From BBC News:
Eggs, bottles and shoes have been thrown at the former prime minister Tony Blair as he attended a book signing in Dublin. [HAHAHAHAHAHAHA - Ed]

It happened as he arrived at Easons on O'Connell Street in the city to sign copies of his autobiography. The missiles, which were thrown by anti-war protesters, did not hit Mr Blair. Four people were arrested as activists clashed with Irish police at a security barrier outside the bookshop. Around 200 protesters demonstrated at Mr Blair's role in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on one side of the street on Saturday morning. On the other side, more than 300 people gathered to get a copy of his book signed. It was Mr Blair's first book-signing since the publication of his autobiography.

BBC Northern Ireland reporter Julian O'Neill said one of the activists had managed to get into the book shop. "We talked to one person who managed to get in the book shop to get her book signed and as Mr Blair was signing her copy she said she wanted to make a citizen's arrest for war crimes," he said. "She said Mr Blair looked a little taken aback but before she knew it she was surrounded by four security personnel who ushered her into the stairwell."

There was a large police presence in Dublin and O'Connell Street was closed to traffic. Among those who turned out to see Mr Blair was Emily Lynch, from Termofeckin, County Louth, who praised him for playing a huge part in Irish history. "He helped make a very important moment in Ireland," she said.

'On our side'
"I remember him coming out and giving a speech on the steps in Belfast in 1998. He is the only prime minister Irish people can relate to and feel he's on our side, before that there had been nothing like that."

Groups represented at the demonstration included the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Coalition and the 32-County Sovereignty Movement. Richard Boyd-Barrett, of the Irish Anti-War Movement, accused Mr Blair of making "blood money" from the memoirs.

Mr Blair has said he would hand over the reported £4m advance payment for the book plus all royalties to the Royal British Legion.

His memoirs detail his accounts of life in Downing Street, the Iraq war, the 9/11 terrorist attacks in America and Princess Diana's death. He also wrote about concerns over the amount he was drinking and of his rift with his successor Gordon Brown.

'Stretched the truth'
One of the chapters also deals with his efforts to secure peace in Northern Ireland and his relationships with the key political players. He admitted that he often stretched the truth past breaking point to get agreement during the peace process and he admits that he took horrendous chances with the political parties.
---

LOL.

You know what? Blair should hand that money over, and any other money he makes from his life in No. 10. The man is a liar, a warmonger, and a total shit. He fucked our country over for years, sucking up to George W. Bush - and wasn't he a wonderful president - and sold us out to Europe. I hate the man. It's a shame none of the 'missiles' hit him, because he personally signed off on actual missiles hitting people for years.

From BBC News:
Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi says the EU should pay Libya at least 5bn euros (£4bn; $6.3bn) a year to stop illegal African immigration and avoid a "black Europe". Speaking on a visit to Italy, Col Gaddafi said Europe "could turn into Africa" as "there are millions of Africans who want to come in". Italy has drawn criticism for handing over to Libya migrants it intercepts at sea, without screening them first. Far fewer now reach Italy from Libya.

European Commission figures show that in 2009 the number of people caught trying to enter Italy illegally fell to 7,300, from 32,052 in 2008. The data was collected under the EU's Eurodac fingerprinting system.

Col Gaddafi has forged close ties with Italy since a friendship treaty was signed two years ago. It sought to draw a line under historic bitterness between Libya and Italy, its former colonial master. "Tomorrow Europe might no longer be European, and even black, as there are millions who want to come in," said Col Gaddafi, quoted by the AFP news agency. He was speaking at a ceremony in Rome late on Monday, standing next to Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. "We don't know what will happen, what will be the reaction of the white and Christian Europeans faced with this influx of starving and ignorant Africans," Col Gaddafi said. "We don't know if Europe will remain an advanced and united continent or if it will be destroyed, as happened with the barbarian invasions."

Audience of women
Col Gaddafi has long seen himself as a champion of African interests on the international stage and has hosted many summits with African leaders. Mr Berlusconi made no immediate comment on Col Gaddafi's demand. Italy has been carrying out joint naval patrols with Libya for the past year, intercepting illegal migrants at sea.

The BBC's David Willey says Col Gaddafi's visit to Rome was overshadowed by another controversial speech he made - to two groups of several hundred young Italian women, hired at a fee of 70 or 80 euros each from a local modelling agency.

He told them that Islam should become the religion of Europe and gave them free copies of the Koran, after he had lectured them for an hour on the freedoms enjoyed by women in Libya.
---

First comes the offer to convert to Islam, then comes the threat. Typical behaviour by an Islamic leader.

I'll tell you what, Mr. Gaddafi, how about YOU pay US $5bn a year to stop YOUR African friends from getting into the EU? After all, you're a 'champion of African interests', aren't you? Surely you must want your friends to stay where they are and live under Islamic rule?

I fail to understand why assholes like this guy are given column inches. The guy's a cunt. Abdel bassett al-Megrahi (or whatever his fucking name is) is a convicted terrorist, and YOU welcomed him home as a national hero! You're a cunt, Gaddafi. Luckily, you're a really old cunt, so your particular brand of madness will be done with soon enough. Old, Islamic cunt.

From BBC News:
A US district court has issued a temporary injunction blocking plans by the Obama administration to increase funding for stem cell research. The court ruled in favour of researchers who say human embryonic stem cell research involved the destruction of human embryos. Judge Royce Lamberth said lawsuits brought against the new guidelines could now go ahead.

President Obama lifted a ban on funding for stem cell research in March. Critics say the ban, which was kept in place by Mr Obama's predecessor, George W Bush, impeded the fight to find treatments for diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and diabetes.

The suit, which was also backed by some Christian groups, is against the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Those against the new plan to increase funding argued the NIH policy violated US law and also took funds from researchers seeking to work with adult stem cells.

"ESC (embryonic stem cell) research is clearly research in which an embryo is destroyed," Judge Lamberth said. He added: "To conduct ESC research, ESCs must be derived from an embryo. The process of deriving ESCs from an embryo results in the destruction of the embryo. Thus ESC research necessarily depends upon the destruction of a human embryo."

But Judge Lamberth said an injunction would not "seriously harm" the embryonic studies because it did "not interfere with their [researchers'] ability to obtain private funding for their research".

The Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which Congress adds to budget legislation each year, played an important role in the case. The amendment bans the use of federal funds to destroy human embryos. With the injunction in place, Judge Royce Lamberth is now likely to hear groups on both sides of the case argue whether the new guidelines should be permanently blocked or allowed to continue.
---

Well, I can't say I'm surprised that this was backed by "some Christian groups". After all, these are the people who think that there shouldn't be a national vaccination programme for the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) because the threat of cancer is a better deterrent to pre-marital sex. In other words these people (members of some Christian groups...) would like to see hundreds of young women in America die of HPV-related cancer rather than give them an effective, safe vaccine.

That sort of idiocy has no place in the modern world.

They would rather we don't advance in medicine and cure the little girl with burns over 80% of her body, or the young mother with a spinal injury, because ESC research necessarily involves the destruction of a human embryo. And what is a human embryo? Well, it's a little ickle human being, innit? To quote Sam Harris from the excellent book 'Letter to a Christian Nation': "A 3-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. There are, for the sake of comparison, more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. The embryos that are destroyed in stem-cell research do not have brains, or even neurons. Consequently, there is no reason to believe they can suffer their destruction in any way at all. The truth is that President Bush’s unjustified religious beliefs about the human soul are, at this very moment, prolonging the scarcely endurable misery of tens of millions of human beings."

Why not, eh? After all, your god has nothing to do with miscarriages, does he? It's estimated that 50% of all pregnancies are terminated naturally by the woman's body. If that's so, that makes 'god' the most prolific abortionist in history! (Sam Harris again.)

Do these people not understand what happens in IVF? More than one human embryo is used, and not all of them create babies. Where do the others go? Hmmm...

Seriously, it's 2010. The nonsense that the religious people of this world spew forth has truly awful consequences, and I'm fed up of society having to pander to it.

The BP oil spill will cost the company $32.2bn (story), and Greenpeace activists removed safety equipment from BP petrol stations across London this morning (story) to force BP to adopt greener policies. What a silly state of affairs.

If the American government would implement policies that forced car manufacturers to make their engines more efficient, and Americans would buy cars with engines smaller than, say, 6 litres, perhaps BP wouldn't need to be drilling where they are. Perhaps? I don't know why the oil spill happened, but I do know that the response from the American public, and especially Barack Hussein Obama's use of the word British in the company's name (even though it hasn't been called British Petroleum for years), has been inappropriate. Yes, there has been a massive oil spill, but it is being cleaned up and people are to be compensated for any losses.

If the American public don't want BP, then they should sell their 40% of the shares and put them into their own oil companies who are capable of drilling at those depths. Oh, right, there aren't any other companies who could actually step into the shoes of BP right now.

And Greenpeace, for fuck's sake. You spent the morning inconveniencing thousands of people across London today. Do you think people care what you want BP to do? You have merely angered them. They're still going to use BP because they need petrol. They aren't going to turn away because you have a problem with the company. You bunch of retards. All it does is point out to the people you annoyed this morning what a bunch of tools you are.

Also, were Greenpeace planning to do this before the oil spill? I doubt it. They're just doing it for publicity. Well, they've got it, but they've also got a bunch of enemies, too.

From BBC News:
David Cameron is to argue strongly for Turkey's membership of the European Union, saying he is "angry" at the slow pace of negotiations.

On his first visit to Turkey as prime minister, Mr Cameron will say he will "fight" for Turkey's bid to join the EU and to become a "great European power". He is expected to compare hostility to the bid in some parts of the EU to the way in which UK entry was once regarded.

After concluding his visit to Turkey, Mr Cameron will travel on to India. He will be joined by a host of British business leaders as he seeks to boost trade links with one of the world's fastest growing economies.

Mr Cameron - who arrived in Ankara on Monday - is expected to agree a new strategic partnership with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan during his visit.

'Frustrating progress'
In a speech on Tuesday, Mr Cameron will say he wants to "pave the road" for Turkey to join the EU and he will criticise those who want to delay the process. A European Union without Turkey at its heart is "not stronger but weaker....not more secure but less...not richer but poorer," he is expected to say. "I'm here to make the case for Turkey's membership of the EU. And to fight for it."

Referring to former French leader General de Gaulle's efforts to block British membership of the EU in the 1960s, he is expected to take a swipe at some other EU countries' attitude to Turkey. "We know what it's like to be shut out of the club. But we also know that these things can change. When I think about what Turkey has done to defend Europe as a Nato ally, and what Turkey is doing today in Afghanistan alongside our European allies, it makes me angry that your progress towards EU membership can be frustrated in the way it has been.... My view is clear. I believe it is just wrong to say Turkey can guard the camp but not be allowed to sit inside the tent."

Turkey opened accession negotiations with the EU in 2005 but is considered very unlikely to join in the next 10 years, partly due to opposition from countries such as France. Turkey's refusal to recognise EU member Cyprus, growing support for pro-Islamic parties on the mainland and the treatment of the Kurdish minority in the country all remain potential stumbling blocks.

Since 2005, only 11 out of 35 "negotiating chapters" relating to accession talks have been opened for discussion and only one has been "provisionally closed".

Regional role
Describing himself as the "strongest possible advocate" for greater Turkish influence in Europe, Mr Cameron will say that those who oppose EU membership are driven by protectionism, narrow nationalism or prejudice. "Those who wilfully misunderstand Islam, they see no difference between real Islam and the distorted version of the extremists. They think the problem is Islam itself. And they think the values of Islam can just never be compatible with the values of other religions, societies or cultures. All of these arguments are just plain wrong. And as a new government in Britain, I want us to be at the forefront of an international effort to defeat them."

While praising Turkey's secular and democratic traditions, Mr Cameron is likely to stress that Turkey must continue to push forward "aggressively" with economic and political reform to maintain momentum towards EU membership. Stressing the vital role Turkey plays in the region, he will say it has a "unique influence" in helping to build a stable Afghanistan through political and economic co-operation and fostering understanding between Israel and the Arab world.
---

Really? Cameron wants to let into the EU a country that refuses to recognise another EU country? He wants to let in a country whose leader is in the process of removing the secular and democratic traditions that Cameron praises, in favour of pro-Islamic ideals? He wants to let in a country whose population would then be free to wander to Britain for free? How many more millions of Muslims can our country take?

You think we're equating Islam with terrorism, I think you'll find, Mr. Cameron, that the terrorists themselves are doing that! They sit in front of cameras quoting from the koran. How much more evidence do you need? They killed 52 people on the London Underground and a bus on 7/7/2005. Have you forgotten that?

Besides, the country has not met all of the requirements for their entry into the EU. If you are now changing the rules just because you want to appeal to Muslims, then you are not leading our country the way the population of this country want you to. I don't expect you'll be in power for much longer, you vapid little man.

You cannot let a wolf in sheep's clothing into the camp. It will bite you, and you won't be able to remove it.

From BBC News:
The alleged leader of an al-Qaeda plot to bomb targets in north-west England has won his appeal against deportation. A special immigration court said Abid Naseer was an al-Qaeda operative - but could not be deported because he faced torture or death back home in Pakistan.

Mr Naseer, 23, was one of 10 Pakistani men arrested last April as part of a massive counter-terrorism operation in Liverpool and Manchester. Student Ahmad Faraz Khan, also 23, won his appeal on similar grounds. The security services believed the men were planning to attack within days of their arrest, but neither was charged.

'Security risk'
The Human Rights Act prevents people from being sent back to places where they would be "subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". The coalition government announced on Tuesday that it would be creating a Human Rights Commission to review the legislation and consider if changes were needed. The Home Secretary, Theresa May, said she would not be appealing against the ruling, handed down by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac). She said: "We are disappointed that the court has ruled that Abid Naseer and Ahmad Faraz Khan should not be deported to Pakistan, which we were seeking on national security grounds. As the court agreed, they are a security risk to the UK. We are now taking all possible measures to ensure they do not engage in terrorist activity."

Altogether five men - who had been tracked by MI5 before the raids last year - were appealing against deportation. Much of the detail in the case was presented to Siac - a court which deals with such cases - in secret during the past three weeks. Lawyer Gareth Peirce, who represented Mr Nazeer and Mr Khan said the ruling was the "worst of all possible worlds" because her clients were flagged up as being involved in terrorism based on evidence "one is not told". Dhe said: "It's no way to conduct justice. If people have committed a crime, put them on trial."

The ruling effectively means that MI5's case against the two men has been supported by the courts even though neither of them was ever charged with a criminal offence. But Abdul Wahab Khan, 27, and Tariq Ur Rehman, 38, who were also arrested at the time, lost their deportation appeals. They had already returned to Pakistan.

Mr Justice Mitting said they were committed Islamists who knew of Mr Naseer's plan. But student Shoaib Khan, however, won his appeal, with the court saying there was no evidence of wrongdoing against him. His lawyer Amjad Malik told the BBC that his 31-year-old client, who is also currently in Pakistan, wanted to return to the UK to resume his studies. In his judgement, the judge said Mr Naseer was sending e-mails to a contact in Pakistan - and that the recipient was an "al-Qaeda operative". The e-mails were said to be at the heart of the plot and culminated in a message sent to Pakistan in April 2009 in which Mr Naseer said he had set a date to marry, something MI5 said was code for an attack date.

"We are satisfied that Naseer was an al-Qaeda operative who posed and still poses a serious threat to the national security of the United Kingdom," the judgement said. It added: "Subject to the issue of safety on return, it is conducive to the public good that he should be deported." The judge said Ahmad Faraz Khan had become a "knowing party" to the plan because he had "undergone a radical change in view" between leaving home and studying in the UK. But in both cases, Mr Justice Mitting said it was impossible to return the men to Pakistan. "There is a long and well-documented history of disappearances, illegal detention and of the torture and ill-treatment of those detained, usually to produce information, a confession or compliance," said the judgement.

The government's independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Carlile, said: "We do not want people who have been held to be terrorists walking our streets. We therefore have to start looking for a different way of dealing with individual cases." He said he hoped the government would look at ways of ensuring people would be treated properly if they were returned to their native countries.

BBC political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg said Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude had suggested the coalition government would, for now, retain the Human Rights Act. This is despite a promise in the Conservative manifesto to replace it with "a British Bill of Rights". The BBC's home affairs editor Mark Easton said the it was likely that a control order would be used to restrict the movement and activities of the two men and to keep them under constant watch, although ministers would be unable to confirm this.

Imminent attack
Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty, said terror suspects needed a fair trial while those convicted "should be sent to secure prisons, not put on planes to face torture or make more trouble elsewhere."

The controversial affair began last April when the Metropolitan Police's then head of counter-terrorism, Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, inadvertently revealed details of the investigation. Mr Quick resigned after he was photographed carrying clearly visible secret documents outside 10 Downing Street. Police brought their operation forward and raided a series of locations across Liverpool, Manchester and Lancashire, eventually detaining 11 men. Ten of them were from Pakistan, who were all either close friends or loosely known to each other. Mr Quick told the BBC that at the time officials feared an imminent attack. But no explosives were found and all of the men were released without charge after two weeks. They were immediately detained again under immigration laws after the then home secretary sought their deportation, saying they were still a threat to national security.
---

Excuse me, Shami Chakrabarti, but what about MY human rights? When are you going to defend the people of this country against people like this committing mass murder in the name of their god? Oh, I see, it's inconvenient to protect the masses against the tyranny of the few, but it's perfectly fine to support people committing such acts. Idiocy. What happens now? We have to house these retards? We have to spend millions ensuring they're kept under surveillance? What a waste of money - they aren't OUR citizens! Send them back, and let the originators of these evil men handle them for the rest of their lives!!!

We do need a British Bill of Rights. We need it to protect our own citizens. There shouldn't really be any need for a commission. Common sense is enough.

I didn't feel any better off under Labour. All I saw was money thrown at the NHS which was then used to bring more foreign babies into the world (well, our part of the world).

I saw uncontrolled immigration at the expense of the indigenous population.

I saw expense scandals, and Mandelson... three times!

I saw our sovereignty signed over to an unelected group in Brussels in a shady back room deal where our own Prime Minister signed the Treaty away from the cameras.

I saw taxes rise. I saw petrol prices hit their highest ever. I saw petrol stations jammed and oil refineries blockaded.

I saw us enter wars we had no place being in - just to appear pally with an American Idiot.

But last of all, I saw an end to it because I didn't vote Labour.

Oh hai. We've just had an election in the UK. I know how other counties don't really care about the UK's political shenanigans, given that US TV didn't mention it at all while I was there. So, the Conservatives got in, but don't have a majority and will have to form a coalition with someone like the Liberal Democrats. I don't care as long as my taxes stay low or go lower, and I get equal rights as a human being who just happens to be gay.

Oh, and if we could remove religion from politics that'd be great, kthnxbai.

Edlington attack boys had 'toxic' upbringing
From BBC News:
Two brothers who brutally attacked two young boys witnessed serious domestic violence against their mother and had a "toxic home life", a court has heard. The brothers, aged 10 and 11 at the time, attacked their victims in Edlington, South Yorkshire, last April. Peter Kelson QC, representing the older brother, told Sheffield Crown Court the boys' father threatened to slice their mother's face "to bits" with a knife. The court heard the boys were also shown "extreme" horror films.

The sentencing hearing, which is expected to conclude on Friday, was adjourned for a short time after the younger brother became distressed. The boy put his head on the desk in front of him and cried as Mr Kelson began to outline the brothers' violent upbringing.

The judge, Mr Justice Keith, has heard how the brothers threatened to kill their victims, then aged nine and 11, stamped on them and attacked them with broken glass, bricks and sticks. One victim was forced to strip naked and perform a sex act and a metal ring was used to strangle one boy.

The brothers have admitted causing grievous bodily harm with intent. They have also each pleaded guilty to robbing one of the boys of a mobile phone and the other of cash and have admitted two counts of intentionally causing a child to engage in sexual activity.

'Gruesome movies'
The boys' mother, who has seven sons including the two defendants, described to a consultant psychiatrist being subjected to serious violence by their father. Mr Kelson described one incident when her partner said he would "take a knife to her and slice her face to bits". He added: "These threats were made in front of the children." The barrister said his client's upbringing could be summarised by a reference in one report to his "toxic home life". Mr Kelson said his client had been shown horror films at his home when he was as young as 10. He said the films were "extremely violent" and "gruesome movies in the extreme". The barrister said the boy also had access to his father's pornographic DVDs. Mr Kelson said his client would also drink cider, had 10 cigarettes a day and smoked cannabis grown on his father's allotment from the age of nine.

A BBC investigation has already revealed the two attackers were well-known troublemakers and that social services were heavily involved in their lives. A Safeguarding Children Board report, seen by BBC Newsnight, found the attack could have been prevented. Mr Kelson said he did not want to blame the state for the older brother's behaviour but said he had been "let down repeatedly". He added: "Children, young children, should be protected from themselves and the failure here is that nobody ever seems to have protected (the older brother) from himself and (the victims) have all suffered so terribly."

The hearing was adjourned until Friday.
---

Oh, boo hoo. Poor little kids. Nothing to do, eh? Bad upbringing? So what the FUCK gives you the right to nearly kill two young boys? NOTHING. I hope these two are sentenced to life in prison. Unfortunately, it seems they would be out before their 18th birthdays and given anonymity for the remainder of their lives. Why? Why are we protecting these evil little bastards? Let 'em rot in prison. They are notsafe to be in the community.

You know that Nigerian f**kwit who tried to blow up a plane of completely innocent people, in accordance with his views on Islam? Well, apparently he has burned his genitals and will likely never use them again. Excellent! We could do without people with this kind of murderous mindset being able to have kids.

See, if Allah really exists, it clearly didn't want this dickwad to succeed, and it also felt that his genitals needed to be burned beyond all recognition. What does that say about this 'god'? It says it does not exist. These murdering terrorist scum can sit there all they like shouting "Allahu akbar!" but with their failure to succeed it's clear they are simply delusional pillocks.

What sort of person thinks that their 'religion of peace' is peaceful if the god sitting atop it wants all non-believers to be killed? If you think that's peaceful, you're a prick.