U.S. pressured Britain to arrest prematurely
Posted August 13th, 2006 by polizeros
MSNBC is reporting the US pressured Britain to make the arrests of the alleged plane bomb plotters prematurely.
The U.S. announcement of the arrests was made the day after incumbent senator Joe Lieberman lost in the primary to an anti-war candidate, showing clearly the pressure was applied so the Bushies could get short-term political gain from it - regardless of whether or not such premature disclosure botched the investigation. (Assuming the plot actually exists, of course.)
A crucial sentence from the MSNBC article reads "In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.'
Not really a shock, its
Not really a shock, its amazing how UK politicians bow down to that Kunt and do what he says.
Now seeing that the US decides how the UK operates on a intelligence level, does this mean we get to tell them when to arrest and whatnot?
The interesting thing is how much damage the whole heathrow kockup will do the travel industry (Thanks Tony/John, nice to see you dont fly cattle class from heathrow anymore, spare me a seat on your ride?)
Not only do they bow down to
Not only do they bow down to that Neocon Kunt, they actively work for the propagation of Neocon policies in the UK and abroad. That's because they're CIA stooges.
The manner in which the Blairites have adopted the neocons' cynical depiction of Muslims as 'evil' is racist in the extreme. Though we have anti-racist legislation to protect the public it seems, when it comes to politics, the government is immune to its own laws!
Is there not a case for prosecuting Blair & Co for inciting racism against Muslims (something which there is evidence they have done)under either the existing UK laws or European Human Rights legislation?
Though, it seems sensible to
Though, it seems sensible to put the information out and get it over with before more people get hurt, or get their hopes up too high.
The BBC is also guilty of
The BBC is also guilty of racism, notice how often (like always) they say British-born moslems, instead of the correct British moslems, or moslem Britains.
This is subtle, what they are saying is these people are not British, they are just born here. Disgraceful, no wonder moslems feel alienated within Britain.
I don't think the BBC is
I don't think the BBC is guilty of racism for using the term British-born moslems. Muslims fancy themselves as members of the Ummah. The Ummah has no borders. The BBC is saying, British born members of the Ummah. I doubt if Muslims would much like being call British Muslims since it evokes "British" culture, and we know all about THAT. Muslim Britains verses Buddahist Britains or Branch Divinian Britains, sounds strange.
Interestingly, I'm told that
Interestingly, I'm told that the story isn't getting much airtime in the US ..... if true, I can't work out why that is.
I am British Muslim. I don't
I am British Muslim.
I don't like being called British-born Muslim.
I don't like people telling me to go home if I don't like British foreign policy.
I don't like references to militants, applied to Muslim that oppose Israeli terrorism by word or deed.
I DO like the freedom, democracy, freedom of speech and tolerance we all enjoy.
I LOVE this country and the fact that most people here are decent, tolerant, thinking people. Together we will defeat terrorism, BNP facism and the evil of apartheid in Israel/Palestine and the British/American foreign policy that sustains it.
I think it's mostly a bunch
I think it's mostly a bunch of untrustworthy British-born Christians that are to blame for this piece of terminology.
... yes, sounds ridiculous: I suspected it would.
Tony Blair is an
Tony Blair is an untrustworthy British-born Christian, as are most (all?) of the cabinet ... so it doesn't sound ridiculous at all. ;-)