theoretical physics at Sussex University. "It calls for several different scientific and engineering disciplines. Iran hasn't yet shown that it has mastered the problem."

Dombey estimates that Iran will need about two years simply to master the process of running centrifuges. Then, making allowances for interruptions caused by breakdowns, it could take another two years to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for one bomb. "At the moment, their programme doesn't constitute a threat. It would constitute a threat if they were enriching substantial amounts to more than five per cent and they're not. In fact they're not enriching anything very much. This talk about industrial scale enrichment is misleading."

The programme may not constitute a threat at the moment but what will happen 4 years down the road when it does? We should be counting our blessings that the Iranian President was exaggerating their capabilities and find a way to prevent Iran's programme from EVER becoming a threat. Once it does it may be too late. Unfortunately what will most likely happen is that our government along with the UN with impose sanctions and discuss why Iran should stop the enrichment of uranium. Four years down the line they will have the technology and no doubt will have built a bomb. There will then be discussions as to why they were not stopped and what should have been done. The result? Iran will have become an even greater and more deadly threat.

Monday, 23 April 2007

David Miliband Declares He Will Support Gordon Brown as the Next Prime Minister

David Miliband, Brown's most serious rival, said publicly for the first time that he will support the Chancellor. At a Labour press conference in Glasgow for the Scottish Parliament election campaign, Mr Miliband denied that he was waiting for the results to decide whether to stand. "I'll be voting for Gordon Brown as Labour leader," he said. "He's done fantastic things for the prosperity of all British people over the last 10 years and I think he's the best qualified candidate across a wider canvas. He'll bring pride to the whole of the UK and when he does I look forward to supporting him."

However Mr Miliband, who is now expected to head an environment and energy department in Brown's Cabinet, argued in a news-paper article that success in the next general election would require the party not to go back on the New Labour project, but to offer "New Labour Plus''.

What exactly is "New Labour Plus?" New Labour was filled with broken promises, airs of corruption, scandals, an increase in the "surveillance society" we now have to endure and many public services including the NHS going downhill. Does New Labour Plus mean even more of the above? Do we now have more broken promises, scandals, and even worse public services to look forward to?

"New Labour" was the country's golden child at one time, today they are nothing more than an embarrassment.

Sunday, 22 April 2007

Question of the Week

Do you think Lord Goldsmith should be allowed to have the final decision as to whether charges are brought in the Cash for Honours case?

For the article related to this question click below

Cash For Access Memo Leaked Days After CPS is Handed 216 Page Cash for Honours File

A strategy to "sell" Downing Street access to wealthy party donors from the very beginning of the Blair years has been uncovered. A leaked internal memo places Tony Blair, his chief of staff Jonathan Powell and Labour's leading fundraiser Lord Levy at the centre of a "cash-for-access" policy to raise millions.

This leak comes days after police handed over a 216-page file to the Crown Prosecution Service, which is now deciding whether to press criminal charges over the cash-for-honours affair. The document was written by Amanda Delew, the former head of the High Value Fundraising Unit at Labour HQ, shortly after the party swept to power in 1997. It proposes that the prospect of access to Number 10 and Tony Blair could help raise more than £15million for party funds. The paper insists the Prime Minister 'must continue to have private meetings' with some donors while others 'would expect to be invited' to Downing Street.

A Labour spokesman insisted last night that the document was discarded before it reached
senior members of the party and that "no one who gave money to the party is given preferential treatment and no one can buy access to Downing Street".

But Angus MacNeil, the Scottish Nationalist MP who triggered the cash for honours police investigation, said: "This document is symptomatic of New Labour and its obsession with the rich and wealthy. It is not to me, or any other politician, they must answer. It is to the highest court in the land."

Lord Goldsmith , a Labour minister who once gave money to the party and who owes his job to Tony Blair, could end up making the final decision on whether charges are brought. Complaints have been made that the Attorney General is politically compromises however Lord Goldsmith insisted he would judge the case for a prosecution "objectively, on the evidence, independently from Government".

Opposition MPs questioned his impartiality. Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: "He is a politician and he is a peer - he was made a peer by Tony Blair. None of that is wrong but he should not be involved in this decision. It should be made independently by a members of the Crown Prosecution Service."

Yes, the decision should be made independently however I am certain that Mr. Blair will use all methods of persuasion available to him to encourage Lord Goldsmith to put a stop the the prosecution despite the fact sources close to the inquiry have described the police file as "very robust". If charges are brought, Mr Blair, who was interviewed twice by detectives, could be called to give evidence in court. That alone gives Blair motivation to pressure Lord Goldsmith.

It is quite obvious that honours were sold for donations to the party and even more obvious Levy tried to cover this up. The only remaining question is will Mr Blair's influence stop it from going to trial?