The Guardian Protects Gould-Werritty

The planned scenario for a war with Iran is playing out before our eyes at frightening speed now. Unfortunately. as I have frequently said, Iran has a regime that is not only thuggish but controlled by theocratic nutters: the attack on the British Embassy played perfectly into the hands of the neo-cons. William Hague is smirking like the cat who got the cream.The Guardian to this day has not published the fact that there were more Fox-Gould-Werritty meetings than O’Donnell disclosed. Why?I contacted the Guardian to tell them I intended to publish this article, and invited them to give a statement. Here it is, From David Leigh, Associate Editor:I hope your blogpost will carry the following response in full.1. I know nothing of any Israeli stake in the ownership of the Guardian. As it is owned by the Scott Trust, not any Israelis, your suggestion sems a bit mad.2. The Guardian has not “refused” to publish any information supplied by you. On the contrary, I personally have been spending my time looking into it, as I told you previously. I have no idea what the attitude of others in “the Guardian” is. I form my own opinions about what is worth publishing, and don’t take dictation from others. That includes you.3. I can’t imagine what you are hinting at in your reference to Assange. If you’ve got a conspiracy theory, why don’t you spit it out?I can understand your frustration, Craig, when others don’t join up the dots in the same way as you. But please try not to be offensive, defamatory, or plain daft about it.As I said, it would be honest of you to publish my response in full if you want to go ahead with these unwarranted attacks on the Guardian’s integrity.Possible some Guardian readers will get drawn to this post: at least then they will find out that Werritty, Fox and Gould held many more meetings, hushed up by O’Donnell and hushed up by the Guardian.It should not be forgotten that the Guardian never stopped supporting Blair and New Labour, even when he was presiding over illegal wars and the massive widening of the gap between rich and poor. My point about Assange is that he has done a great deal to undermine the neo-con war agenda – and the Guardian is subjecting him to a campaign of denigration. On the other hand Gould/Fox/Werritty were pushing a neo-con project for war – and the Guardian is actively complicit in the cover-up of their activities.

[IRANS GOVERNMENT THUGGISH?IN WHAT SENSE?A STRONG DEFENSE OF ITS NATIONAL INTERESTS ,IS THUGGISH?DEVELOPING AND FOSTERING RELATIONSHIPS WITH LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ,STRENGTHNING SOUTH ON SOUTH COOPERATION IS THUGGISH?INVESTING IN THEIR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT IS THUGGISH?STANDING FIRM AGAINST IMPOSING IMPERIAL POWERS IS THUGGISH?RECALL MR MURRAY YOU YOURSELF SAID YOU KNEW GOULD PERSONALLY AND EVEN LIKED HIM EARLIER ON YOUR BLOG ...HOW COULD YOU LIKE A WARMONGER?WE DONT EVEN KNOW WHO WAS BEHIND THE UK EMBASSY TAKEOVER,NOT ME NOT YOU...I DO AGREE GUARDIAN PAPER IS PRO WAR..SEE.. THE GUARDIAN PUSHES BIGGEST LIE ON IRAN(CLAIMING IT WANTS NUKES) WHILE DEFENDING IT? http://thenakedfacts.blogspot.com/2011/11/guardian-pushes-on-iran.html ALSO SEE.. GUARDIAN PAPER IS A JOKE,MANY ARE FOOLED BELIEVING ITS A LIBERAL PAPER..NOTHING COULD BE FARTEHR FOM TRUTH..SEE...  The Guardian and imperialism http://forth.ie/index.php/content/essay/the_imperialist_warmongering_andhate_filled_guardian_newspaper/08042010  The Guardian and its parent groups are a participant in Project Syndicate ^[1], established by George Soros, and have recently intervened to save the Mail & Guardian in South Africa ^[2].  Jonathan Cook, "The Dangerous Cult of the Guardian: A Thought Police for the Internet Age