Torture, Terror And Elite Schizophrenia In The UK

By: Andrew_McKillop

Keep Calm and Carry On
First reaction and respnse from the "mainsream media" in the UK. if not from alternate media and bloggers to the US Senate report on CIA-initiated torture, was to talk it down and dump it. Editorials in true-blue papers like the 'Telegraph' and in every single media outlet owned by Rupert Murdoch, Sky Tv and of course the BBC told consumers of pap-news that torture was necessary if a wee bit distasteful, saved lives, and thwarted Islamic terror plots - but is never used by the UK!

Keep calm and carry on.

The BBC excelled itself in the bizarre quest of justifying torture (even revelling in its use), while stoutly telling viewers and listeners that "we don't do that here". BBC News TV's first response and reaction to the Senate report included a 30-minute special report in peak viewing time "with data compiled by the BBC itself" on its claimed tally of Islamic terror deaths around the world in the month of November. The total was a suspiciously exact 5042 and Iraq and Nigeria topped the "goal average' of dead the BBC registered in, or concocted for, third-place Afghanistan. But curiously enough, Syria wasn't even mentioned.  Not a single terror war death happened in Syria in the whole of the month of November 2014 - despite all the terror war funding by the football-loving and hotel-buying Arab Gulf petro-states which are "moving towards democracy"! My oh my.

Scarcely 3 days later however, by Sunday 14 December the British mainstream media's tone had dramatically changed. The previous propaganda blitz cracked asunder. Suddenly the UK's elite-serving mainstream press was asking in a stern way: "How much did the UK government know?", and what bits of the Senate report were "redacted" to censor details of active British participation in CIA torture since the years 2001-2004? It was now urgent to know. Three days before, there was no such thing as UK complicity in American torture!

One likely or probable reason for this "sea change" includes the fact that the bulk of UK complicity and aid to CIA torture and "extraordinary rendition" or kidnapping followed by torture, was decided under a Labout government headed by Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Jack Straw, in which Labour Party leader Ed Miliband's brother was Foreign Secretary for a while. The true blue press and media, like the BBC can therefore rally to support the clean-fingernailed English Conservative party by suddenly trumpeting the horrors of UK complicity in US torture. You can trust the media!

Extraordinary Exclusion
Extraordinary rendition, as its tastefully called, was firstly described as "not in any way really concerning the UK", give or take a few isolated cases, Such as the botched and bungled Abdul al-Megrahi Lockerbie bombing farce, in which al-Megrahi was released early on "compassionate grounds" to prevent his sppeal being heard, where his Scottish lawyers would have produced devastating proof that the prosecution had used completely tainted and false testimonies, including purchased testimonies, and completely false material evidence invented by "you guess who". 

In today's example of what "English fair play" really means, the same week that the mainstream media told its believer-sheep that American torture is "nothing to do with us", the BBC News TV channel wheeled on "security experts", several times,  who piped up in obedient parrot fashion that CIA "enhanced interrogation" of terror suspects can reveal who are "the real terrorists". It can prevent the UK from giving passports to foreign killers seeking British nationality, and living the life of Reilly on $60-a-week UK welfare payments if they get nationality. Or, if they have been "rendited" and given enough waterboarding in British, Polish, Latvian or even American dungeons in Afghanistan, Iraq or Pakistan, that can prevent them from ever coming to the UK!

Winding its way slowly through the UK parliament, the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill features what are called Temporary Exclusion Orders, and Managed Return measures, both of which are an extreme form of elite paranoid schizophrenia. All the proceedings have been carried in full by the Parliamentary TV channel, often showing a thinly-populated parliament of the few-interested members of parliament. A range of MPs proposing amendments to the Bill have pointed out, at length, that the temporary exclusion orders (needing a partial abrogation of the so-called "royal prerogative" conferring or removing citizenship) would be served on "identified British terrorists", in Syria or elsewhere, who would be temporarily stripped of their nationality and then prevented from returning to the UK, temporarily.

The identification would be by the sole decision of the interior minister or Home Secretary but how would the Youth Jihadis be notified about that decision? Could they appeal? If they were stripped of their British nationality in Syria, for example, and were arrested by the Syrian authorities as terrorists, would they be defended or protected by the British government? Would that be remotely possible or stupid pie in the sky? If they returned by road and ferry, or by the Eurotunnel, would they be arrested at the start or finish of their voyage?

Through a strange example of elite-think, it seems that Islamic State terrorists, from the UK, only travel by air! Ryanair or Easyjet, of course.

The current Tory-Lib Dem coalition government also wants "managed return" of suspected terrorists – who in this case would be arrested on stepping foot on British soil, and then "managed", for example by forcing them to live at least 200 miles from their last known previous address in the UK. That way, they would be "cut off" from their previous beardy-weirdy terror pals and networks! So much for Internet and social netwrks. They would report to a minding officer on a regular basis; they might wear electronic bracelets, as well as beards, and could be "re-educated" by not-defined methods. Possibly they could smoke dope and listen to Led Zeppelin? Or they could study cooking (eg. how to cook human heads when foodstocks are low – out there in the desert!)

In theory if this Bill gets approved by parliament, as is almost certain, suspected terrorists could be "held abroard" – by who? - but then could be given managed return to the UK. Capping the half-witted strangeness of this legislation, once in the UK, managed return measures would only last for about 6 months, or possibly less than that (100 days).

In theory therefore, if the suspected terrorists himself suspected he had been "fingered" by Britain's security services, he could lay low abroard, or circulate between different countries outside the UK – because as currently proposed, the Bill would only stop suspected British terrorists trying to return to the UK. If they went somewhere else, the UK Home Secretary Theresa May said to Palriament on 15 December, they would be eligible for British consular services and protection in those third countries! Beat that for elite schizophrenia!

Their passports would only be canceled if they tried to return to the UK. Surely enough, she was accused by Labour party members like Frank Dobson of encouraging the terrorists to keep going, and not return. As an extra dollop of elite tomfoolery, Theresa May also told parliament the terrorist suspects would be notified of their exclusion "at their last known address in the UK", not in their stolen Humvees rolling across the deserts of eastern Syria and northern Iraq – where Royal Mail delivery services are proving to be difficult!

Man Haron Mounis and the Terror Economy
The somewhat-strange (and tragic) case of Iranian-origin Australian, Man Haron Mounis may throw a few problems for conspiracy theorists leaping to suggest that Mounis was a false flag operative paid by the CIA, Mossad, the Iranians, Russia's secret services or – who knows? -  by the Australians themselves, anxious to find a reason for sending more armed forces to fight ISIS in Iraq (although of course not in Syria). By his own words and actions, Mounis was a recent Shia convert to "militant or extreme" Sunnism, and also a strong supporter of ISIS.

That last assertion is not so sure and certain. On a theoretical basis, most Salafists should approve of ISIS, but also any self-respecting Neo-Nazi should also admire ISIS, if only because it is a bunch of sociopathic and psychopathic killers! Some extreme right-wing groups, if not parties, might also approve of how ISIS "maintains firm rule" in the towns and cities it has invaded. In which ISIS administrators can have a person's hand lopped off for smoking a cigarette in the street, or can have male persons whipped for not growing a beard. Public morale and morality-building, so to speak.

Just wait until you hear how ISIS will enforce CO2 emissions reduction, for example assassinating every third driver of any cars which happen to be circulating!

Much more dangerous, in fact, is the creeping and definitely unavowed elite acceptance of ISIS on "purely economic grounds". Italian-American economist, Loretta Napoleoni has extensively researched the links between terrorism and the economy in general, and the case of ISIS in particular. In books, articles and TV interviews (for example on Russia Today television), she expounds her theory on the subject, firstly by claiming that ISIS is now sufficiently powerful economically, not just militarily, to be considered like other once-were-terrorist organizations who are today either in government, or close to government. Among examples she cites are the Kurdish PKK and Northern Irish IRA.

Napoleoni says that early-2014 estimates of ISIS revenues published by US security agencies, of about $2 million-a-day are now much too low. She says ISIS is rapidly moving on from simply stealing oil and selling it in smallish lots, for example road tanker-truck loads, and shipping oil in small barges along rivers straddling the Turkish-Syria-Iraq-Lebanon borders. ISIS now controls around 40% of the entire wheat and staple crop food production capacity of Iraq, she claims, and also claims that once ISIS cash-only revenues are moved abroard, they quickly enter the global financial system, and are instantle "cleansed" by the vermin of the crony finance "community" and ISIS cash brings a return on capital – and elite acceptance.

Her argument is that with its ever-rising revenues, with a preference for euros rather than US dollars, Napoleoni says, ISIS can begin to shed its Youth Psychopath image and move on towards its goal of the New Caliphate, able to administer, educate and feed its subjects. Apparently, she does not believe this is what the Turkish Ottomans (as well as the British and French in the 1918-39 mandate period) tried to do, and failed.

The danger of the Napoleoni theory of "ISIS becoming respectable", firstly through economic power and then from ruling on the ground or "in theater" is simple to see. On the ground, the only real and effective military opposition to ISIS are the Kurds and the al-Assad government of Syria – and neither of them have acceptance by western elites. In fact al-Assad is the bogeyman of the western elites – presumably because he lets a major naval base to Putin's Russia, and his government is unfailingly supported by the Chinese, as well as the Russians in the UN Security Council. Claims by the elite-serving media that the US, UK, France and Germany "had to support all opposition forces" to al Assad, including al Nusra, al Tawhid and ISIS, despite their grisly terror tactics and totally inhuman treatment of civilians, is a favorite cop out of the media. It defends the apprentice sorceror strategists supplying the western elites with the dumb idea of a terror war in Syria to usher-in a Twitter-friendly, late stage, greed-based consumer society on the corpses of hudreds of thousands of civilian victims, by proxy and  "without boots on the ground". Just like in Libya – explaing why Russi and China do not go along with this white western elite madness..

The fingernails of the white western democrats remain clean, and they can fumble with strange ways to "punish but also re-assimilate" former White Punk Jihadis returning to countries like the UK – instead of simply killing these psychopaths. Elite arrogance goes so far as to imagine theseWhite jihadis will never play national TV viewers a remake of the Man Haran Mounis Sydney video clip on their return to Blighty. Scout's honour, m'lord!

The Iraqi government, such as there is any government in Baghdad (Libya already has one government in Tobruk and another in Tripoli) cannot be relied on to prevent Sunni tribes from thowing-in their lot with ISIS, if only to stop themselves being decimated by Shia militias armed – by Baghdad! ISIS is fighting a divided opposition except when facing the Kurds and the Damascus government. The only two forces who are really fighting ISIS.

Because the western elites are as sly as they are degenerate, they may decide that ISIS is already "the devil we know", supplies cheap oil, and keeps a firm Medieval-style grip on the poor unfortunates who fall under its dark shadow – like the Wahabites in Saudi Arabia do for their unfortunates, Backing up this argument, which is he Napoleoni theory, any western military action against ISIS that was remotely like the "liberation" of Kuwait in 1991, the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, and the invasion of Iraq in 2003 could exterminate every single Youth Psychopath in the ISIS terror brigades in a very, very short period.

But bizniss is bizniss and ISIS has a lot of dosh! Th greedy elites love easy dosh, based on murder, pillage and theft, so they support ISIS.

By Andrew McKillop

Contact: xtran9@gmail.com

Former chief policy analyst, Division A Policy, DG XVII Energy, European Commission. Andrew McKillop Biographic Highlights

Co-author 'The Doomsday Machine', Palgrave Macmillan USA, 2012

Andrew McKillop has more than 30 years experience in the energy, economic and finance domains. Trained at London UK’s University College, he has had specially long experience of energy policy, project administration and the development and financing of alternate energy. This included his role of in-house Expert on Policy and Programming at the DG XVII-Energy of the European Commission, Director of Information of the OAPEC technology transfer subsidiary, AREC and researcher for UN agencies including the ILO.

© 2014 Copyright Andrew McKillop - All Rights Reserved Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisor.

© 2005-2022 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.