December 17th, 2010

Jemima Khan’s Hypocrisy

Seeing a passing bandwagon, attention craving Jemima Khan decided to delve deep into her family’s wealth to help bail out Julian Assange. Explaining her decision she wrote:

“I believe that this is about censorship and intimidation… On the one hand, the US is proud of its First Amendment and its long-standing commitment to the freedom of speech…On the other hand, it is examining ways to take legal action against Assange, who is in effect editor of the world’s first stateless (non-profit) media organisation… WikiLeaks offers a new type of investigative journalism… I feel passionately that democracy needs a strong and free media.”

A noble sentiment perhaps, but Khan hasn’t always put her money where her mouth now is, in fact quite the opposite. She seems to have suffered slight amnesia forgetting the time when she wasn’t such an advocate for free speech. The Goldsmith consiglieres, with the aid of Carter Ruck, flipped a switch when their super-injunction gagging order was leaked to, wait for it… Wikileaks:

WIKILEAKS PRESS RELEASE / EDITORIAL
December 24, 2008

December the 15th saw a secret UK court hearing, with secret participants, produce a secret order to secretly gag the population, the terms of which are secret and the revelation of which is punishable by up to 10 years of imprisonment. How many of these orders exist is unknowable—we glimpse at the severity of the problem only when the orders are violated. So let’s start violating them.

Wikileaks previously released the gag order for the Northern Rock bank collapse, now we release the secret gag order made by High Court Justice Tugendhat on Dec 15, 2008 aimed at covering up an email leak from the British establishment. The secret order first targeted UK newspapers, but our copy was destined for the UK Parliamentary blogger ‘Guido Fawkes’, editor of ‘order-order.com‘. The summary states:

  1. The identities of the Applicants/Claimants must remain confidential.
  2. The fact of the existence of the Orders must remain confidential.
  3. The terms of the Orders must remain confidential.

The order concerns emails from Zac Goldsmith, a noted 2005 Conservative party recruit, and social climber sibling Jemima Khan. Both are heirs to the late billionaire financier Sir James Goldsmith. Needless to say there are no teachers, small business owners or technicians being granted secret media gag orders in the UK.

The order states that anyone who knows of the order must obey it, so plaintiff lawyers Carter Ruck have served the order on media outlets across the British Isles.

Britain is an increasingly dangerous Western disgrace, but you won’t hear about it in the British press.

Oh the irony, needless to say Guido told them to get stuffed


181 Comments

  1. 1
    Fry His Ass-ange says:

    All the luvies and useful idiots are out in full force on this one.

    Like

    • 5
      AngryEnglishJon says:

      Bugger all to do with her shallow life. Better she shut up along with the rest of the sanctimonious pillocks

      Like

      • 115
        Osama the Nazarene says:

        Guido is happy to quote Wiki Leaks where it concerns his nemesis one Johnah Brown but if it offends the lovely Sarah of Moose land Wiki Leaks is viewed as a pariah.

        A touch inconsistent, methinks.

        Like

        • 129
          Free Speech but only if it's approved by Cameron and the U.S. says:

          Now, now, I’m sure Mr Fawkes was dying to stand up for free speech and help out Mr Assange but just couldn’t get the cash from his CCHQ paymasters.

          At least he’s not a hypocrite and would never indulge in “the most acrimonious lit i gation, hard fought at every turn of a number of interlocutory skirmishes. No holds were barred; no punches were pulled”.

          Like

    • 21
      Anonymous says:

      Not many of them supported the ‘freedom of speech’ of Gert Wilders or the Koran burning pastor from Texas.

      I wonder why?

      Like

      • 77
        Anonymous says:

        To protect the silly P******s from their own actions, better to act now than at some later at much greater cost, just as Jimmy Gordon did over the bankers, PFI etc and we know how much is costing us.

        Like

        • 152
          Terribly chic surname collecting uber-rich Posh Totty says:

          OK she might as well get the publicity:

          You can follow Jemima Khan on twitter: @JemKhan

          Just for the record: Jimmy Goldsmith really was very cool but as mad as a bag of cats. RIP

          Like

    • 35
      Yanks turn on their Own says:

      How come the Luvvies are not sticking up for Private Bradley Manning who has been in solitary cofinement for six months without charge or trial? He is not allowed to exercise and hasn’t even got a pillow.

      Wikileaks organised a collection for his legal expenses but the money has not reached the organisation that has taken on his defence.

      Like

      • 58
        Hard-Lazing Voter says:

        Bradley Manning doesn’t have a cult of personality to maintain.

        All hail Lord Assange! Truth to the tenets of Wikileakity!

        When they eventually commit mass-suicide, what will they use in place of Kool-Aid? Robinsons’ cordiale?

        Like

      • 75
        Anonymous says:

        there isn’t a tv camera crew within 40 miles of bradley manning. these people would support a nazi war criminal if they thought it would get them some positive face time with the proles

        for once it might actually do some good however

        Like

    • 37
      Jedi Knight says:

      All Hackers are by definition: crooks.

      They are no different from Nigerian hoods fleecing saddoes on the internet or Russian mafia selling watches or viagra to online twats.

      Assange is the Numero Uno Crook. Just because he is anti-American he is suddenly a Hero of the People. He is indifferent – like the Hard Wired Luvvy Left – to tyrannies like Venezuala, Iran, North Korea or Russia.

      The same wankers who glorify violent demos in the UK will no doubt rush to support him & his band of halfwits by claiming “freedom of speech etc” but in reality they are silent on the thugocracies they admire that commit heinious crimes in the name of Islam or African nationalism.

      Assange is now playing the “victim” card but he is responsible for dangerous activities that have led to deaths. After he exposed the Kenyan Governments policy on Aids a few years back, hundreds died in the subsequent riots and thousands were displaced.

      Like

      • 43
        Publish and be damned says:

        As far as I am aware assange is not a hacker.

        He is a journalist who publishes leaked info. Just like the Telegraph did on MPs expenses.

        Like

        • 47
          Jedi Knight says:

          Assange began his career in Australia as a hacker.

          Like

          • justa Yoof having a bit of fun says:

            When he was just sixteen and he did it for the buzz and did no damage. Although it is not surprising that the US authorities want to label him as a hacker today.

            Like

        • 86
          Jedi Knight says:

          He has also gone silent about the activities of criminal hackers disrupting legitimate businesses like Amazon and PayPal in support of his crimes.

          Like

          • Unsworth says:

            A) Silence does not mean approval. It merely means silence. The classic Marxist ‘you are either for us or against us’ is extremism.

            B) That Assange was a hacker in his youth may or may not be true. The question is – is he one now?

            Like

          • Dave says:

            Do you mean “hacker” as in commited criminal acts or do you mean hacker as in he built some pretty decent security tools which people can use to protect their information from 3rd parties and knows his way around a computer ?

            Like

          • Anonymous says:

            ddos’ing a domain is not hacking

            assange hasn’t commented because it is nothing to do with him, he didn’t ask them to do it nor could he stop them. If someone were throwing shit at your enemies would you get involved?

            Like

      • 76
        jgm2 says:

        What secret AIDS policy was that which so enraged the voters of Kenya?

        Like

        • 87
          Truth Seeker says:

          Back in 2007, WikiHacks released documents about corruption in Kenya.

          The leak exposed massive corruption by Daniel Arap Moi, and the Kenyan people sat up and took notice. In the ensuing elections, in which corruption became a major issue, violence swept the country. “1,300 people were eventually killed, and 350,000 were displaced. That was a result of our leak,” says Assange. It’s a chilling statistic, but then he states: “On the other hand, the Kenyan people had a right to that information and 40,000 children a year die of malaria in Kenya. And many more die of money being pulled out of Kenya, and as a result of the Kenyan shilling

          Like

      • 79
        Kristall Nacht says:

        Jedi Knight, go fuck yourself as you know nothing about that whereof you speak. Here are the facts, as laid out by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates:

        “Now, I’ve heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described as a meltdown, as a game-changer, and so on. I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought. The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it’s in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets. Many governments — some governments — deal with us because they fear us, some because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as has been said before, the indispensable nation. Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.”

        Like

        • 130
          You go fuck yourself you poodling government censorship apologist says:

          Which is why loon politicians in the US want him executed.

          Like

      • 83
        Fry His Ass-ange says:

        The great Ass-ange waffles on regarding conspiracy and disinformation about himself by deep dark forces and others. Quite frankly, all that is required is a brief reading of some of Ass-ange’s cringeworthy personal writing to establish that the guy is a complete wanker, as the extract below from his personal blog shows.

        “The truth is not found on the page, but is a wayward sprite that bursts forth from the readers mind for reasons of its own. I once thought that the Truth was a set comprised of all the things that were true, and the big truth could be obtained by taking all its component propositions and evaluating them until nothing remained. I would approach my rhetorical battles as a logical reductionist, tearing down, atomizing, proving, disproving, discarding falsehoods and reassembling truths until the Truth was pure, golden and unarguable. But then, when truth matters most, when truth is the agent of freedom, I stood before Justice and with truth, lost freedom. Here was something fantastical, unbelievable and impossible, you could prove that (A => B) and (B => C) and (C => D) and (D => F) Justice would nod its head and agree, but then, when you turned to claim your coup de grace, A => F irrevocably, Justice would demur and revoke the axiom of transitivity, for Justice will not be told when F stands for freedom. Transitivity is evoked when Justice imagines F and finding the dream a pleasurable one sets about gathering cushions to prop up their slumber. Here then is the truth about the Truth; the Truth is not bridge, sturdy to every step, a marvel of bound planks and supports from the known into the unknown, but a surging sea of smashed wood, flotsam and drowning sailors. So first, always pick your poetic metaphor, to make the reader want to believe, then the facts, and — miracle! — transitivity will descend from heaven, invoked as justification for prejudice.”

        This drivel comes from his blog here http://web.archive.org/web/20071020051936/http://iq.org/

        Like

      • 132
        Anonymous says:

        hackers by definition are not crooks. You are talking about ‘crackers’ which is coincidently what you could also be described as.

        you might want to do more than 30 seconds of research before posting long rants on the internet.

        Like

      • 147
        annnnonyperson says:

        I agree Jedi Knight!

        And doesn’t he LOOK like the kind of weirdo creep who would believe that all women are just ‘gagging for a shagging’ by Jules the Bold, the saviour of the free world? So, therefore, in the warped world of Jules Lestrange, ‘No’ means ‘yes’, so it’s a quick fuck and: “Be grateful I chose to shag you, you bitch!” or “OK, well, you can report me to the police… but just you try it! If you take me to court I’ll close down the Swedish legal system!”

        Is THIS what happens when an unelected pipsqueak hacker like our Jules gets more power than his funny little pointy head can cope with? I think it might be.

        Like

      • 171
        Anonymous says:

        Are you fucking stupid or what?

        Assange did not Hack the cable’s, wiki-leaks is a whistle blowing website, which in turn allow’s whistleblower’s anonymity in posting documents for the better understanding for the whole human race, it just goes to prove exactly what our so called elite say behind closed doors, and it proves that “us” sheep are nothing to them.

        Its the politicians who fear whistle-blower’s. get that into your stupid thick skull!

        But people like you will allow the corruption of politics to walk right over you and your children’s future’s, & with out making a stand.

        Grow some balls you idiot!

        Like

    • 62
      Jemima's dad says:

      Never did understand why she ran off to Pakistan became a Muslim and married that ex cricketer who was old enough to be her dad.

      Like

    • 123
      i say Fuck him ! says:

      Assange is a rich Wanker on a huge ego trip, that much is clear.

      Like

    • 142
      Willsteed says:

      Note also that her father James Goldsmith tried to sue Private Eye into oblivion on about ten occasions.

      Like

  2. 2
    I like gold says:

    I like gold

    Like

  3. 3

    But she a great rubber duck.

    Like

  4. 4
    Chris says:

    Hopefully there’s more good stuff to come out to rival the Brazilian authority’s systematically & institutionally locking away Muslims on fake narcotics charges

    Most of the other stuff has just been idle gossip

    Like

  5. 7
    Righty Right Wing (Mrs) says:

    Her hypocrisy is delicious.

    Give her a job at the BBC.

    Like

  6. 8
    Where are Tony Blair's Expenses says:

    The Guardian described her as ” The writer Jemima Khan” – can anyone enlightend me as to exactly what she has produced that we should be reading. She is just a good time girl who just happened to marry a famous cricketer; if she was from council estate and not from the Goldsmith clan she would be more aptly described as a slapper ( bit like our friend Sally Bercow really)

    Like

    • 30
      The Penguin says:

      Yeah, damn right – but wouldn’t you just like a chance to do to her what her lovely family have done to so many?

      The Penguin.

      Like

    • 124
      i say Fuck him ! says:

      She is a thick cow with an eating disorder.

      Like

    • 178
      The writer Jemima Khan says:

      * 26 articles (since April 2001)
      * Average article: 45 column inches (1354 words)
      * Shortest article: 15 column inches (457 words)
      * Longest article: 124 column inches (3733 words)

      Like

  7. 9
    Hamish says:

    Be charitable, Guido.
    There is great rejoicing in heaven if one sinner repents.
    As well as giggling down here, and gnashing of teeth in the basement.

    Like

  8. 10
    Gordon Brown says:

    Today I will be a Betamax video recorder.

    Like

  9. 11
    Gordon Brown ate my hamster says:

    If you believe in free speech, Guido, then why don’t you remove your moderation algorithm?

    Like

  10. 14
    He says:

    With crutons

    Like

  11. 15
    hazy memory says:

    Wasn’t there some article from Jemima a little while ago about modifying free speech laws so as not to offend muslims?

    Like

  12. 16
    Anonymous says:

    I wonder if Assange’s bloated c*u*n*t of a lawyer would make public all privileged conversations with his clients. In the spirit of openess of course.

    Like

  13. 18
    Jemima Khan't says:

    The world is full of hypocrites, you included Guido, daahling.

    Like

  14. 20
    My other car's a Merkava says:

    Why did she keep her married name? Is she a self-hating you-know-what?

    Like

  15. 28
    confused says:

    does Gordon Brown have life insurance?

    surely a true socialist would be happy to leave the fate of his wife and children to the arm embrace of the state

    Like

  16. 31
    Professor Henry Brubaker, Institute for Studies says:

    One again i am not in any way suprised at the hypocrisy of a lefty luvvie. This wikileaks/Assange business is not about ‘free speech’, instead its about embarrasing the west and especially the US

    Free speech doesnt mean you have the right to blab everything you know, especially if those things are meant to be confidential. I used to be a soldier and I know things that may be useful to an enemy but I dont blab about them. I have no right to blab about them either to the press, the world at large or wikileaks

    I have access to personal details of clients which they would not wish me to splurge all over the internet, and I have no right to.

    This wikileaks bollocks is nothing to do with free speech. Stealing confidential material and then publically revealing all is not an exercise in free speech at all. If it where considered as such then we would seemingly have no right nor expectation of any privacy whatsoever.

    So in that vein, if Jemima Khan believes so passionatley in this sort of ‘free speech’ i demand, and am entitled to, answers to the following questions:

    When did you last have a really good shit?

    When did you last have a period?

    how many sexual partners have you had?

    have you ever had a sexually transmitted disease?

    do you take it in the ass?

    please make available all your medical records

    please make available all you banking details and statements.

    please make available a record of all your texts, phonecalls, emails, internet search history, online shopping, flights and travel details.

    Please reveal your home address, phone numbers, email addresses and such.

    The answers are to those questions are personal and, of course, I have no right to know them. I dont actually care about the answers to these questions, I simply wish to publish them online in order to embarress her.

    So lets stop with this ‘free speech’ bollocks because this is nothing of the sort.

    Like

    • 38
      They're all smug, sneering, Celt cunts at the BBC, 'cept Kuenssberg whom I wish to bum intensely says:

      What’s the issue with that?

      I am a law abiding, very right of centre, high-rate taxpayng, England for the English fellow, but I despise the yank trash.

      9/11 would have far more enjoyable if 50 planes had rained down on the vermin

      Like

      • 50
        Professor Henry Brubaker, Institute for Studies says:

        Am I expected to feed this troll?

        Like

        • 57
          The Management says:

          Yes. Get on with it.

          Like

          • Postlethwaite says:

            Proff Brubaker AKA singed berk
            Medical records no longer confidential – Blair
            Bank details not been confidential in my lifetime – all parties
            Rrecord of all your texts, phonecalls, emails, internet search history, online shopping, flights and travel details – all accesed and recorded / owned by the GB government – Brown
            Home address, phone numbers, email addresses and such – partof the great computer programme that correlates and records your every move – mobile phone tracks you every 15 seconds to within 10 ft o th e planet
            ”The answers are to those questions are personal and, of course, I have no right to know them. ”
            I do care about the need for this info to be kept on me.
            So lets stop with this ‘free speech’ bollocks
            Agreed, I just want to be free.

            Like

    • 49
      Ewanme says:

      Coooeeee , Henry , hun xx .

      I just had a good dump , if that’s of any interest to you ???

      E x .

      **yawn**

      P.S. Can we have the craption comp early today , Guido , darlin ??? Ta .

      Like

    • 94
      Neither Right nor Left says:

      What are you talking about man?

      This isn’t about you releasing confidential or personal information that you have a duty to protect. Assange did NOT release documents that defied His country or His clients. He released someone else’s. There was a bloody good reason for this, the picture painted of the USA around the world is false. The documents are being leaked in order to ballance the picture. Many of the policies dictated by our last illustrious two leaders were as a direct involvemnt of the UK being too close to an increasingly unpleasant US foreign policy.

      The USA is NOT a defender of freedom and democracy, take a bloody good look, Recent news.

      OBAMA wants detention increased to 180 days.

      Senators want Assange executed

      ‘Secret Court’ assembled to decide what to do with Assange

      The term ‘Terrorist’ used against News organisations and Free Speech

      The guy who DID leak USA secrets kept in an isolated cold cell without a blanket or pillow for six months (no excersize).

      The UK’s Guardian and The New York Times banned from US Military viewing

      US seeks underhanded extradition from Sweden of a guy in British custody (WTF)

      Wake up man, the USA has fallen a long way since it could be reasonably called ‘The Land of The Free’

      To put this into perspective, even China allows its people to read the fecking Guardian.

      Like

      • 104
        Unsworth says:

        Does China allow its people to read (yes, I know) the Daily Sport?

        Like

      • 111
        Professor Henry Brubaker, Institute for Studies says:

        Right on brother! Your short left wing style rant has convinced me of the futility of my arguement and that Assange is some kind of hero!

        Actually, whilst typing the above sentence I came to realise that your post is, in fact, conspiracy theory bollocks. My conversion was due to a moment of physical and mental weakness brought on by the utter boredom of reading yet another ‘america is the great satan’ style post on the internet. Well done, your very original.

        I return to my original point: Releasing this confidential information via wikileaks in this manner is not a expression of free speech, its a crime.

        Berk.

        Like

    • 126
      jemima is a thick mare says:

      Ok if they really wont unfettered information to information Lets have a full list of all celebs with eating disorders, coke habits and offshore tax havens.

      Like

  17. 32
    They're all smug, sneering, Celt cunts at the BBC, 'cept Kuenssberg whom I wish to bum intensely says:

    Yes but Ms Khan is very sexually submissive I have heard, this situation far outweighs any so called ‘ipocrisy’

    Pikey Fawkes wants the UK to remain an unthinking puppet to the Washington warlord’s depraved demands

    Like

  18. 33
    Penfold says:

    Spoilt little rich girl, jumping on a bandwagon.

    Perhaps she wants to marry Juli baby, and mother him diddums, and grab that media spotlight.

    Hypocrisy was always at the forefront of the Goldschmidts.

    He might have been a “financier”, but having had dealings with the old shark in his Cavenham days, he was a very naughty boy.!! Dodgy, used car dodgy.

    Like

  19. 34
    Cato Street Conspirator says:

    Doesn’t alter the fact that Wikileaks is a good thing and that the latest releases are something we are entitled to know about.

    Like

    • 44
      Anonymous says:

      No. The latest releases are interesting and they embarrass various governments, which we like.

      I would say we aren’t entitled to know the contents of these documents, actually. But I very much like being shown them.

      Like

    • 48
      Professor Henry Brubaker, Institute for Studies says:

      I dont agree sir.

      Like

    • 65
      The truth will out. says:

      At least we now know that the English Plod were gathering evidence against the McCanns.

      Like

    • 150
      misterned says:

      You are not entitled to know classified information, and Wikileaks are not authorised, nor responsible enough to be trusted to choose what should and should not be declassified and published.

      This whole thing is a smoke and mirrors dog and pony show as a prelude to a real clampdown on the Internet.

      Assange is a twat and should be allowed to fry.

      Like

  20. 42
    status quo says:

    Dale has another blogpost this morning. The farewell tour continues.

    Like

  21. 45
    albacore says:

    If she’s a hypocrite, she ain’t the only one.
    There was a significant High Court ruling this morning that gave freedom of speech a rare boost and the Equality and Human Rights Commission a right shafting.
    It is and will remain outside Fawkes’ box.

    Like

  22. 53
    potty says:

    Quite Guido & haven’t your 2008 predictions come to pass

    Like

  23. 61
    Gordon Brown ate my hamster says:

    Can some of you fuckwits make up your mind? Either you’re for free speech or you’re not. You come to a site which – quite rightly – exposes crooked politicians and dodgy goings on in Westminster, and yet you get all worked up because a European has exposed what the American and British governments have been saying and doing. You’re all for who’s shagging who in Big Ben Town but your subservient streak means you desperately want to crush anyone who dares embarrass Uncle Sam and its military industrial board of directors. I’m for 100% free speech, whether it’s details about Handycock’s sinister behaviour, or details about an Apache gunship obliterating 20 Iraqi civilians.

    Like

    • 105
      Neither Right nor Left says:

      Dear Sir/Madam.
      “and yet you get all worked up because a European has exposed what the American and British governments have been saying and doing”
      Why that’s complete nonesence, they’re getting worked up because an AUSTRALIAN has exposed what US and British authorities have been saying and doing. ;)

      Like

    • 106
      Unsworth says:

      You ain’t got it, have you? Free speech is not the same as unrestricted access to all information.

      Like

      • 112
        Professor Henry Brubaker, Institute for Studies says:

        I agree. This is not an expression of free speech. Its the criminal release of stolen confidential information.

        It would not be ‘free speech’ for someone to splurg NRNL’s medical history or bank details all over the internet. That too, would be a crime.

        Like

        • 116
          keyboard warrior says:

          It’s no good talking sense to the ‘top boy’…

          Like

        • 117
          Unsworth says:

          Criminality is yet to be proven in a Court. Until it is (i.e. charges laid, trial, verdict etc etc) the notion of ‘criminality’ is mere opinion.

          As to splurging (details, of course – whatever were you thinking?) there is plethora of considerations. Which jurisdiction, which legislation, which court, which charges etc etc etc – virtually ad infinitum.

          Let’s not confuse opinion with fact, eh?

          Like

          • Professor Henry Brubaker, Institute for Studies says:

            Confusing opinion with fact is a central part of my interweb manner, that and the inclusion of my delusions that what I say on the web makes a difference.

            I think the crime thing is clear cut: stealing that information is a crime. Blurting it out is NOT free speech .

            Like

          • Unsworth says:

            Right, so who did the stealing?

            Is blurting illegal? Perhaps I missed the reference in the Statutes.

            Like

          • misterned says:

            Publishing classified information without authority is a crime in the USA. Specifically publishing American classified cables on an American server without authorisation is a federal felony.

            We all know Assange published this data on his website hosted on American Servers, under American legal jurisdiction. He admitted it and we have all borne witness to it.

            When you see someone blatanly pick up an item that you and they both know is not their property in a shop, and you see them leave the shop without paying for it, then you do not need to wait for a jury to announce their guilt to know they are a thief. Likewise if you were to witness a man stab and kill another man, you would know they are murderer without the need for a jury to announce guilt.

            Assange has performed his crime in full mainstream media promoted public glare, and has bragged of performing functions which areknoen to be illegal.

            Like

          • mister obama's censorship poodle says:

            if assange is guilty of that then so is the New York Times and every other outlet publishing them…so a big fat fail there Judge Judy

            try looking up the pentagon papers supreme court case you stupid censorship apologist wanker

            Like

          • Lord Goldsmith says:

            Agree with your analysis.

            The information was confidential and it was stolen.

            I also agree that free speech and the disclosure of stolen confidential information are two different things.

            The problem is that the law relating to confidential information is totally focussed on commercial situations, which over the years have given rise to civil search warrants (Anton Piller Orders) and a variety of injunctive reliefs. Nowhere (to my knowledge anyway – I better look it up) is there any authority on the misuse of confidentail information in a criminal context. I suspect there must be a statute lurking somewhere however.

            If it is correct that there is such a criminal offence in USA, then shagger Assange is stuffed. And so is the new York Times and anyone else who appears to have misused criminally-obtained information.

            As for this bint Khan, she just can’t help herself can she ? ‘Attention-craving’ says it all. The whole family is addicted to self-publicity, it’s sick-making. Assange should fuck her up the arse and then charge her for it (in my legal opinion).

            Like

    • 144
      it ain't that fucking hard says:

      Free speech is when I can say we should halt immigration. It’s not giving our troops positions away.

      Like

  24. 66
    pissed off voter says:

    he may well be hypocriical but she sure is not alone

    e.g. lib dumbs and tuition fees
    Cameron and EU
    Brown and almost everything

    Like

  25. 70
    Gordon Brown ate my hamster says:

    You like someone who called his pet pigs Anne and Frank? Right. Look, there’s a documentary on Hitler! Go and wank to your hero!

    Like

    • 84
      Gordon Brown ate my hamster says:

      So anyone who happens to despise Hitler is a Guardianista? OK. You are quite clearly the most stupid gormless c unt in the known and unknown universe. Did your mother drink bleach when she had you up her muff?

      Like

      • 93
        Excellent News says:

        Oh do fuck off.

        Like

      • 170
        Scootaboy says:

        I vote Tory, read the telegraph, and I think Hitler was terrible. Modern people who link Hitler to modern day political decisions /attitudes are quite wrong. Even Nick Griffin is nothing like Hitler. Remember if hitler didnt like you you would usually be shot or sent to a death camp to die

        Like

    • 140
      Tell it like it really is says:

      That, (0GB ate m h) is just made up guardian shite – thought you were a bit more intelligent than to believe it but you are obviously the one brain cell types they cater for.

      Like

  26. 72
    Julian Assminge fucked the USA while they were asleep says:

    What really made me gag with laughter was in Mark Stephens’ first statement to the press. He said that Assminge’s supporters had pledged their ‘hard earned money’ to the cause.

    Jem Khan’s ‘hard earned money’ WTF!!?? Hello? Fuck! Even I think that and I’m a wingnut FFS!!!

    Like

  27. 73
    The Watcher says:

    I wonder how she values free speech in Pakistan where a woman is awaiting execution for converting to Christianity? I always fancied JG – but never imagined she was so shallow.

    Like

  28. 85
    (I've been renamed) DA-Notice says:

    Maybe she’s seen the light?

    Like

  29. 88
    The Beast of Notting hill says:

    she also let Hugh Grant fuck her

    Like

  30. 90
    The Beast of Gehan Staz Politzei says:

    Anne Frank and her diaries are a nonsense
    I wish I could get that much cash for hiding my imaginary daughter in an imaginary loft then flogging a book

    Like

  31. 91
    Kered Ybretsae says:

    Let’s have more GagLeaks!!!

    Like

  32. 92
    Postal Vote says:

    Guido, you’re just envious that Jemima may wants to test Assange’s manhood as well.

    By the way, the big issue here is that the US’s approach to the Wiki saga is damaging Obama’s standing among left-leaning politicians and voters.

    Like

  33. 108
    RICH MAN says:

    HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO SHAG JEMIMA KHAN UP THE BUM?

    Like

  34. 121
  35. 154
    Nurse Rachet says:

    He he he –

    This evil filth went in the oven.

    Like

  36. 155
    Nurse Rachet says:

    jam

    Like

  37. 167
    Anonymous says:

    So the delicious Jemima has upset the English-hating plutocrat Mr Fawkes. Excellent. Ha ha ha.

    Like

  38. 169
    Scootaboy says:

    Well done Guido. JK is a hypocritical little twit, albiet a rich twit. On Radio4 the other day they had Helena Kennedy suporting Julian A. She was putting her mind to the swedish investigation. Image what she would have said if it had been Nick Griffin or a Tory Mp or even a footballer facing those charges– there would have been howls of indignation from the old cow about womens rights in Rape and how he should go straight over to sweden and admit his crime and full support for the Swedish authorities

    Like

  39. 179
    Ally says:

    What disgusting place blog this is racist,fascist Hunts foaming athe mouth

    Like

  40. 180
    Ally says:

    @Scootaboys

    Not charges,allegations,are you an idiot who doesn’t know the difference between a charge and an allegation? Ignorant sick fu ck.

    Like

  41. 181

    Poor kid cannot even spell appropriate right. Tsk tsk tsk…

    Like


Seen Elsewhere

Apple’s Tim Cook: iGay | Techno Guido
Insurgent Parties Plunge Labour Into Crisis | Alex Wickham
Mind-Bending Politics of Drugs | Mark Wallace
PC Worries Prevent Police Protecting Young Girls | Jill Kirby
Miliband Should Win Rochester | Martin Kettle
Thatcher Minister Sir John Nott ‘Voted for UKIP’ | Times
Time to Listen to Drugs Experts | Guardian
Drug Laws Don’t Work | Times
Our Moral Duty to Cut Taxes | David Cameron
Greens Ahead of LibDems | Guardian
Channel 4 to Spoof UKIP Election Win | Guardian


VOTER-RECALL
Find out more about PLMR


David Cameron drug policy reformer and leadership contender in 2005…

“Politicians attempt to appeal to the lowest common denominator by posturing with tough policies and calling for crackdown after crackdown. Drugs policy has been failing for decades.”



“Digger” Murdoch says:

Is it just me, or is Nigel Farage just a top hat and a monocle away from being a Batman villain?


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,550 other followers