UK Barrister Urges Al Qaeda to “Assassinate Tony Blair”
Go To Start Of Original Post
A Challenge For Charon QC
Breaking News: Top Islamist Terror recruiter convicted. Met: Hamid “grooming people to commit murder” - 12 13 Years on - (NOTE, PRE-BLAIR) - WE’VE noticed!
Comment at end
UPDATED 24th February, 2008
Visit CharonQC’s blog to hear GEEK’ LAWYER’S PODCAST - OR click the 18 minute podcast link below to listen while you read my synopsis here.
This was quite surprising. Geek Lawyer sounds almost human!
Some points from the 18 minute podcast, which started on the present debate on internet file sharing. By the way, Geek says:
“My competence at criminal law is well known as slight”.
ON TAX
Admitting he “evades slash avoids” tax when he can, he says -
“disregarding the legality of it there is no moral imperative to pay tax”.
“Disregarding the legality of it …”, the good barrister says … (?) Yes, we had noticed the flexible confluence you apply to morality and the law, GL.
ON THE PRINCESS DIANA INQUEST
Diana Inquest - On MI6, Licensed to kill.
Charon said that on the instructions of the judge we are not allowed to talk about the inquest; so they proceeded to.
Following the words of the present Head of MI6, Richard Dearlove - that MI6 have not killed anyone in his 38 years -
Geek said that “they engaged in a partial truth” [...] “they will fit people up so that OTHER people will kill those people. So they will, for example, leak information from one side or another with the intent that one of the other sides actually goes out and kills people. They’ve certainly no direct hand but they’ve certainly caused (unclear) and arranged it.”
My goodness, Geek! What a thing to happen!! By suggestion or distribution of information MI6 gets SOMEONE ELSE TO KILL PEOPLE? You don’t mean that actually WORKS, do you? What a thought.
So, if somebody passes around or distributes a nod and a wink and a hint of approval it might affect the behaviour of others? NO? Surely NOT! And I expect the so-and-sos said they wouldn’t participate in it, or encourage it, but that they wouldn’t be upset if it happened. Tchh … tchh … whatever next?
Game/Set/Match?
GEEK LAWYER’S DOWNED BLOG
His thoughts on downloads and file sharing indicate that he understands a fair bit about the internet and its workings, yet he’s not sure if his blog has been hacked as well as ‘DOSed’. Do us a favour, Geek.
Asked by Charon about his old blog, he still maintains that he hasn’t yet got around to getting it back up.
He said he is not sure if the DOS attack is still going on, but that the software had been “buggered up” and the site may have been hacked. But it’ll be down for a week or two, he says, after he returns from his ski-ing holiday. (Then he suddenly changes the subject back to the file-sharing business with which Charon opened the discussion.)
Avoidance or evasion? What’s the difference. Ask me - I’m not a lawyer.
But since Geek Lawyer still hasn’t had the time to get his old offending site back online, and will be on the piste for a couple of weeks, never let it be said that I’d allow the great British public to have to wait in restless anticipation for his return. He says he stands by ALL he said at his blog.
Listen here - Geek/CharonQC 18mins 28secs podcast - He is asked about his dead blog at 16:40, and manages to change the subject by 17:22.
A CHALLENGE TO CHARON QC
I thought Charon QC sounded a decent enough chap with a civilised penchant for fine wines and tobacco, so he can’t be all bad. Why don’t you do a follow-up podcast, Charon, with our mutual friend when he returns from his holiday? Call It “The Death of A Salesman … Blog”. I’d listen in.
Addendum to this challenge, Charon: if GL doesn’t fancy telling us all about the dreadful attack on his blog perhaps he’d like to explain exactly how he is not actually suggesting, coaxing or encouraging Al Qaeda to kill Tony Blair? He, surely, has nothing to fear in explaining his account of his innocence in this matter. After all, according to him, there is no case to answer, so he will be giving nothing away. Or is he too much of a coward to rise to this challenge?
Come on GL - FREEDOM OF SPEECH needs you!
12th February, 2008
Update from the blog owner: This lawyer person’s site seems to have been taken down. He is now, in his “blame cultured” fashion accusing someone of a DDOS attack. In case you don’t know, that’s what happens to the Pentagon, financial institutions, or government authorities. Important places. Not to sites like his or mine. It entails millions of e-mails/comments flooding the site. Personally I suggest another authority has asked for its removal. I will be writing a follow-up post at the end of this week. In the meantime he or his followers have cloned a page of my site - well, a bit of it - in an attempt to con people. If you don’t suspect the feigned sycophancy, which you should, look for the misspelling of “Blair ” in the url, if you come across this silly site. If you want my advice, I suggest you don’t comment there.
ARREST THIS TW*T NOW!
PLEASE!
I’m fu**ing furious.
I really am; or I wouldn’t use that kind of language.
(I refuse to link you or any civilised person to the sh**hole of a site I am about to refer to. He doesn’t deserve the traffic. But you can have the url privately if you e-mail me at the end of the page.)
Tonight an e-mail popped into my inbox from a Lincoln’s Inn barrister. I clicked the link and was treated to a diatribe of abuse against the Blairs personally.
So what’s new? Well, this …
As well as immature rantings which he obviously thinks funny, the low-life says this of Tony Blair:
“Why oh why oh why oh why can’t the useless rag-head pillocks in Al Queda assassinate him? It would be great PR for them: many of us would revise our low opinion of them if they could do us this one small service. Their ineptness is proof that the terrorism ‘threat’ is laughable.”
This is a barrister! For those from outside the UK, a barrister is a highly-trained lawyer. He or she defends or prosecutes in a court of law.
A “lawyer” or “solicitor” can only advise prior to going to court. A barrister is one step up the ladder and often on his or her way to becoming a judge.
Tony and Cherie Blair are both barristers by training. Cherie is now a part-time judge.
She is a member of Lincoln’s Inn, as was her husband prior to his political career.
I am making enquiries as to this blogging creature’s right to incite murder. But, since he is a lawyer, I expect he knows that this is permitted in our great liberal democracy.
He and other scum, it seems, can get away with murder.
A RETURN OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?
Highly unlikely, of course, as part of the EU. And I am a contented European, most of the time.
But I’m sadly coming to the conclusion that we need to bring back capital punishment and start using it here at the top of the British legal profession. OK, so it’s been a while since we hanged people for incitement. But today we seem to do nothing, NOTHING about anything in prevention of violent acts. Our civil liberties lobby has seen to that.
And here we have the evidence; imbeciles like this in our courtrooms.
We have enough enemies out to destroy our society without this.
It’s shameful.
I’m reading through the Treason Felony Act here on this matter, which as I understand it, applies solely to the monarch. However, I believe, but it’ll need further research, and it’s late, that a charge of “accessory before the fact” as well as “after the fact” could be laid in this case against people who incite others, if the incited eventuality occurred or an attempt was made.
‘Association’ may be a requirement, but reading this fool, NOTHING would surprise me. NOTHING!
Wikipedia’s reference to Incitement is unsupported by sources. More work to be done on the part of those of us who do not believe in taking the law into our own hands or encouraging others so to do.
Perhaps the inadequacy of English Law in this field explains why raving, screaming, placard-waving Islamists in Regents Park last June called for death to the Queen and for others to bring Blair back from the Middle East in a box (”how you do it is up to you”). They were completely ignored by the by-standing British police.
You’ve been warned. The enemy is also within.
P.S. If you ever need a barrister in London, find one who can spell, and not one like this pompous, useless waste of space. The law which they practise, sadly, you’ll need to leave to the “government”.
But in “Al Qaeda”, there is no “u” after “q”. That’s English, not Arabic, you nincompoop.
////////////////////////////////
I didn’t read anything about this in the British press, but if this isn’t brainwashing, I don’t know what is.
British Shia Muslims say - “Martyrdom Is One Pious Activity That the Prophet Himself Longed For”
//////////
I sometimes feel we need to search hard, but there are other Britons who think we’re missing the plot here. Go to my next post on the Archbishop’s incendiary statement on sharia law.
The PRODOS Blog - on the Archbishop’s call for Sharia Law:
‘And now The Archbishop turns to one such “Muslim scholar” to illustrate his point:Tariq Ramadan, whom he quotes:
… the idea of Sharia calls up all the darkest images of Islam … It has reached the extent that many Muslim intellectuals do not dare even to refer to the concept [of Sharia] for fear of frightening people or arousing suspicion of all their work by the mere mention of the word.
Goodness! If we believe such awful, horrid things about Sharia WE are the scary ones! WE cause all those brave “Muslim intellectuals” to omit any mention of that which they in fact believe in. WE cause them to hide their Truth.
And this is not just ordinary fear. It is “fear of frightening”.
But it’s not their fault!! It’s YOUR fault, you bigoted infidels!’
Heard the one about the Archbishop, the lawyer and the Blair supporter?
ADDENDUM - UPDATED on 23rd March, 2008
I have now removed my copy of Geek Lawyer’s page since he has somehow managed to re-instate it in all its glory. Amazing what those who don’t seem to be able to differentiate between right and wrong can do when they try.
Click here to read the post which some of us found very offensive, if not worse. (Found under the BLAIR tag on the right of his homepage).
Another post in his site archives, coincidentally discussing DDOS attacks, says this below (my emphasis). (He likes to talk in the third person. I expect it helps him keep a safe distance from himself.)
Interestingly, GL seems to approve of THIS particular DDOS attack. Inconsistent? Nah! Characteristic of the illiberal liberals, that’s all.
Scientology and DDos attacks
Broadly Geeklawyer would say that Denial of Service Attacks were, and should be, criminal offences.Ah yes, you say, a ‘but‘ is in the air;There has been a recent sustained attempt to remove this evil quack religion/business/multi-level-marketing-scam from the Internet by online vigilantes who are engaged in DDos attacks.Fucking good job too. Scientology is the scummy scam product of the fraudster Ron L. Hubbard who confessed to a friend that creating one’s own religion was a great way to make a fortune. Geeklawyer would not, of course, encourage assist aid or incite the commission of any offence, except the murder of Tony Blair, but he remains supportive of their objectives. If they wish dogged vicious intractable and determined pro-bono legal aid in the event of their capture then they may have Geeklawyer’s services gratis.[...]
This entry was written by , posted on January 25, 2008 at 10:44 pm
And yet I could have sworn he said he wouldn’t encourage assist etc - hang on, I’ll go and find his words. Back in a mo.
Here’s GL’s comment, 11th February at 10:02pm saying that he would not etc. It’s in the comments section in this post, below.
“I do of course very much wish that someone somewhere someday kills Blair. [...] but I reserve a special bile for Slimy Tony. I am, howeverk not inciting it or encouraging it, nor would I assist or cooperate in it - but I am saying it would be a great thing to happen. Merely to say I hope this happens is not to arrange or cause it to happen - unless one is King John perhaps.
To say “why can’t [terrorists] kill Tony Blair?” is not the same as “please, *someone* kill Tony Blair” The difference is not that subtle for anyone with an IQ higher than a carrot: not least because of the context in which it is written which is manifestly a rant. Not least because despite being Al Queda’s main supporter, financier and founding member I have no influence over them. You see, foolishly I lost Osama’s email address some time ago; we used to chat on IRC all the time about the old days: the booze & whores - you know, the usual.”
Pleasant, classy, bright type, isn’t he? (Rhetorical.)
AH, BUT WAIT! In the archives of his blog is this little piece of evidence … verbiage:
“Geeklawyer would not, of course, encourage assist aid or incite the commission of any offence, except the murder of Tony Blair”
And that was a couple of months ago, prior to the AQ remark. And here you say, Mr Geek Lawyer, that you WOULD “… encourage, assist, aid or incite…” So, you have “form”, eh, Geek?
RANT OR CREDO?
I suppose he’d say this too is a “rant”. I wonder how many judges would consider it so? Or is their IQ, on average, ‘less than that of a carrot’? A rant it may be argued is when one keeps piling it on verbally and increasingly angrily if at times incoherently. I suppose he could try to use that defence as regards his original post, which was all about Blair. BUT, this 25th January post (Burns Night, btw - “oh would some power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us…”) is hardly a rant. Since he has mentioned it more than once in his blog, it’s more like a credo.
It’s used by GL here almost as an aside, “by the way, this is where I stand” piece of information - thrown into an argument about something entirely different (DOS attacks), for no EVIDENT pertinent reason. Why mention this thought, unless it is an integral part of him?
As such it is at the very least careless. But I would argue that it is representative of thinking which verges on criminal intent or/and support for a criminal act. Accomplice?
//////////
CONFESSSION BY GEEK LAWYER
January 25, 2008 at 10:44
(Evidence of intent. Geek Lawyer’s “form”, m’Lud )
Related Post
Tags: Al Qaeda, assassinate Tony Blair, British lawyer, Cherie Booth, civil rights, courts, English barrister, islamists, kill, law, legal, Lincoln's Inn, murder
February 4, 2008 at 3:02 am
is nt lincolns inn where the blair painting was to be hung and h aparently i read somewherwhere a memberof this organisation was blair himself so i wonder if this is just a personal vendetta not a political one and did’nt blair bring in a law against gloryfying terrorism and couldn’t this be used against this man i hope he doesn’t succed
February 4, 2008 at 3:23 am
Yes, absolutely right. Both Blairs are members.
It was years ago when Blair was last there. This idiot makes some very nasty remarks about Cherie, so he obviously is not a friend of hers either.
But even if they’ve had a falling out, surely THIS is not on. You might say quietly to colleagues in the pub at lunch what you think of someone. We all do at times, but not on a website! Not in a position of authority.
I’m just disgusted that a BARRISTER thinks this is acceptable!
Yes, there was a “glorifying terrorism” act of some sort - not that Brown & co would have noticed.
And if I write to Gordon, he’ll only lose the letter!
;0)
I’ll have to look another time. It’s late! I see you’re a night owl too, eh?
February 4, 2008 at 3:24 am
perhaps if this man cant be prosecuted by criminal law he could be prosecuted in a civil court for endangering life
February 4, 2008 at 3:39 am
Don’t think so, margaret. But I’m going to have to look into this. Seriously. The apathetic average person doesn’t give a damn, or have the gumption to get off their lazy backside to do or say anything. Until it’s too late, of course. And then half of them - like Idiot Face here - would be cheering.
February 4, 2008 at 3:42 am
it just occured to me that you could write to blair at his offical office and gve the url to him he then could get theproper authorities to investigate as he is the victim of this outrageand would know who to contact like special branch or the antiterrorist squad or even those who are protecting him could be warned forarmed they have a betterchance of stoppingvthis and getting this idiot
February 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Hi margaret,
Yes, I’ve forwarded the information on to several authorities today, and to Mr Blair’s office.
I get this feeling they won’t do anything at all about it, because of fears of upsetting the civil liberties idiots.
I have tried to find out what I can do to raise this issue legally and what chances there’d be of success.
I’ve also contacted the Bar Council. Don’t expect they’d consider striking the bastard off! They might just let him work in the roughest courts in the country, where he’d obviously be comfortable venting his bile. I know what I’d like to do with this bile!
Will keep in contact with you.
February 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm
[...] Some idiot is trying get me prosecuted! . [...]
February 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm
my husband suggested in telling the press but i don’t think it’s a good idea as for blair i think he will do something as he doesn’t seem to be particularly bothered about thesse civil liberty groups .he upset a quite few of them when he was in office
February 4, 2008 at 4:36 pm
As hateful as this dreadful man is, I think you’ll find it impossible to prosecute as the judges are all in on it as well
February 4, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Looks like the terrorist sympathiser has noticed.
The press would have been quite able to get this information too. Since the internet is largely the refuge of all and sundry with a brain cell (well one or two of them have) the press ignore much of it. Anyway, it was easy to pick this information up.
Apart from that many in our great British press don’t give a damn. The only thing they are ready and willing to write about Blair is his obituary.
Who do you think TOLD the gullible fool in Lincoln’s Inn and his juvenile readers that Blair is the Devil Incarnate?
The Daily Mail, etc …
The Mail, under Paul Dacre, is as vile, politically motivated and bloody corrupt as the waste of an education who wrote the “Assassinate Blair ” atrocity.
Alastair Campbell last week described the Daily Mail as “evil” under Dacre. I think he is probably right.
And which publications are under their umbrella?
The Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday, The Evening Standard, London Metro, Irish Mail on Sunday and the advertising publication Loot.
Five of these six are read widely in London by Londoners! No wonder they can’t think objectively.
Well, we’ll see what happens. In the meantime, I hope to keep the little scrote concerned.
February 4, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Actually yes, I am totally in agreement with Noddy. The problem is that in this country the judges are on the sides of liberals and against decent working folk. My father worked in a mine until he was 50 and got lung disease. Now he needs help he finds it is all being spent on Polish immigrants and third world illegal workers.
What happens when the government tries to do something about it? the judges tell us it is against human rights law. Well what about us decent brits? No forget the judges they wont listen about this rat. And the police are as bad now to - they just let him off cos itd be to much work. In my day they’d have clumped a kid round the ear now its all about hug a hoodie. Political corectnes is gone mad in this country.
Blair would have got it sorted if hed had more time - now we got Brown who is just a bit average we cuold have got better if wed let Tony stay
February 4, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Hi Noddy,
The judges are all in on … what exactly? Backing Al Qaeda? Keeping civil righters sweet? Getting rid of Blair? Ignoring the law?
I’m interested.
What exactly do you mean?
February 4, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Not backing al qada but keeping civil writes people happy.
February 4, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Good find! What a miscreant… a barrister should know better. Good for you for chasing it up. I hope they listen.
February 4, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Well it makes me really angry how strong these civil rights people have got- you know that woman from Liberty or whatever it’s called. And the thing is the judges have to keep them sweet or the press will be all over them- a friend of mine knows quite a few of the key civil rights people. And you know lawyers - all they care about is keeping their money and position. They don’t give a damn about what really matters. Look at how they went to town over Blair when he said there were Weapons of Mass Destruction.
I think you should keep on at him.
February 4, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Hi Campbell.
Good name. (My mother’s maiden name.)
Thanks for you comments.
Tony tried for the last few years as PM trying to get over the message that things were moving the wrong way in British society. A lot of the time you needed to read between the lines.
He couldn’t say overtly that multiculturalism hadn’t worked as intended. Nor that the reason for that was the refusal of some ethnic groups to mix with the natives particularly by keeping their women at home and non-English speaking.
He couldn’t say because of several reasons. For a start - the left of Labour; fear of distancing the Muslim & minority Labour vote in the inner cities; the simple admission that it hadn’t worked; the lack of willingness or ability of Muslim leadership to LEAD on modernising British Islam; his motives would have been misread by those such as this barrister as attempting to distract attention from what THEY saw as his “anti-muslim” attack on Iraq … and so on.
But as usual no-one picked up the baton. He was, more or less, on his own.
The problems we have with the Human Rights Act are extensive. I’m frankly sick of hearing voices of such as Shami Chakrabarti CBE (June 2007) of Liberty, who has constantly campaigned against government’s anti-terror laws. She too was trained as a barrister. I’m sure she is a good woman, but why do we NEVER hear of her standing up for many in the indigenous population?
http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=113297&d=301&h=24&f=46
It’s always immigrants, legal or illegal, and suspected terrorists. Did she spend time holding Ruth Turner’s hand when HER rights were, by common consent, stamped on?
In case you’re wondering I would never EVER vote for the BNP or even UKiP. But I don’t see any political party in this country giving these issues the attention they deserve.
Cameron is just as quiet on all of this as Brown. And Clegg? Who?
February 4, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Hi Harry and Noddy,
Yep, Harry. I’ve now got the little scrag between my teeth. I can be a tenacious so and so.
Great to have so much support from good people in this country who have not been brainwashed.
Any further help or suggestions are always welcome.
————————————————–
Noddy - I echo your “Liberty woman” sentiments, and wrote something about it above before I noticed your message had come in.
The authorities need to sit up and take notice. And soon. They can’t depend on wallies begging Al Qaeda to blow us all up.
The natives are restless.
And on the WMD issue: the press and civil righters treatment of Blair was beneath contempt over WMDs. The whole world knew Saddam had them and the whole world was right. Apart from the anti-war, anti-Blair, anti-Bush, anti-courage types. He’d used them on the Kurds. The antis conflated what they “KNEW” was true, that Blair had lied over it all just to get parliamentary approval, with their need to trash him. And the self-righteous press coalition decided Blair’s honesty was the real issue.
What bloody fools!
I don’t believe he DID lie any more than did Bush or the UN when they too believed the intelligence.
But I tell you something - if he had, I’d rather that, than we sit on our superior ‘honest’ backsides saying we’ll do nothing proactive about terrorism until the bastards poison London’s water or start to kill our leaders and our democracies.
Btw, I’m reading the Litvinenko “Death of A Dissident” story at the moment. His father said he had been killed by a “tiny nuclear bomb”. The HPA described it a a “major dose” of radioactivity.
Because of the radioactivity he cannot be cremated, if that is his family’s wish, for 28 years.
INTERESTING FACT
One gram of polonium is enough to kill half a million people.
Weapons of mass destruction come in many forms.
And the WMD we need to deal with first in this country? The lies and denials of such as this barrister.
February 4, 2008 at 6:34 pm
I dont think ukip is so bad. I dont think id vote for them but at least they have us in their minds. Maybe if Tony was president of the EU hed make them unecessary and make the EU more frendly to the US who are the goods guys in the wurld. Think about how much terorism has been stoped by hard interogation at guntanamo - sure some were inocent but most were not & remember what churchill said “its better that a few innocent suffer than all the innocent suffer”.
February 4, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Yes, well UKiP are not the BNP.
The reason I mention that, though, is to reasure people that I’m the average voter - floating at the moment, since Blair went and I see no real leadership. I’m neither a left or right wing extremist. I have many Muslim friends and I have no prejudices, as far as I know. I’m a pro European who loves America and its people.
Churchill spoke wisely:
“I have always felt that a politician is to be judged by the animosities he excites among his opponents.”
“A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”
“Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed. ”
Sir Winston Churchill, British politician (1874 - 1965)
February 4, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Ukip are pretty good I think. The EU is such a pain — constant bickering and all they ever do is make stupid rules that annoy everyone. Did you know I can’t buy a liferaft for my boat without spending nearly £1000 because the EU banned all the cheap ones? Nevermind saving lives though — making money for french corporations is far more important.
I hope Blair gives them the what for when he’s running the gig — can’t wait!
February 4, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Harry - Nigel Farage comes over well, but I just don’t approve in the same way that I don’t approve of the policy of withdrawing from the EU.
MISSION STATEMENT
From:
http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=26
The UK Independence Party is committed to withdrawing Britain from the European Union. As the debate on the new Constitution has now made clear, the EU agenda is complete political union with all the main functions of national government taken over by the bureaucratic institutions of Brussels.
But yes - Tony will fix it if he gets the job. I sincerely hope he does, but he’s up against it, from ALL sides (except, maybe, Sarkozy)!
February 4, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Hi all,
Just went and read that lawyer’s blog again. He’s such a self-obsessed smart-arse. I might post something on there.
February 4, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Noddy - did you do a search to find the smart-arse? Haven’t put his url on here for the reasons I said at the start, but since he’s done me such a favour today - and my visitors have already trebled - maybe I should do the same for him.
He’s a completely obnoxious self important nonentity. I suppose that’s what makes him so envious of Blair, eh?
February 4, 2008 at 8:39 pm
I agree. Tony could definitely fix it. It’s a pity he’s not still PM — there’s still a bunch of stuff that needs to be fixed and I’m pretty sure he could do it all if he just had enough time. Can’t believe Brown pushed him out.
If he gets made president then maybe we should stay in — otherwise we should definitely be out. I mean just look at the constitution. It’s the same damn thing as it was before! They just changed a few words! Can’t trust em.
February 4, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Harry,
I think there’s been a lot of media hype about the treaty/constitution. To the extent that we would NOT be voting for that at all if we had a referendum, but just for Europe per se.
The press - AGAIN!- Sorry, they’re my bete noire - winds us up about Europe and we are only ever half-hearted members due to that.
Time we got on with it! Blair could help make us true Europeans. They’re crying out for our kind of de-regulated market, and we can show the way.
Anyway, we need to be a stronger force in the world in future decades for reasons of trade, energy, climate concerns, Africa, poverty, terror threats etc.
The USA/China/India/Middle East/Europe.
Where do we fit in?
We’re not Switzerland, so we need to get this sorted.
At least with Blair we’d have a committed European in charge who knows who our friends are.
As for Brown pushing Blair out - it’s an amazing story full of contradictions and brotherly love and hatred. Never having been a Labour party member I didn’t know all that much about it. Now I think I could probably be a Mastermind contestant on it. Once I had started, about 18 months ago, it became fully absorbing. I’ve devoured books and web information on the subject. But my admiration for the younger one increased exponentially.
I really think he has grown hugely into the statesman he is through his experiences. And to think I hardly paid attention for most of his time as PM! Now I think he is the “compleat” (to use the angling expression) politician.
What a thing to do - dump such a man in his prime.
February 4, 2008 at 9:31 pm
His blog is very easy to find. In fact I think you may have made an error blogging his dammed sight (forgive rude language - im a bit iritated) as he is more visble on google now
I have just written him a very nasty private email!! hoho i’ll tell you if he replies but he wont cos he is to chicken to face people who now the truth.
I started by saying “Your a moron” and then let him have it
Bit juvunile really I suppose.
February 4, 2008 at 9:37 pm
This Lawyer is a nasty evil piece of work it is bad enough Tony is risking his life out in the middle east without a idiot like him inciting extremists.
maybe people should treat this man with the contempt he deserves.
I have always said intellegent people have no common sense.
February 4, 2008 at 9:46 pm
My dear “Keep Tony Blair” friend,
It was hard for this American woman to read that Barrister’s filthy ravings and rantings. Thank you for explaining the difference between a Barrister
and a solisitor and about Lincoln’s Inn.
I have seen this same ugly rhetoric written about our President and everyone around him that is decent. I really and truly believe that this person is not a Barrister. In fact I do not believe that he is even British. I suggest that he is a radical moslum (we all agree that he is being inciteful, right?) It’s an old communist trick. To incite; to incite hatred, to incite confusion and to disrupt the general public. It is the same as our liberal media here in the States. It is all about negativity. I have found that there are in realty more human beings like you and me than there are beings such as the little bastard. I have also found that the best way to deal with them is to pray for them. (Bare with me now). The Lord told Job to “bless” his enemies and then God will take care of the enemies.
You’d be amazed at what happens.
I will be remembering you in prayer and praying that the Lord will continue to bless you with wisdom of words and yes, I will pray for our little bastard, too. I will pray that the Lord will bless him with the truth and the truth is here.
Much respect,
Arlene
USA
February 4, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Campbell, Karen & Arlene - can’t keep up with the comments tonight. It’s gone a little crazy for some inexplicable reason. And I’m still waiting for the hate mail!
So if you don’t mind, I’ll reply to you all at once.
Well, Campbell, ‘juvenile’ is right up his street; so he’ll get it.
Yes, I may have inadvertently sent extra traffic there, but well, he has reciprocated generously. Very good of the young upstart.
I’m trying to build two websites tonight - NO chance!
————————————————————
Karen - Contempt? Effusively! Most definitely!
I wonder if we are dealing with a normal person here. Mentally ill? Possibly. A real barrister? Possibly not, as Arlene says below.
But these evil bastards need to be outed, whatever.
I’ll wait to see what the Bar Council say in their reply to my e-mail. And if they don’t reply, I’ll write to them.
————————————————————
Arlene - thank you. I wish I had your deep faith. Perhaps this is how Mr Blair deals with it.
But I DO, despite such people as this, have faith in humanity - most of them, much of the time.
Thank you again for your kind and pure thoughts.
February 4, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Arlene,
REGARDING THE CREDIBILITY OF THIS BARRISTER IDIOT
It’s tempting to think that such despicable stuff is all under false pretext. BUT - and it’s quite a large but - if you scroll down to the bottom of the comments at his page there are many links on there regarding law, as well as (paid?) ads for legal companies such as Symonds, Mowbray/Woodwards, Lawrite and Fentons. These are all real lawyers.
Perhaps we should e-mail the kosher (ooh! how un-pc) lawyers and ask if they are happy about advertising on such an amoral site.
February 4, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Following on from Arlene’s useful definition of ‘incitement’ above, I thought I’d help you out with a couple of useful definitions:
a) ‘Sarcasm’:
1. A cutting, often ironic remark.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
Y’see, Geeklawyer didn’t actually MEAN that he wanted Bliar to be assassinated. That was an ironic comment, intended to make a point. If you’re not sure about the meaning of ‘ironic’, please consult a dictionary - just to get you started, it doesn’t mean ’sort of like iron’.
I’ve been in fits of laughter over some of the comments here, mind. As a barrister myself, I’m thoroughly glad that people like Geeklawyer raises the issue he does. We need intelligent, well-informed political comment in Britain now more than ever; if this is the alternative, forgive me for continuing to read Geeklawyer’s blog. Even if that does make me a gay Muslim communist extremist pinko liberal cheese-eating surrender monkey…
…rather that than a moron, I fancy.
(Incidentally, you’ll note that Geeklawyer’s kept all your comments up on the post…ten to one says that you won’t be following Voltaire’s famous comment quite so rigorously.)
February 4, 2008 at 10:53 pm
i was watchin a dvd earlier tonight perhaps you could prosecute this cachi( yery bad shit in welsh)soliciting for murder as some iman was prosecuted in london in2005. i pray for blair every night when he’s in the middle east after this i will pray for him where ever he is
February 4, 2008 at 11:36 pm
El Presidente! Sir!
HERE COMES THE JUDGE … I mean …. DEFENDING LAWYER!
So nice of you to honour us with your presence, m’Lud. We bow at your feet with humble, unbridled gratitude that you’d deign to bestow on us, undeserving plebs, a moment of your precious time.
IT’S ALL A BIT OF A LAUGH, REALLY
YEH!
Fits of laughter? As a barrister, and if you share chambers with whatsisname, you’re a laugh-a-minute anyway. You hardly need to come here for a giggle.
No, I think you and he fully understand that if GeekThing had said,
“My mother-in-law is such a big-mouthed, fat-arsed so and so (to paraphrase him on someone else) and I wish somebody’d knock her off before the next time she’s due to visit us” … we’d all have got the joke.
WHO he was referring to makes this an entirely different matter. Geek clearly, personally, can’t stand the Blairs, and that’s HIS business. But Tony Blair is an international figure, recent PM, under high level security because of threats on his life from terrorists and others, perhaps. The last thing any of us needs is for an impressionable 19-year-old to read this junk and conclude that killing him is what the legal profession in this country really wants. (Whether or not some of you do!)
It’s the “responsibility” test.
And Geek has failed it. Big time.
BTW - WHAT WAS THE “ISSUE” GEEK RAISED?
I think I missed “THE ISSUE” in his article. Seemed more of a personal diatribe of bitterness and abuse, culminating with a “why don’t the incompetents at AQ kill the bastard” (Oh, yes. ‘Irony’.)
Do me a favour. I wasn’t born yesterday. The fool may not have MEANT to incite murder, but that, in this world of mad misguided miscreants looking for a BANG to go out on, is (legally), imho, what he was doing.
So Voltaire won. Your friend in all his legal complexities wrapped up in semantics and ignorance, lost.
Or might yet.
Anyway, you owe me a tenner!
———————————————–
Margaret - keep praying. You and Arlene both.
What a way he has to live.
Bloody hell!
February 5, 2008 at 12:08 am
I actually quite enjoyed that response, but I can’t agree with you - if the ‘impressionable 19-year-old’ you mention really did come to the conclusion that the legal profession wanted Blair dead, I suspect he’d have trouble tying his own shoelaces unassisted, let alone coming up with and executing (no pun intended) a fiendish murder plot.
And you were doing so well, too, right up until you bracketed the word ‘legally’ in your argument. Legally speaking, that isn’t incitement to murder, or even close. It might be a good idea to check on these things, if you’re planning on a civil action (not a civil ‘prosecution’; they only happen in criminal cases); having your pleadings come back covered in judicial laugh-spittle isn’t a pleasant experience (or so I imagine. Ahem.).
I don’t share chambers with GL, by the way. I think the issue he was on about was the ex-Dear Leader’s desire to become EU president (a job he’d be welcome to, in my book; you’d need a mind like a corkscrew to get your head round some of the initiatives). It may have been somewhat vitriolic, but hey, it’s his blog, he’s entitled to be just as vituperative in criticising Blair as you are in defending him.
That said, thank you for at least recognising that you’re undeserving plebs; that raised a smile.
PS: The Al Qaida/Al Queda/Al Q’aida thing is academic; it’s a translation from one of the Arabic language and as such has no fixed spelling. Al Qaida seems to be becoming the norm, but it’s not sufficiently entrenched to berate someone over yet.
February 5, 2008 at 12:25 am
Well of course, if Tony were in charge of it, it would be fine. He’d bring some real gravitas and integrity to it — they’re a pack of lying hounds at the moment.
Arlene, Margaret — reassuring to see you here! I’m so glad that there’s there are others who’ve been saved to pray for the geeklawyer, and Tony too — I think they both need God’s help, but in rather different ways..!
February 5, 2008 at 4:34 am
[...] In the Blue corner In the Red corner [...]
February 5, 2008 at 10:43 am
I’m personally with the calm reasoning of El Presidente , as opposed to the the rambling, pseudo- right wing, half UKIP, half slightly pink, painfully correct diatribe posted here to date. The Cult of Blair is alive and well, and, it would seem, rather wild eyed about a storm that isnt even in a teacup.
Do you people HONESTLY believe that TB gives a flying *F**K about whats bieng said here? Indeed, do you honestly believe that he gives a flying *F**K about you, or your opinions? I am quite sure that the man has had more death threats made against him - written and spoken - than you’ve had hot dinners and, were he to attempt to pursue every SINGLE threat made against him as an incitement to hatred his suit would have been thrown out of the Civil Court for vexatious litigation; it certainly would not run in the Criminal Courts.
Consider his present job - “Ambassador” in the Middle East Peace Process; no death threats bieng made whatsoever in that arena, I suppose. Oh wait a minute - perhaps there ARE ! Shall we sue the various parties concerned ? (bit of a bugger that one, bieng out of jurisdiction and the like)
The man was a political opportunist, a charismatic one, I grant you, but an opportunist nonetheless; lets none of us forget that he actually stood as a TORY MP in his early career.Had things been a bit different he could well now be the leader of the Conservative Party; would you have felt the same about him then? Quite probably; your politics are as inconstant and as inconsistent as the Wind bieng blown around this forum.
Ultimately, you are all as full of hot air as TB ; your agruments carry no substance and you have nothing better to do with your time than witter on about another’s right to speak in a free, ironic and it must be said amusing fashion.
One final point. If all barristers are part of a grand conspiracy and will stick together no matter what, it is quite likely that TB and GL, bieng members of the same inn of court, are both lunching together at the aforementioned and having a bloody good laugh at what’s been said here.
February 5, 2008 at 11:00 am
What a disgraceful thing for a UK barrister to say, truly disgraceful what is this country coming to when a barrister says things like that !!. This sort of comment you would expect from the gutter press but from a UK barrister, words fail me.
Glad to know that you have sent it on to the authorities, hope you get somewhere with it, but somehow feel that you won’t be able to. These comments and threats should not be allowed and yes the Treason act ought to be brought upon this person, it won’t though sad to say.
Things do seem to be getting worse in this country as regards authorities allowing these people to say all these horrendous things and make threats, there doesn’t seem to be any redress to these issues at all for fear of offending the people who say them !! crazy truly crazy !! The authorities including the Goverment should be able to within the law confront these people and get them to answer for their conduct.It has got so bad that the Goverment are afraid to act because of being of out step with the Human rights lawyers and the left, which is ridiculous to say the least.
You probably have read about this in the papers re the Goverment issuing a phrasebook to all their departments in how to deal with the Muslim commuinity and telling them not to mention “War on Terror” for fearing of offending them!!! The terrorists are now meant to be called “Crimminal murderers, thugs etc but not terrorists, watch out we might offend Crimmianl murderers and thugs what are we going to do then?? !!! This is so stupid it is beyond belief , why oh why we can’t identify our enemies, we need to because we need to know who we are up against. I have often thought many times over the past few months what Tony Blair would have said or done, one things for sure I doubt very much he would have changed the word Terrorist for Crimminal murderer or wiped out the phrase “War on Terror”. So if we can’t call a spade a spade how on earth are we going to confront a UK barrister with the comments he has made about Tony Blair.
The other story that seems to be gaining ground with commentators in the papers is that we should get our troops out of Afghanistan. This is a crazy idea and one that should not gather steam, we need to be there in Afghanistan for sure,no matter how difficult it is, we must be there. Like the story of not dealing with people who say horrendous things, and not wanting to offend the muslim population, this is another issue that because we are in Afghanistan that is what is annoying the terrorist and so, we must go home !! it is all our fault !! I only hope that there are some Tony Blairs in the Brown Goverment who have the stomach to fight of these extremists within our country and outside of it.
It will interesting and revealing to know if you get anywhere with your reporting of the UK barrister. Would be great if you would keep us all informed, as I am sure no only myself but others would love to know the outcome.
From Shaz
February 5, 2008 at 11:13 am
Given the anti-judge, pro-Blair stance on here - what are your predictions for this chap?
http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=131072
February 5, 2008 at 12:08 pm
hii, I just wanted to say that that article isn’t intelligent El President , as you say it is.
What’s intelligent about someone who would use the facade of a well-meaning polemic to circulate his rather distasteful and slanderous views??
Real intelligence is about being able to make observations and express views with humility and some remorse for the fragility of human nature.
and also El President, if GeekyLawyer can freely denigrate someone in such a public forum, he gives us scope to attack him and his obviously perverse and refractory views regardless of whether you find it amusing or not.
I am 18 and even though I dont agree that I am a ‘impressionable 19 year old’ I thoroughly agree with the sentiment of ‘keeptonyblairforpm’ as youths nowadays do feel estranged from the ambivalence of the political arena in society now, and this sort of stuff (geekylawyers blogs) deters people from articulating their stances in politics.
Thankyou
February 5, 2008 at 12:13 pm
sorry , just another comment to say
I completely agree with you Shaz, you have voiced all that I have always thought. Thanks
February 5, 2008 at 12:32 pm
If anyone should be hung it’s Blair for handing over our countries governance to a foreign power (The EU). The news that he maybe EU president is terrible, don’t you see that he is trying to sell us out to the EU Liberal Elite?
Clever Blair struck the Treason Act 1795 from the statue books in the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act. You are calling for it to be brought back to get this Barrister, but it’s Blair who got rid of it in the first place.
February 5, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Harry, I don’t think praying will save Geeklawyer. I think he’s too far gone. I believe some of his lawyer friends are noticing now. I’m sure he won’t be in favour for making them look stupid.
February 5, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Hear, hear!
Arrest the spineless little weasel. I wonder if he’d have had the guts to publicly say the same about Saddam in Iraq a few years ago? No? Thought not!
Anyway, we’re just two months away from the fifth anniversary of his toppling. Rejoice, rejoice, rejoice!
February 5, 2008 at 1:22 pm
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
thankyou thankyou thankyou I haven’t laughed so much in ages
February 5, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Hi El Pres (are you Elvis, btw?)
In the way of the articulate barrister you’ve tried to divert attention from the REAL issue here, by criticising other matters.
Whether or not a 19 year old can tie his shoelaces (or a suicide belt round his middle) is NOT the point.
The criticism I make is that someone in the legal profession thinks it’s all right to air the thoughts he did, even (if) in jest.
It’s, no doubt, arguable as to whether he was serious, or just trying to sound controversial. And ignorance of the law - as you will know - is not an excuse.
But it’s the first time anyone in one of the ‘pillars of the land’ has said such a thing, in my experience. Now if he’d said (”only joking, of course”
or if just one of his early respondents had said “hang on a minute, GL” I’d have clicked away and forgotten about it.
But neither happened. Thus the concerns.
As to whether or not this is criminally chargeable as “incitement”, well, you would say that wouldn’t you?
I refer people to this, from the Terrorism Act, 2006:
——————————————————-
(2) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he publishes a statement to which this section applies or causes another to publish such a statement; and
(b) at the time he publishes it or causes it to be published, he—
(i) intends members of the public to be directly or indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate acts of terrorism or Convention offences; or
(ii) is reckless as to whether members of the public will be directly or indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate such acts or offences.
(3) For the purposes of this section, the statements that are likely to be understood by members of the public as indirectly encouraging the commission or preparation of acts of terrorism or Convention offences include every statement which—
(a) glorifies the commission or preparation (whether in the past, in the future or generally) of such acts or offences; and
(b) is a statement from which those members of the public could reasonably be expected to infer that what is being glorified is being glorified as conduct that should be emulated by them in existing circumstances.
——————————————————-
Whole Act here -
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060011_en_1
Yes I went back to his little palace of merry frolics and noticed that it had started off as a moan about the unstoppable Blair, in amongst GL’s chatting up some female visitor. Must be so frustrating for such as your mouthy, sexually obsessed friend, to have so little to work on in comparison to Blair ;0(
Since you guys are supposed to be wordsmiths - that’s why people employ you; can’t be for your charm and political nous - it seemed relevant to draw attention to the AQ spelling business. I don’t think my point was lost on others here. Let me repeat - it is NEVER spelt with a “u” after the “q”. That’s peculiarly English.
WE can all google. Aren’t we all amazingly clever?
“Al-Qaeda (also al-Qaida or al-Qa’ida or al-Qa’idah)”
Oh, and while I’m being a pain about spelling & semantics - one can’t be “vituperative” …. in defending someone. Oxymoronic.
All right, Oxy?
And this,
“… but it’s not sufficiently entrenched to berate someone over yet.”
WHAT! The poor lamb.
I’ll have to find something else to berate him over.
Hard one that! Struggling here. I’ll think of something …
Another litle point. It’s clear that your friend subscribes to the view that the terror threat is all dreamt up. [Wonder if he ever watches any other cases going on outside of his own domain, the one with the full-length mirror.]
Yesterday’s news, for example -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7226425.stm
Terrorism is not an invention of Blair or Bush or anyone in western governments.
Blair has probably been high on the hit list since 9/11. He’s used to it. But I refuse to get used to lawyers like GL.
The secret services aren’t actually making it up that there are thousands of groups and individuals under surveillance, with charges in the pipeline. Perhaps that’s why we haven’t been hit since 7/7.
Credit where it’s due.
February 5, 2008 at 2:49 pm
BlairSupporter. I’ve seen more intelligent comments on public lavatory walls than on that sad site.
Stop feeding the low life.
February 5, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Harry, Shaz, Roubella, Usefully Employed, UKIP Supporter, Noddy, Shamik Das, anonymous coward.
Thanks for your contributions. Shaz - my sentiments completely, and I think the lawyers would be surprised if they knew my original political leanings! Shamik, Harry, Noddy & Roubella - all very wise comments, imho.
Yours, Roubella, is a breath of fresh air. Sorry if I insulted teenagers by mentioning the ‘fictional’ 19-year-old in that regard. YOU are not impressionable, clearly, and you are not being manipulated. A lot of teenagers are these days, sadly, as we can see any day on YouTube.
Nice to give anonymous coward something to laugh about. Though if he’s come from GL’s site, why did he bother? It’s a laugh a minute over there.
UKIP Supporter - well, my remark about bringing back the death penalty was tongue-in-cheek. It was made to match the tone GL was using, only not as personalised as his disgraceful stuff. I did NOT call for GL’s neck specifically (as you will notice if you read it again). I’m not THAT daft!
We won’t agree on the political direction for our country, as UKiP wants to take us out of the EU, but ever since the days of the British Empire we’ve been moving unstoppably towards the rest of our geographical neighbours. Unless we had decided to become another Switzerland (which might have been an option once, but it’s too late now) ALL governments have seen the inevitable. Personally I’m proud to be from the European tradition. The culture of Olympic and democratic Greece, as well as the art and music of Michelangelo & Mozart. We are in reality the bithplaces of democracy and the arts.
Anyway, as I recall half of our trade is with the rest of the EU.
Oh and Usefully Employed, I’m not anti-judge or the legal profession. I’m actually very pro. Just very disappointed as to the depths some of them seem to have sunk. But it’s not all their fault. Governments make the laws by which they make their judgements.
Get your EU President’s hat on asap Mr Blair and sort them all out. The Human Rights Act might be one of the first we should look at.
February 5, 2008 at 3:17 pm
P.S. Added a couple of contributions from our worthy legal profession, via GL seemingly, that I had somehow overlooked in the scrum. The short link will take you somewhere you may not wish to go, eventually.
But that’s free speech for you. And who am I to deny the law that?
After all, some commenter at the linked QC’s page thinks we’re all religious nutters! Now where have I heard that raised before? Was it in defence or prosecution?
(Fun!)
;0)
February 5, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Just because we trade with the EU, it does not mean that we have to scrap our constitution. Blair has been a big supporter of the new EU constitution and now Brown is signing us up to the Lisbon treaty without a referendum.
Blair wants to destroy British Monarchy and Democracy and place it with worthless EU bureaucrats, which he could lead. He is a power hungry traitor who should be locked up.
February 5, 2008 at 6:01 pm
UKIP Supporter: We’re not quite scrapping our unwritten constitution. It is ever-evolving as you know and does not comprise of one single document. It comprises laws and many changes made over centuries and many believe it is flexible because of its unwritten nature.
I can see why some are concerned that an EU “constitution” would take over (in written form) from a British unwritten one.
But this is a “treaty” and there have been plenty of those, importantly by two Conservative PMs - Heath in 1971 taking Britain into the EEC …
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicsobituaries/story/0,,1530964,00.html
and the 1992 Maastricht Treaty in Major’s time, 1992 -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Treaty. And Thatcher, despite her Euro sceptic instincts, and her Bruges speech, moved Europe closer, with her vision of a wider, not deeper EU, as has been Blair’s.
It’s easy to castigate motives, and I’ve seen plenty of that thrown at Blair. But I don’t think he is working for his own betterment as far as the EU is concerned. After all “what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”
And wiping Britain off the map as a political entity would have that equivalence.
It is NOT going to happen any more than France or Germany will be subsumed. But it IS going to change. The future of Europe, in Blair’s hands (for a bit), if that happens, does not concern me.
But the UK press put the frighteners on us years if not decades ago over the rest of Europe. I see no sign of that changing. Yet.
A referendum, if held over the “treaty/constitution” would be about staying in or getting out. Nothing else. The anti press would have a field day, and the rest of us would have to pick up the fallout.
Disingenuous, imho.
…………………………………………………………..
And to Sam - wiil try to refrain from over-feeding. But I’ve always had a soft spot for the intellectually starved.
February 5, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Hello Blairsupporter. I’ve had a quick look at the geek site, but really it’s not a place that rational people (who are represented here) want to spend any time is it?
I have to agree with Sam that life’s too short to waste it reading the arrogant silliness, and these sites do only attract a certain type of audience don’t they?
I rather think that regular members of the public don’t even think in the sort of terms expressed there, let alone transcribe them into the public forum, and I expect that the geek and his cohorts (if genuine) are not representative of the trade, just a couple of Buller types having a ‘joke’; poor taste I know, but only what you would expect.
I think you’ve taken the right action by drawing to the attention/shaming those practices who promote themselves there into withdrawing their advertising. It’s an unsuitable place to market their legal services – and under the circumstances one would not be inclined to engage any firm represented on that site.
If I were to offer you advice it would be to delete the lot off and don’t waste your time, energy and good page space in an argument with such idiots.
Incidentally, Steven Glover at the ‘M’ had an outrageous piece about TB the other day, which was predictably too stupidly ridiculous to respond to, bit like the geek Hmmm?
February 5, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Yes there have been treaties before in the past, but none like the ones we see coming in at the moment. I don’t know how you can call yourself British after what Blair has done to sell us out to the EU. He has also brought in these EU Human rights laws which allow these liberal elite conspirators to get away with things like this Barrister says.
February 5, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Hello Jenny,
Yes, you’re right. I just thought it was worth drawing attention to SOME in a profession which most of us tend to believe is rational. I didn’t realise they’d started calling them to the Bar at 12.
Worrying to think our solicitors normally find us a barrister. If you’re in London, and you need one, it might be worthwhile saying to your solicitor, “I don’t want Geek Lawyer”!
Steven Glover at the “M”. Is that The Mail? That piece of gutterpress read, possibly, by all good geeks?
February 5, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Actually, a barrister is not any steps up from a solicitor. In fact, they don’t even take as long to train as a solicitor.
February 5, 2008 at 7:09 pm
You’re absolutely right, Marcin. I just put that in to catch the so-and-sos out! None of them complained. They’re playing games.
No, untrue!
I should have made it clearer. It looks like solicitor to barrister is a natural progression, which it isn’t. Thanks for clearing that up.
Further information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrister
February 5, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Ah well UKIP, I’m British all right.
Blair hasn’t “sold” us out to Europe at all. We’re part of Europe, and the progress may not be to all of our likings, far too slow for me - 50+ years - but that doesn’t make us any less British.
The Human Rights thing IS an issue for a lot of us. One of the barristers/legal beavers at the other site extols it hugely. I think he’s hoping to potect Geek’s back under that sort of pretext.
I’m not completely against it in principle. It’s just that it seems to have had some unintended consequences. Blair knows about them
Once and if he is Mr President, EU, I have little doubt that that will be pursued by more than just the British. It’s messed up other countries’ attempts to deal with certain problems too.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_1
A greater and wider EU - a natural progression, imho.
February 5, 2008 at 7:44 pm
I just reread your comments and I agree with that integration thing and I’m sure your not anti-muslim either.
I am a bit i reckon but only a bit, but some of those people are OK. Down my way we have an indian takeaway and I go there a lot and every time I say to the owner bloke who is a Hindu or muslim “I’ll have a Shiva and pork vindaloo Mohamed, and I don’t care if it is the festival of ramadamadingdong!” He always smiles at that everytime I say it cos he’s got a sense of humour - unlike them loony ones on the marches.
Try telling that joke to them and you got a problem. And he speaks english and is integrated, unlike his wife who like you say doesnt or pretends not to but if you left the takeaway without paying youd see if she did or didnt!
Tony had some good ideas on integration but didnt get time to implement em. All this terrorism would go away if these loons become english properly like us. Idiots like that lawyer make the problem worse by letting them not have to do it.
February 5, 2008 at 10:55 pm
That blog was just nonsense and it’s not worth even to be discussed.
We all know, if we want to be objective, who TB is and what is his legacy. He is highly regarded in US and he is considered one of the best european politicians in Europe itself. It’s only the british-not all of them-that don’t seem to realize what important political figure they had.
What make me sad is this outrageous language so often used when Tony Blair has to be judged. I remember George Galloway justifying an attack by a suicide bomber against Blair as retaliation against his decision to go to Iraq, not to mention those pathetic bloggers in the guardian who spend their time insulting Blair whatever he does even as former PM, that is private citizen.
If Britain wants to be the great country it deserves to be, it’s better to change language and give credit to a person who did his utmost to make Britain. So please, just a lesson of humility.
Blair would be a great european president and Britain should be proud of it.
February 5, 2008 at 11:55 pm
Thank you Campbell.
Your words and the comment from our American friend PortswooD got me thinking.
Perhaps it’s time we took a page out of the US’s book on immigration.
They’re a land of immigrants (although we are too, if you go far enough back), yet America seems to absorb its disparate peoples so much more effortlessly and naturally than we do.
Yes there are issues, not yet resolved in the USA. And one of the major issues still is the reason Obama probably won’t win the democratic candidature in the end, despite his present position.
BUT Americans of all shades and religions feel American first.
It is now the thing in the UK, if you are a Muslim, to feel Muslim first. I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel Christian first, and never have. I’m British! I wouldn’t dream of identifying myself or others by religion.
But we failed to notice when we should have, in our conceit and tolerance (a potent mixture), that others didn’t think like that. They had different priorities inculcated from childhood.
And, imho, being “muslim” first in Britain, is not innocent, devout religiosity. Hindu, Jew, and others yes. But Islam has been hi-jacked by a political agenda, and this agenda has been around since at least 1953 when Hizb ut-Tahrir was launched with its worldwide caliphate ambitions.
And the lack of structured leadership at the top of Islam means that they don’t always sing from the same book.
‘I have no country’, wrote a British Muslim I read recently. ‘I am muslim, and wherever I am, is my country.’
Sounds innocent, but has the potential to be the complete opposite.
The Americans are much more religious than we are and yet they are still ‘Amurican’ first. But somehow or other, despite Britain’s open-door and liberal multi-culturalism, it’s gone wrong here.
LACK OF PRIDE
I believe it is the lack of pride in our country and in our traditions, which we were encouraged to lose from at least around the 1970s, with an embarrassed shrug.
We were too careless. We wanted to assuage incomers’ fears of their old colonial masters, with a “Don’t worry about us. We’re not the Americans. You won’t have to sing God Save The Queen, or salute the flag.”
“And our soldiers .. ah, forget ‘em. When they return from Northern Ireland or Cyprus or wherever they’ve been … er …doing whatever … they’ll get out of their uniforms, stick them in the attic never to be brought out again, and they’ll be civvies in no time. You won’t be reminded of our (wicked, colonial, military) past. Don’t worry, dears. We’re not proud.”
And in losing that pride, we lost a lot more.
You can see it in the contributions on that lawyer’s blog. Intelligent, educated people sounding superciliously self-satisfied, cynical and oh-so-wise. Knowing it all and yet, knowing nothing.
DON’T LET THEM FOOL YOU - IT DIDN’T START WITH IRAQ
The fundamentalist exclusivity of minorities hasn’t just happened since 2003. True, the Iraq invasion following 9/11 became the catalyst around which many gathered hungrily, ready to use that as an excuse for kicking the host country in the teeth. We, and especially our leaders, were ‘nu-colonialists, oil-grabbing, big business, secret society, greedy bloodsuckers, who cared less for the deaths of a thousand non-caucasians, than for running over a rabbit caught in the car headlights.’
And the liberal left and the pompous press say - “OK. You’re right. We were wrong. Our leaders are evil, and always were. But the rest of us are big enough to admit it; we can take it. And yes, of course we agree the Prime Minister is beneath contempt. But we can’t hang him. Sorry. no, honestly, sorry. We wish we could.”
Here, probably for all the right reasons, and due to the REAL enemy - the liberal left intelligentsia, even 20 years ago, our governments have taken the line that they can bring their culture with them, and we Brits are big and generous enough to absorb all. In the meantime, they can choose to NOT absorb us. And that’s how it’s gone.
With earlier immigration from the colonies it was different. Many of those people felt proud to be British colonials and wanted more than anything to be British citizens.
In recent years, there wasn’t always that happy history. Even from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh there had been many problems and conflicts and arguments over land sovereignty. Some, though only a small minority, brought that bitterness with them, waiting for the day it could be rekindled.
That day might sadly be upon us.
February 6, 2008 at 12:14 am
Campbell,
You can’t make jokes about Mohammed. He was a prophet. I don’t think they are right about Jesus but Mohammed was a prophet and we must respect him.
Mohammed is wrong and the bible tells us that only Jesus can save us, but he was was right about some things. As a Christian, my view is that Mohammed was a good man but God intended him to lead us to Jesus, and for that he deserves our love. I think integration is about respecting their religion but leading them to Jesus.
PortswoodD, couldn’t agree more. Galloway is naive. Do you remember that visit to Iraq where he said he salutes their indefatigable spirit? Awful — he should be supporting our troops. A friend of mine has a son out there and he is risking his life to bring them democracy. How can Galloway not realise the damage he’s doing? I mean, if he spent more time in Parliament instead of in the Big Brother house, maybe he’d have a clue…
February 6, 2008 at 12:54 am
Noddy,
Didn’t notice your comment before, sorry! No one is ever too far gone for prayer. He is steeped in sin, he probably corrupts all around him. I mean look at that Miss Robinson who sending her bikini pictures to all and sundry — so unchaste.
February 6, 2008 at 1:09 am
Hello PortswooD,
And thanks so much for your kind words.
I too feel deep sorrow about some of my fellow countrymen who clearly think that skinning alive is too good for Blair.
We have so many idiots in this country who don’t recognise a good man and a great leader when he walks amongst them. And God knows they’ve had enough experience of the other sort.
It’s the uncouth courseness of even the ‘intellectuals’ that bothers me. Amongst other things. Whether or not we are religious, we seem to have lost any gentleness, or basic human compassion. It’s only ‘cool’ to be critical. Always. About everything. Moaning Minnies.
A miserable lot really - at least the Guardian type writer is.
They hide, eyes half-covered behind the screen of righteous indignation where all is clear to THEM, personally, but hidden somehow to anyone with whom they disagree.
There must be a psychological name for the condition. They can’t all be stupid intolerant, narrow-minded bigots. I’m sure many of them had to look up Iraq or Afghanistan or Palestine (sic) on a Google map, and yet they scream about the British & American ‘abusers’ and forget the atrocities before we ever got there. And at the same time they tell us that WE do not understand the lessons of history.
I suppose ‘Holocaust Deniers’ comes to mind.
The Guardian CiF-ers! Israel haters. Basically fools on the whole. I wrote this page here some time ago, allowing them the honour of being mentioned in it.
http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2007/07/23/tony-blair-obituary-by-george-w-bush/
And as for the “glaikit scunner” Galloway (a Glasgow term of abuse I know he will NOT enjoy)…. if any readers here do not know what he said about informing the authorities if he knew of an assassination plot against Blair, you should take a look at this. Galloway’s a disgrace, but sadly not on his own.
http://robnewman.typepad.com/rob_newman/2006/05/kill_tony_blair.html
Well, I for one am VERY proud of Tony Blair. And he makes me proud to be British, when previously I was just well … drifting along without thinking about it.
He’ll be a great president of the EU, if it happens. He’s only just entering the next phase of his political life. We need to keep him safe from fools, fundamentalist madmen and the intolerant of the world; oh, and lawyers.
Thanks again for sharing your appreciation with us.
February 6, 2008 at 3:56 am
what’s this about blair being a tory in his early career as an earlier commentator said. he never tried to be a tory mp but his father did. and to blair supporter i will always pray for blair to be safe to god.as for other commentators like el presidente what if neighbours of blair or others died in this attack that he is contemplating for blair something i hope will never happen
February 6, 2008 at 7:36 am
hi margaret,
Your comment is with regard to one of the followers of GL - kika, above. I omitted to comment on this as it is just abusive, as is their wont. I prefer to look at the positive.
Of course s/he was wrong about Blair’s politics. He was NEVER a Tory.
You’d think anyone who follows politics at all would know by now that Blair’s father hoped to be a Tory candidate until he had a stroke at 40. But, it seems this individual has got his facts confused. Avoid legal beavers who don’t get their facts straight, folks.
kika said:
Let me help you with this, my factually-vacant friend. Read ‘Blair biography’, so far.
I think, kika, our readers can judge better than you or I where the wind is coming from.
As for this -
Well, I did not say that. I have great respect for those in the legal profession. Many of my close friends are lawyers. They manage, thankfully, without the puerile bahaviour of the slavish juvenile followers of the Geek.
A quick search on the net and you will find dozens, possibly hundreds of reports of death threats against Blair, dating back to the beginning of the century. And those are only those we have heard about - usually because of a court case. It’s obvious he is at the top of the hit list, today as much as ever, if not more than before, for obvious reasons.
My cause for concern with the Geek is NOT that he flies this kite, joining the internet imbeciles who bloom and grow in their self-justification, constantly bolstered by equally valueless ignoramouses. No.
My concern is that he diminishes his profession, and the trust the public has in legal impartiality, balance, common sense and tolerance. Oh, and in the law itself.
Not to mention the evident absence of any understanding of others’ humanity.
He and the children at his site seem to have no sense of THEIR responsibility.
No wonder Blair used to talk a lot about values. He had met many lacking this guiding compass at the Bar, it would seem.
I suppose Geek can do us all a favour and let us know what exactly Mr or Mrs Blair did to upset him, work wise. Throwing personal insults does nothing to encourage the objective reader to take him seriously. Does he ever advise clients of the futility of that kind of approach. No? Physician, heal thyself.
February 6, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Why can’t Campbell make jokes about who he wants to? This is typical of the Blarite attitude of pandering to the needs of the Muslims. Your worse then those idiots, who call themselves intellectuals and read the Guardian at least we know they are the enemy. Saying your respect their prophets, allows them to go on living here and not talking our language or living a decent British lifestyle.
Blair talks about values, but he doesn’t value Britain. If he did then he would never be selling us out to the EU. America isn’t so bad, I could handle it when was working with George, because we have always stood shoulder to shoulder with them, but it wasn’t so long ago that we were fending off the fascist Europeans.
February 6, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Have just caught up with this thread and am shocked. I thought that I might add a few pertinent thoughts
‘the internet is largely the refuge of all and sundry with a brain cell’ Too right! These sort of people shouldn’t be allowed near a keyboard. There is evidence that they attract others who also only have one brain cell
‘And you know lawyers - all they care about is keeping their money and position.’ Absolutely spot on! Just look at all the examples of politician barristers and their spouses who done just that very thing!
That Liberty Woman, Shami Chapati, really needs help. May the saints preserve her from us, as coated in aspic
‘The whole world knew Saddam had them and the whole world was right’ Two rights definitely don’t make a wrong!. Of course all those weapons inspectors knew the whole world was right and that they had to be wrong, or else the whole world couldn’t have been right!
‘The Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday, The Evening Standard, London Metro, Irish Mail on Sunday and the advertising publication Loot….Five of these six are read widely in London by Londoners! No wonder they can’t think objectively’ Can I have a bit of help here, please?..Which