Davids Blog

Ask David: Chagos, Bilderberg, Big Brother,Candidates, 7/7

Posted by David on Wednesday, 24 January 2007 20:06:19

Chagos: a wrong to right?

Asked by DanielSimpson on Tuesday, 16 January 2007 12:44:31

I understand your concerns on this general issue. There is ongoing legal action so I don't want to comment on the legality of all this. But I recognise that there is a moral issue here. We cannot undo any mistakes of the past, but we must do all we can to correct them now.

I recognise the importance of the air base on Diego Garcia, which was used in the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Gulf War of the early 1990s, and the security concerns that prevent islanders from returning to Diego Garcia itself. But we do need to look at why Islanders are prevented from returning to the outlying islands, which are clearly some distance from the air base.

The Foreign Office say long-term resettlement of the islands is unfeasible. But I don't want simply to take those claims at face value. I have asked my Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister, Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, to investigate this matter thoroughly. Geoffrey will be visiting the Chagossian community in Mauritius (where most were transferred), and meeting diplomatic and humanitarian representatives. He will look at the feasibility of a return, and the conditions in which Chagossians currently live, and report back to me and William Hague.

We will then consider the best way forward. So I don't want to commit to a Parliamentary motion at this stage.

 

Your Involvement With The Secretive Bilderberg Group

Asked by anewname on Monday, 15 January 2007 08:56:59

I haven't attended any such meetings, so your other questions don't apply!

 

The Big Brother State

Asked by IanWhickham on Monday, 15 January 2007 22:09:17

There's a lot of truth in what you say. And the short answer to the final question is that yes, ID cards would go.

Quite apart from new plans to weaken data protection laws, we also oppose the chips in wheelie bins to check your rubbish; and the council tax inspectors knocking on your door. Across the board, it's clear that the liberties and privacy of honest law-abiding citizens are being eroded.

The latest data plans are especially worrying given the history of Government failure when it comes to large-scale IT projects.

For example in May last year the Home Office admitted that 2,700 people had been wrongly labelled criminals since 2002 as a result of inaccurate records on the Criminal Records Bureau.

So, although there have been reassurances over the latest project, we can't always take these at face value.

 

Help for lower income candidates

Asked by SamuelCoates on Monday, 15 January 2007 08:00:05

You're right in saying my ambition is for our Party to be representative of modern Britain. We cannot be so without ensuring that our candidates include men and women not just from the public and voluntary sectors but from all over Britain. And while we have made progress, there is much to do - not just for Parliamentary candidates but in choosing council candidates and increasing our membership and supporter base.

I've spoke to Francis about your three suggestions to help attract a wider range of candidates.

First, he has agreed that the fee for the Parliamentary Assessment Board, where there are compelling cases, can be reduced on a case by case basis. In fact this is something that has happened in the past.

Second, we'll give some serious thought to your emergency access fund. I like the idea. If possible we should do it. I'm not promising anything immediate, but I'll see what we can do.

Third, instead of a ‘Candidate's Protector', which seems a little bureaucratic, we already have in place ‘MP Mentors' who guide and counsel candidates. I'll make sure John Maples gets Mentors to monitor financial demands placed on candidates.

Campaign Directors are in place working on Target Seats. They are the best placed people to advise candidates and associations on how time and money should be prioritised.

 

We deserve an independent inquirey into 7/7 The London Bombings

Asked by marndin on Monday, 15 January 2007 21:35:32

As I mentioned last week, we have called for a thoroughgoing investigation into 7/7, and I think that would be useful. But I think from a different perspective. We want to see what lessons there are to learn for the intelligence services for example.

, , , , ,

You could comment if you logged in | Read comments


 

Posted by spivver on Thursday, 25 January 2007 09:06:39

One can see clearly here just how we are all being manipulated and deceived by our politicians. Cameron states here that he agrees that an independent inquiry into the events of 7/7 are justified, but “from a different perspective. We want to see what lessons there are to learn for the intelligence services for example”.

So there we have it, questions are raised from witnesses who state they saw no-one standing where the explosives were reported, they saw the carriage floors buckling from below as if the explosives went off under the carriages. We are told that the terrorists used a certain train, but it now transpires that this seems to have been cancelled and so could not have existed.

Yet Cameron would not take these type of questions ‘on board’ in any inquiry, even if it were to disprove those questions and suspicions which are in existence. He would restrict any inquiry into “lessons learned” for the intelligence services. Can we see the convenient pattern here?

Serious criminal acts, no arrestees (because they have conveniently blown themselves up), no serious investigations, quick explanations (some which appear to be implausible) from our Governments, and then a restriction of the remit for any inquiry which may be set up under pressure from the public.

Sound familiar?? Yup, the 9/11 Commission fiction!!!

Wake up folks, this “war on terror” is a fiction designed to keep the populace in fear so that our Governments can erode our once sacred rights and freedoms, rights and freedoms the masses who are still asleep seem to willingly forego. We need in the country politicians who will stand for us, not against us.

Posted by Alois on Thursday, 25 January 2007 09:17:12

Since when are investigations done 'from a perspective' ?
Shouldnt an investigation be all about finding out what happend ?
The 'perspective' should arrise through the investigation, not be fixed beforehand. Which is exactly why people have to ask such questions.
Yes, we want so see what lessons there are to be learned, concerning the intelligence service and its role.

 

Comment edited by Alois on Thursday, 25 January 2007 13:41:55

Posted by jamied on Thursday, 25 January 2007 11:24:11

Should have asked about Le Cercle, not Bilderberg...

Posted by carlos on Thursday, 25 January 2007 15:28:30

spot on spivver, you're far too obvious Mr.Cameron...

It's the world's biggest, elephant in the corner for politicians... the truth doesn't just dissapear, even if you try!

and as for the answer regarding Chagos.. so you think U.S having an airbase is more important than people living on their own land... THE US HAS FAR TOO MANY MILITARY BASES ALL OVER THE WORLD.... INCLUDING THE UK!!!!

Infact they have a military listening base, that is - like all U.S bases, U.S sovereign soil, and so they can do whatever they like on them!!!! watching all emails+mobiles+landlines..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/503224.stm

Posted by Chewbacca on Thursday, 25 January 2007 17:14:52

Blair was asked about his meetings at the outrageous and undemocratic "Bilderberg" for which he had attended, along with Gordon Brown and Bill Clinton, before any of them took office. Here was the question and his response;

Norman Baker MP: To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 12 October 2006, Official Report, column 862W, on the Bilderberg Group, if he will provide the information requested in respect of himself since 1997. [95308]

The Prime Minister: I have not attended any such meetings.

Sources;

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm061019/text/61019w0006.htm#column_1372W
http://infowars.net/articles/October2006/201006Bilderberg.htm

Now look at Cameron's response;

"I haven't attended any such meetings, so your other questions don't apply!"

This is quite sickening and frankly rather disturbing, did he literally just ask one of his advisers "what did Blair say" and copy that? Very odd, Mr Cameron this is a massive betrayal of trust against the people! We all know Ken Clarke has been attending these meetings for decades and is on the steering committee, why did you not elaborate on your knowledge of “Bilderberg”? WHY IS THIS SECRET! What is our democracy rendered, a sham? I am most disgusted, this is beyond articulation, WHO DO YOU SERVE IF NOT THE PEOPLE MR CAMERON?! Unbelievable. Where is our “free press” media?




 

Comment edited by Chewbacca on Thursday, 25 January 2007 17:30:13

Posted by PJP40 on Thursday, 25 January 2007 17:58:18

Good to see a postive answer to Samuel Coates' question, with Cameron actually taking advice from someone on his blog! Well done Samuel, well done DC!

Posted by Millsy on Thursday, 25 January 2007 17:58:19

Excellent, honest answers, Mr Cameron. I think some people are paranoid and have far too much time on their hands. That's one downside to having a presence on the internet, it attracts all sorts of freaks who don't normally get a look-in in rational debate. What is all this guff about 7/7 and 9/11?

Posted by spivver on Thursday, 25 January 2007 18:24:08

Ahh... Millsy, well, you clearly are one to judge, aren't you. All this so called "guff" is available on the Internet to anyone who cares to do some research of their own, so maybe, with some knowledge behind you, you could start to enter into the discussion in an enlightened way about this "guff".

Many of the posters on this site have kindly provided links to much good information to make it easier for the unenlightened such as yourself. I would suggest a good place to start informing yourself would be to follow some of those links

Clearly Cameron is like you, does not even look into things before he decides, which is, of course, why be has irritated many people!!!

 

Comment edited by spivver on Thursday, 25 January 2007 18:38:21

Posted by Chewbacca on Thursday, 25 January 2007 18:33:51

"Millsy" you honestly don't have the slightest clue about any of this, don't try and insult those who have fair and informed concerns by calling them "paranoid… freaks", when clearly you haven’t done an ounce of research or critical thinking yourself. Have you ever heard of the "Bilderberg Group"? People have a right to be exercising their suspicion when all the top media moguls, business leaders, politicians, "Elites" from Royal and aristocratic families are getting together, and the average person not know a thing about such a meeting. Again you don’t have a clue, but you certainly have an opinion none the less. I don't wish to be patronising, but you should do some critical thinking and research before you try and insult others.

 

Comment edited by Chewbacca on Thursday, 25 January 2007 18:34:45

Posted by PJP40 on Thursday, 25 January 2007 18:34:49

Don't worry Millsy...i agree with you.

Posted by cambridgecameroon on Thursday, 25 January 2007 19:52:02

Re chewbacca

What's your problem with Mr Cameron's answer? He says he didn't attend the meetings, so get over it and maybe think about something which actually matters... like hospitals and schools.

On the conspiracy theory stuff, 'I read it on the internet' (to paraphrase), is a frankly laughable reason to believe this stuff. I read on the internet that man never landed on the moon, that politicians are all in fact lizards, and that the Tory party collaborated with MI5 to kill Diana. People make stuff up. Fact.

Thanks David, keep up the good work!

Posted by spivver on Thursday, 25 January 2007 20:24:23

CambridgeCameroon, I am in absolute agreement with you, up to a point. Yes, people can make up all sorts of things. I don't believe everything I read in the newspapers, or see and hear on the BBC or other mainstream news, let alone believe everything I read on the Internet.

However, I note that Chewbacca, and many others, is not saying "read it on the Internet". Many of the links are to documentaries and newsreels, from sources such as CNN, taken at the time of the atrocities. I remember myself watching, and being slightly puzzled at news footage at the time, which now never seems to be screened on the mainstream media, of dust covered witnesses near the Twin Towers talking of explosives. However, this footage is still available on the Internet. So, rather than just disbelieving "everything you read on the Internet", what you need to do is select carefully what you watch, and then form your own opinion. I don't agree with everything put forward by those who question the "official explanation" of 9/11, but I do believe that there are enough discrepancies and proven lies told by the American administration to warrant raising questions.

However, I don't "rubbish" everything just because it is on the Internet. The film 911: Press for truth shows some of the American politicians lying out of their own mouths, watch them for yourself!! Watch Rice squirm as she talks about the August report, watch Bush and Cheney change their stories, to name but three examples.

Posted by Chewbacca on Thursday, 25 January 2007 20:37:46

cambridgecameroon, that’s really discouraging. I hope the broader population doesn’t share such an immense lack of urgency and awareness. You indict yourself with that lack of understanding, these things matter more so then the more obvious problems of the system such as Hospitals and Schools. These are the things the people need to be aware of to make informed choices as to what their country is doing. The fact that you can’t see that and attempted to ridicule those who do with ridiculous nonsense about “lizard people” underlines just how criminally uninformed many people are. "Bilderberg" is an old outrage that the Nation finally needs to be aware of.

Posted by BongoBrian on Sunday, 28 January 2007 16:56:52

"As I mentioned last week, we have called for a thoroughgoing investigation into 7/7, and I think that would be useful. But I think from a different perspective. We want to see what lessons there are to learn for the intelligence services for example."

...And how do you suggest, Mr Cameron, you learn lessons by carrying out an investigation "from a different perspective"?
Surely the only 'perspective' is a total and complete full investigation to get to the truth of what actually happened. Only then can we determine which lessons require to be learned. Or are you indeed suggesting that the investigation should be steered away from specific areas which may be uncomfortable for the government?

Don't miss these