Bishop Hill Greenpeace and the Labour party
David Rose has an explosive story about David Mills, the husband of Labour party bigwig Tessa Jowell. It is damning for Mills, who seems to be linked to a major money launderer and to "a criminal network dumping toxic and radioactive waste in the oceans".
What caught my eye about the story was that this was all uncovered by a team at Greenpeace. Rose takes up the story:
The report into the dumping of illegal toxic waste, seen by this newspaper, was the work of a three-year probe by a team from Greenpeace International. It said Mills – whom it described as ‘a figure of substance in the London legal profession’ – set up UK companies owned by Swiss financiers who funded this illegal trade.
Yet the report’s English version was published only fleetingly and then withdrawn – according to its lead author, following pressure from the then New Labour government.
The lead author of the Greenpeace report, speaking exclusively to The Mail on Sunday, alleges that it was suppressed because the charity did not want to make an enemy of Britain’s New Labour government by drawing attention to Ms Jowell, then Health Minister, and Mills.
International toxic waste expert Roberto Ferrigno says his Greenpeace report, entitled The Network, was supposed to be published in English in September 1998. But it was almost immediately withdrawn because of what he termed ‘a gentleman’s agreement’ not to cause too much trouble for Blair’s administration, which was then basking in its first landslide victory.
The reason for the withdrawal, he said, was the report’s references to Mills: ‘I was told someone was unhappy with it in London. I was called in by the senior management guys at Greenpeace International in Amsterdam and told it was being withdrawn because Greenpeace UK had problems with it.’
I couldn't help but recall the words of one Mr Burnham: "The party first, always". The oceans, it seems, can wait.
Reader Comments (41)
I wonder what Greenpeace were promised by Labour for keeping quiet on this. I would be very interested to see government donations to Greenpeace post 1998. Follow the money.
How long would it take to design and build the enviromentally friendly third Rainbow Warrior which entered operation on 14 Oct 2011?
> I wonder what Greenpeace were promised by Labour for keeping quiet on this.
I think labour relaxed the rules on charities actively lobbying government.
I must say there was a bit of an unpleasant smell when Mills was quickly booted out of the house when this business arose in the early stages of the Blair government. The fact that it has taken so long to surface might be indicative of its seriousness. Non diu latent scelera.
So GP comes up with a tenuous link (you can form a company in seconds on the Companies House website for a few quid and its legal) between Mills and an Italian guy and makes it into something much bigger than it is. Forming companies for overseas people is what Lawyers are paid to do. Then when it realises its really going to harm one of their own it backs off promptly instead of continuing the smear.
Mills has obviously got some dodgy links going on but as a Lawyer knows how to keep his fingers clean, very difficult to catch.
This is the best they had
'It said Mills – whom it described as ‘a figure of substance in the London legal profession’ – set up UK companies owned by Swiss financiers who funded this illegal trade.'
Much the same as their 'Big Oil' smear tactics.
Poor Tessa! A few years back hubby was embroiled with Berlusconi in another fraud. A large cash transaction was used to pay of their mortgage. Tessa didn't ask and hubby didn't tell! What shysters! It must be lurve!
The phrase 'the issue is never the issue' came to mind. One implication of it is that If you think otherwise, you are but a 'useful idiot'. I suspect there are a good few of them in Greenpeace and other notionally 'environmental' movements such as the WWF: decent people, that is, who are genuinely concerned with sundry eco-issues. I could not recall the author of the issue quote. A Google search came up with this, referring to Hilary Clinton's 1969 thesis at a college:
Source: http://genius.com/David-horowitz-a-modern-machiavelli-2-lyrics/#
SDS = 'Students for a Democratic Society' (they were anything but)
So, are there powerful Alinskyite nihilists within Greenpeace? It is a thesis that would explain the suppression of the toxic waste report in the UK.
Of course, it might be that the Greenpeace investigation was as accurate and well founded as most of their output. That which seemed so devastating in the echo chamber of the Eco chamber might have looked a bit flaky when it emerged into the real world.
It really is hard when a choice has to be made between a lawyer with Labour Party sympathies and an obnoxious sociopathic pressure group. Which one is likely to be telling the truth?
As ever, the real story is the cover up, regardless of the possible public interest in the actions of both parties.
In the best traditions of Watergate, the original "crime", is not as significant, as the actions and motives for the cover-up.
Also of course, why now? This story is probably not about settling old scores, as in the honourable "code of honour gutter-fight" that became Huhne v. Pryce.
Lord Peter Melchett gets a vivid write-up here: https://thewrongkindofgreen.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/from-greenpeace-to-greenwash/
Extract:
Would Alinsky be proud of him?
Come to think of it, wasn't there some connection to those shady Tchenguiz brothers?
Which other London mayoral candidate might have known about this as a member of Greenpeace?
Politics is often a very dirty game.
Not over impressed by this accusation.
By Coincidence yesterday I read a professional opinion that the World Ocean authorities had made a big mistake by declaring so many categories of waste like nuclear can't be buried in the sea. The expert insisted that nuclear waste should have gone as originally suggested into deep ocean trenches, cos there was going to make little difference to the biology and would have actually ended getting dragged deeper and deeper right into the Earth's crust.
- Then the DM article says this : \\This was planning to deploy hundreds of ‘penetrator’ devices to bury both asbestos and high-level nuclear waste from Europe in holes in the seabed off the coast of several countries in Africa.
This was later condemned as illegal by the International Atomic Energy Authority and the international bodies that police the law of the sea.//
- So the waste companies weren't even breaking the law by planning it before it was banned, but only if they continued afterwards.
- And I don't see any hard evidence against Mills in the DM article. It's not good to be a mafia lawyer or sell an ice cream to a guy who turns out later to a paedophile, but neither make you a crook.
- Mills is entitled to the due process of the law just as anyone else.
- Much as we despise Greenpeace it is possible that they dropped the report cos they hadn't got anything concrete, and didn't for once want to continue smearing without evidence.
And I thought Lord Melchett was a fictional character in Blackadder.
Reference to Safe ocean nuclear disposal in National Geographic education page
"Some scientists argue that this makes the Challenger Deep the perfect place to dispose of toxic nuclear waste. The material would be far from human habitation and would melt into the Earth's molten mantle at the subduction zone. An international agreement (the London Convention) currently makes this proposed method of nuclear waste disposal illegal."
I seem to remember that Tessa Jowell and Mills, separated some years ago over dodgy tax dealings. Therefore where is the smoking gun in the Labour room?
BTW Judith Curry just drew our attention about why much research never sees the light of day
- Science Publication bias that means surprising of stories get published more easily in the first place.
- That they are often surprising cos they are wrong
and Media bias, amazing stories are brought to us and routine ones not.
She references Dorothy Bishop Blog - Why does so much research go unpublished? (in the first place)
"...and didn't for once want to continue smearing without evidence."
stew, good comment. But it's a bit hard to see the last bit happening. Not because Greenpeace is inherently crooked but it simply isn't their method. When do you remember last a Greenpeace 'investigation' that didn't have huge holes in it, in terms of the facts, the slant they put on the story, or the relative political safety of their chosen targets? Greenpeace 'courage' only comes out into play when it chooses corporate targets.
Trefjon -
"I seem to remember that Tessa Jowell and Mills, separated some years ago over dodgy tax dealings. Therefore where is the smoking gun in the Labour room?"
- It concerns events that took place in the 1990s.
Problem is, everything is always"toxic" or "radioactive" where greenpeace "reports" are concerned.
So whatever the truth of the matter is, I don't expect to hear it from greenpeace.
Relating to the disposal of nuclear waste:
The author of "Merchants of Despair" Robert Zubrin has a PHD in Nuclear Engineering. In his book he said the best way to dispose of the waste was to encase it in stainless steel drums and drop it into the deep Ocean trenches as described above. Apparently the bottom of the trenches is a deep layer of 'silt' and the speed of the drums on impact would bury them deep in the silt.
michael hart, Greenpeace are toxic. They prey on the vulnerable who may have the purest motives, and poison them into headline grabbing actions. Meanwhile the top brass enjoy the trappings of luxury and power.
Similarities with Islamic State, and other terrorist groups, are entirely of their own making.
Indeed, GC.
As the saying goes: "Greenpeace is neither."
Dung
Robert Zubrin opines:-
"the best way to dispose of the waste was to encase it in stainless steel drums and drop it into the deep Ocean trenches"
To be really sure of permanent disposal the trench would need to be of the Island Arc or the actively subducting continental margin variety where a big sediment load would bury the drums rapidly and then the sediments and contained drums would be subducted with the descending plate and melted.
There is some risk that the sediment and drums could be planed off onto the continental plate as an ophiolite accretion wedge however.
In any case suitable trenches of this type are not very numerous and the are generally fairy close to densely populated areas such as Indonesia, Chile, Peru and Japan.
So who stands to gain from the timing of this story?
Jowells rivals within the Labour Party?
Candidates for Mayor from any party?
Disgruntled Greenpeace activists/leaders?
If this was a leak from right of centre, it would have come out before.
This is more likely Green/Red v. Red/Green. Very confusing for onlookers and damaging for participants. Buy popcorn, and settle down.
Small businesses are drowning under the weight of this sort of nonsense.
Activists create a "problem" , have a hand in legislating action, then form consultancies that you have to pay to help you deal with the problem.
A bunch of leeches helping themselves by skimming from productive enterprises. Don't think the Mafia haven't noticed this socially-approved form of extortion.
From what this American has seen of the contingent chasing the London mayoralty, a circular firing squad ain't a bad idea. Is there anyone sane and capable in the lot?
Popcorn it is.
This is old news that a lawyer did business with a dodgy guy. So what? The news now is that Greenpeace backed off as he had an in with the Blair Government. So why talk about it now?
I agree it's in-fighting. But it's simply Green vs Red.
The Dennis Skinner wing of the Labour Party has been overpowered by the middle-class, identity politics neo-Greens for a long time. But Corbyn has shown that the left-wing still has support form the grassroots. And with Union funding being in jeopardy, the grass roots need to be listened to.
So expect a lot of these things to come out soon. From both sides.
Including how funding if the Miner's Strike in the 80s was achieved.
OK Wait a minute. Right I got the broom now where's that carpet.
@M Courtney
The oppressive and evil communist administration of East Germany:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292470/Miners-strike-1980s-funded-East-German-communists-historians-say.html
Scargill (the miner's Marxist leader) was an evil little man. And a hypocrite:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10573027/Arthur-Scargill-tried-to-buy-his-London-council-flat-under-Tory-right-to-buy-scheme.html
Sorry, should have used html tags to make the links live!
communist funding of MUM
scargill the hypocrite
As Private Eye on its cover once described her:
Tessa "I have never met my husband" Jowell
John Shade @ 11.25 " Eton educacted Lord Melchett ".
One beauty of the blogosphere is how often what the unimaginative perceive as a mere typo is in fact is the inspired creation of a new word of great potency and fertility.
"Educacted" - schooled and disciplined in the art and behaviour of membership within the ruling oligarchy, using family and personal peer contacts to occupy a chosen niche within the most powerful and wealthy of globally influential organisations.
My definition is open to refinement.
In other news on the page
Fascinating, who'd have known? Don't miss it...Most of our politicians and lawyers are not brave enough to get involved in anything really dodgy...they already make enough money and the risk of jail time is too great.
Suspect this is going nowhere.
Always nice to see Greenpeace getting slagged off, though. I stopped worrying whether stories showing them in a bad light were true or not a long time ago.
And to think I was a member for many years....
where is vvussell when you need him to obfuscate the issues?
Ottokring 6:24
Tessa "I have never met my husband" Jowell.
She is obviously not the only one, to have been so lucky.
Greenpeace is not a charity. It's a political organization funded in as shady a manner as any other political organization.
Consider now real charities, like the Red Cross or even the Humane Society. They have never behaved as Greenpeace does. Ever.
"Consider now real charities, like the Red Cross or even the Humane Society. They have never behaved as Greenpeace does. Ever." --Brute
Yet, Brute, yet.
"And to think I was a member for many years...."
Are you sure? Perhaps, like me, you were held at arms length as a mere "supporter".