Monday, December 27, 2010
Sunday, December 26, 2010
SWINE FLU KILLER VACCINE
http://www.rense.com/general85/vacc.htm
Do Not Take A
Swine Flu Vaccine!From Patricia Doyle, PhD
4-25-9
Do Not Take A
Swine Flu Vaccine!From Patricia Doyle, PhD
4-25-9
|
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Friday, December 24, 2010
Thursday, December 23, 2010
SOON....we will hear' boyfriend helping police with their enquiries'
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/12/23/boyfriend-s-tearful-plea-for-missing-architect-jo-yeates-115875-22801664/
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Canynge+Rd,+Bristol,+City+of+Bristol+BS9,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=19.228226,66.84082&ie=UTF8&geocode=FW81EQMdlPjX_w&split=0&hq=&hnear=Canynge+Rd,+Bristol,+Avon+BS8,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.459775,-2.62404&panoid=YAEAQGdgmFRorzYPhuZNEw&cbp=12,57.07,,0,-1.33&ll=51.458593,-2.622149&spn=0.009867,0.032637&z=16
Google view of house...
Comment: 'I thought we would be together forever '? A strange remark, as though he knows she is never coming back.
Landscape architect Jo, 25, vanished six days ago after walking home from a Christmas drink with workmates.
Her live-in lover Greg Reardon, 27, a fellow architect, told how he only realised Jo was missing when he returned to their one-bedroom Bristol flat on Sunday night.
Fighting back tears at Jo’s parents’ house, he said: “She was my future. We had celebrated our two-year anniversary on December 11 and recently moved in together – things were falling into place.
“We’ve had a cat called Bernard for about a year who means the world to us.
“This Christmas was going to be our first together. We were going to stay with her family for about a week then head up to Scotland for New Year’s Eve.
“A big moment in our relationship came early on when we went to the Isle of Wight music festival. It went so well that we knew it was going to be something special.
“This summer we had an amazing holiday touring Cornwall in a campervan. We visited the Eden Project and spent most days surfing. Everything was really positive. She was really looking forward to Christmas.
“We had put up a tree and she was due to bake some mince pies.
Greg added: “On Sunday night I came home at about 8pm after staying with my family in Sheffield, but Jo wasn’t home.
“Over the weekend I had called and texted her and didn’t get a reply, but Jo didn’t always reply so it wasn’t out of character.
“I waited until about midnight and then when she didn’t return I started to worry.
Comment: He returns and notices Jo is missing but waits a further four hours before contacting the police. Why does he not ring family and friends,,, her parents even ? BUT no he contacts the police to say she is missing..
“I went through her bag which was on the table and found it had all the stuff she would need to take with her, things like her purse and her keys.
“I called the police to report her missing… since then I haven’t slept much.”
Jo’s mum Theresa, 58, a Waitrose cashier from Southampton, said: “The last time I saw Jo was a couple of weeks ago when I went up to Bristol to watch the filming of Deal Or No Deal.
“She seemed happy. We are very close, if she ever had a problem, she would tell me.
“We were looking forward to having her and Greg for Christmas and their presents are still sitting under the tree. We just want her home.”
Best friend Rebecca Scott, 25, was the last person to speak to Jo. She said yesterday: “She rang me at 8.30pm on Friday as she walked back from the pub. We spoke for about 15 minutes – she was totally normal.
“Then I had a message from the police on Sunday saying Jo was missing. She’s just not the sort of person to go missing.
“Everybody is worried sick about her and anybody that knows anything should come forward.”
http://watchingyouwatchingyme-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2010/12/jo-yeatesgregs-mother-says-there-were.html
Gregs mother spoke of wedding plans? did Jo's parents know of these plans ,or her friends ?
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Canynge+Rd,+Bristol,+City+of+Bristol+BS9,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=19.228226,66.84082&ie=UTF8&geocode=FW81EQMdlPjX_w&split=0&hq=&hnear=Canynge+Rd,+Bristol,+Avon+BS8,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.459775,-2.62404&panoid=YAEAQGdgmFRorzYPhuZNEw&cbp=12,57.07,,0,-1.33&ll=51.458593,-2.622149&spn=0.009867,0.032637&z=16
Google view of house...
Boyfriend's tearful plea for missing architect Jo Yeates
by Krissy Storrar, Daily Mirror 23/12/2010
Comment: 'I thought we would be together forever '? A strange remark, as though he knows she is never coming back.
Landscape architect Jo, 25, vanished six days ago after walking home from a Christmas drink with workmates.
Her live-in lover Greg Reardon, 27, a fellow architect, told how he only realised Jo was missing when he returned to their one-bedroom Bristol flat on Sunday night.
Fighting back tears at Jo’s parents’ house, he said: “She was my future. We had celebrated our two-year anniversary on December 11 and recently moved in together – things were falling into place.
“We’ve had a cat called Bernard for about a year who means the world to us.
“This Christmas was going to be our first together. We were going to stay with her family for about a week then head up to Scotland for New Year’s Eve.
“A big moment in our relationship came early on when we went to the Isle of Wight music festival. It went so well that we knew it was going to be something special.
“This summer we had an amazing holiday touring Cornwall in a campervan. We visited the Eden Project and spent most days surfing. Everything was really positive. She was really looking forward to Christmas.
“We had put up a tree and she was due to bake some mince pies.
Greg added: “On Sunday night I came home at about 8pm after staying with my family in Sheffield, but Jo wasn’t home.
“Over the weekend I had called and texted her and didn’t get a reply, but Jo didn’t always reply so it wasn’t out of character.
“I waited until about midnight and then when she didn’t return I started to worry.
Comment: He returns and notices Jo is missing but waits a further four hours before contacting the police. Why does he not ring family and friends,,, her parents even ? BUT no he contacts the police to say she is missing..
“I went through her bag which was on the table and found it had all the stuff she would need to take with her, things like her purse and her keys.
“I called the police to report her missing… since then I haven’t slept much.”
Jo’s mum Theresa, 58, a Waitrose cashier from Southampton, said: “The last time I saw Jo was a couple of weeks ago when I went up to Bristol to watch the filming of Deal Or No Deal.
“She seemed happy. We are very close, if she ever had a problem, she would tell me.
“We were looking forward to having her and Greg for Christmas and their presents are still sitting under the tree. We just want her home.”
Best friend Rebecca Scott, 25, was the last person to speak to Jo. She said yesterday: “She rang me at 8.30pm on Friday as she walked back from the pub. We spoke for about 15 minutes – she was totally normal.
“Then I had a message from the police on Sunday saying Jo was missing. She’s just not the sort of person to go missing.
“Everybody is worried sick about her and anybody that knows anything should come forward.”
http://watchingyouwatchingyme-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2010/12/jo-yeatesgregs-mother-says-there-were.html
Gregs mother spoke of wedding plans? did Jo's parents know of these plans ,or her friends ?
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
UK GP's know swine flu jab is a killer
American Chronicle | Letter Leaked Showing New Swine Flu Jab ...
Letter Leaked Showing New Swine Flu Jab Linked to Guillain Barre Syndrome. Christina England. August 16, 2009. A UK newspaper has received letters showing a ...
www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/114488 - Cached - Similar
www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/114488 - Cached - Similar
Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked letter reveals ...
15 Aug 2009 ... A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a ...
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Swine-flu-jab-link-killer-nerve-disease-Leaked-letter -reveals-concern-neurologists-25-deaths-America.html - Similar
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Swine-flu-jab-link-killer-nerve-disease-Leaked-letter -reveals-concern-neurologists-25-deaths-America.html - Similar
Get more discussion results
Leaked Letter Reveals Swine Flu Shot Death Risk ...
5 Oct 2009 ... This from the UK Daily Mail online edition: A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the ...
bluegrassbulletin.typepad.com/.../leaked-letter-reveals-swine-flu-shot-death- risk.html - Similar
bluegrassbulletin.typepad.com/.../leaked-letter-reveals-swine-flu-shot-death- risk.html - Similar
Leaked Letters Reveal Swine Flu Vaccine Lethal Link | Facebook
Facebook is a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them. People use Facebook to keep up with friends, ...
www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=87680876959&topic=13744 - Cached
www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=87680876959&topic=13744 - Cached
Nordic Truth: Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked ...
15 Aug 2009 ... Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked letter reveals concern of neurologists over 25 deaths in America ...
nordictruth.blogspot.com/.../swine-flu-jab-link-to-killer-nerve.html - Cached
nordictruth.blogspot.com/.../swine-flu-jab-link-to-killer-nerve.html - Cached
Videos for swine flu leaked letters
|
|
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange
Unseen police documents provide the first complete account of the allegations against the WikiLeaks founder
Documents seen by the Guardian reveal for the first time the full details of the allegations of rape and sexual assault that have led to extradition hearings against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.
The case against Assange, which has been the subject of intense speculation and dispute in mainstream media and on the internet, is laid out in police material held in Stockholm to which the Guardian received unauthorised access.Assange, who was released on bail on Thursday, denies the Swedish allegations and has not formally been charged with any offence. The two Swedish women behind the charges have been accused by his supporters of making malicious complaints or being "honeytraps" in a wider conspiracy to discredit him.
Assange's UK lawyer, Mark Stephens, attributed the allegations to "dark forces", saying: "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan." The journalist John Pilger dismissed the case as a "political stunt" and in an interview with ABC news, Assange said Swedish prosecutors were withholding evidence which suggested he had been "set up."
However, unredacted statements held by prosecutors in Stockholm, along with interviews with some of the central characters, shed fresh light on the hotly disputed sequence of events that has become the centre of a global storm.
Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian. He maintains that other potentially exculpatory evidence has not been made available to his team and may not have been seen by the Guardian.
The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.
Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.
When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.
On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call "Harold", and a few others for lunch.
Assange left the lunch with Miss W. She told the police she and Assange had visited the place where she worked and had then gone to a cinema where they had moved to the back row. He had kissed her and put his hands inside her clothing, she said.
That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."
Assange's supporters point out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.
On Sunday 15 August, Monica told police, Miss A told her that she thought Assange had torn the condom on purpose. According to Monica, Miss A said Assange was still staying in her flat but they were not having sex because he had "exceeded the limits of what she felt she could accept" and she did not feel safe.
The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".
Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."
The police record of the interview with Assange in Stockhom deals only with the complaint made by Miss A. However, Assange and his lawyers have repeatedly stressed that he denies any kind of wrongdoing in relation to Miss W.
In submissions to the Swedish courts, they have argued that Miss W took the initiative in contacting Assange, that on her own account she willingly engaged in sexual activity in a cinema and voluntarily took him to her flat where, she agrees, they had consensual sex. They say that she never indicated to Assange that she did not want to have sex with him. They also say that in a text message to a friend, she never suggested she had been raped and claimed only to have been "half asleep".
Police spoke to Miss W's ex-boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time.
On Wednesday 18 August, according to police records, Miss A told Harold and a friend that Assange would not leave her flat and was sleeping in her bed, although she was not having sex with him and he spent most of the night sitting with his computer. Harold told police he had asked Assange why he was refusing to leave the flat and that Assange had said he was very surprised, because Miss A had not asked him to leave. Miss A says she spent Wednesday night on a mattress and then moved to a friend's flat so she did not have to be near him. She told police that Assange had continued to make sexual advances to her every day after they slept together and on Wednesday 18 August had approached her, naked from the waist down, and rubbed himself against her.
The following day, Harold told police, Miss A called him and for the first time gave him a full account of her complaints about Assange. Harold told police he regarded her as "very, very credible" and he confronted Assange, who said he was completely shocked by the claims and denied all of them. By Friday 20 August, Miss W had texted Miss A looking for help in finding Assange. The two women met and compared stories.
Harold has independently told the Guardian Miss A made a series of calls to him asking him to persuade Assange to take an STD test to reassure Miss W, and that Assange refused. Miss A then warned if Assange did not take a test, Miss W would go to the police. Assange had rejected this as blackmail, Harold told police.
Assange told police that Miss A spoke to him directly and complained to him that he had torn their condom, something that he regarded as false.
Late that Friday afternoon, Harold told police, Assange agreed to take a test, but the clinics had closed for the weekend. Miss A phoned Harold to say that she and Miss W had been to the police, who had told them that they couldn't simply tell Assange to take a test, that their statements must be passed to the prosecutor. That night, the story leaked to the Swedish newspaper Expressen.
By Saturday morning, 21 August, journalists were asking Assange for a reaction. At 9.15am, he tweeted: "We were warned to expect 'dirty tricks'. Now we have the first one." The following day, he tweeted: "Reminder: US intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks as far back as 2008."
The Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet asked if he had had sex with his two accusers. He said: "Their identities have been made anonymous so even I have no idea who they are. We have been warned that the Pentagon, for example, is thinking of deploying dirty tricks to ruin us."
Assange's Swedish lawyers have since suggested that Miss W's text messages – which the Guardian has not seen – show that she was thinking of contacting Expressen and that one of her friends told her she should get money for her story. However, police statements by the friend offer a more innocent explanation: they say these text messages were exchanged several days after the women had made their complaint. They followed an inquiry from a foreign newspaper and were meant jokingly, the friend stated to police.
The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.
The co-ordinator of the WikiLeaks group in Stockholm, who is a close colleague of Assange and who also knows both women, told the Guardian: "This is a normal police investigation. Let the police find out what actually happened. Of course, the enemies of WikiLeaks may try to use this, but it begins with the two women and Julian. It is not the CIA sending a woman in a short skirt."
Assange's lawyers were asked to respond on his behalf to the allegations in the documents seen by the Guardian on Wednesday evening. Tonight they said they were still unable obtain a response from Assange.
Assange's solicitor, Mark Stephens, said: "The allegations of the complainants are not credible and were dismissed by the senior Stockholm prosecutor as not worthy of further investigation." He said Miss A had sent two Twitter messages that appeared to undermine her account in the police statement.
Assange's defence team had so far been provided by prosecutors with only incomplete evidence, he said. "There are many more text and SMS messages from and to the complainants which have been shown by the assistant prosecutor to the Swedish defence lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, which suggest motivations of malice and money in going to the police and to Espressen and raise the issue of political motivation behind the presentation of these complaints. He [Hurtig] has been precluded from making notes or copying them.
"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.
"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.
"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."
Monday, December 20, 2010
Clifford pays six-figure sum to Hamiltons in libel case
Max Clifford, the celebrity publicist, yesterday agreed to pay Neil and Christine Hamilton a six-figure sum in costs and damages over false rape allegations.
The disgraced former Tory MP and his wife sued the PR man for 25 counts of defamation over comments he made in August 2001 about their relationship with Nadine Milroy-Sloan. She had made a series of lurid, unfounded al legations of sexual assault against the Hamiltons in a series of newspaper articles and live on GMTV.
The Hamiltons sat alongside their solicitor, Howard Pinkerfield, as he told Mr Justice Eady that Mr Clifford, who was not in court, had agreed to pay undisclosed damages and the couple's legal costs.
His decision to settle came as Mr Clifford awaited a decision from the court of appeal over a ruling which knocked out much of his defence last year. Mr Clifford, in a state ment read out in court, said that following Milroy-Sloan's allegations, he subsequently made remarks "which could be taken to mean that the allegations were true.
"I acknowledge that my remarks could be interpreted in a way that is both highly offensive to Neil and Christine Hamilton and damaging to their reputations," added Mr Clifford.
Mr Hamilton said: "It is a total, abject apology. He has eaten humble pie by withdrawing all the allegations completely and paying a very large sum of money; there were plenty of noughts on the end." He insisted that the suggestion that the settlement would total £100,000 was a "wild underestimate".
The couple said they planned to spend the money on paying lawyers' fees and settling outstanding debts. They will now turn their attention to promoting Mrs Hamilton's autobiography - For Better, For Worse - which is released next month.
Mr Clifford remained unre pentant. "This was based on an interpretation of what I said, not what I actually meant," he said. "I won't be paying them in brown envelopes."
The publicist added that he would not change his approach: "I never ask to do interviews but over the last 20 to 30 years people in the media know I will help them where I can. I can't complain about how that's helped my career."
Yesterday's settlement was the final twist in a surreal saga that began in May 2001 when Milroy-Sloan contacted Mr Clif ford and claimed she had been raped and sexually assaulted by the couple. They were arrested by police, accompanied by TV presenter Louis Theroux, who was making a documentary about them.
All charges against the pair were dropped and Milroy-Sloan, a mother of four from Grimsby, was jailed for three years in June 2003 for perverting the course of justice, after being denounced by the judge as a "cunning" fantasist.
The disgraced former Tory MP and his wife sued the PR man for 25 counts of defamation over comments he made in August 2001 about their relationship with Nadine Milroy-Sloan. She had made a series of lurid, unfounded al legations of sexual assault against the Hamiltons in a series of newspaper articles and live on GMTV.
The Hamiltons sat alongside their solicitor, Howard Pinkerfield, as he told Mr Justice Eady that Mr Clifford, who was not in court, had agreed to pay undisclosed damages and the couple's legal costs.
His decision to settle came as Mr Clifford awaited a decision from the court of appeal over a ruling which knocked out much of his defence last year. Mr Clifford, in a state ment read out in court, said that following Milroy-Sloan's allegations, he subsequently made remarks "which could be taken to mean that the allegations were true.
"I acknowledge that my remarks could be interpreted in a way that is both highly offensive to Neil and Christine Hamilton and damaging to their reputations," added Mr Clifford.
Mr Hamilton said: "It is a total, abject apology. He has eaten humble pie by withdrawing all the allegations completely and paying a very large sum of money; there were plenty of noughts on the end." He insisted that the suggestion that the settlement would total £100,000 was a "wild underestimate".
The couple said they planned to spend the money on paying lawyers' fees and settling outstanding debts. They will now turn their attention to promoting Mrs Hamilton's autobiography - For Better, For Worse - which is released next month.
Mr Clifford remained unre pentant. "This was based on an interpretation of what I said, not what I actually meant," he said. "I won't be paying them in brown envelopes."
The publicist added that he would not change his approach: "I never ask to do interviews but over the last 20 to 30 years people in the media know I will help them where I can. I can't complain about how that's helped my career."
Yesterday's settlement was the final twist in a surreal saga that began in May 2001 when Milroy-Sloan contacted Mr Clif ford and claimed she had been raped and sexually assaulted by the couple. They were arrested by police, accompanied by TV presenter Louis Theroux, who was making a documentary about them.
All charges against the pair were dropped and Milroy-Sloan, a mother of four from Grimsby, was jailed for three years in June 2003 for perverting the course of justice, after being denounced by the judge as a "cunning" fantasist.
Max Clifford and his' clients'
Clifford takes swipe at former clients
The publicist Max Clifford was yesterday involved in bitter courtroom exchanges defending an action brought against him by Mandy Allwood, his former client whose story he marketed when she became pregnant with octuplets.
At one point the judge, Mr Justice Park, intervened when Mr Clifford attacked the reputation of Ms Allwood and her partner, Paul Hudson.
Mr Clifford also became angry when Jonathan Crystal, her counsel, questioned him over allegations that he said he would not put a cash payment through his books.
He claimed that the action at the high court in London was nothing more than an attempt by Ms Allwood to damage his professional reputation.
Ms Allwood, who is suing for breach of trust, alleges that Mr Clifford made a "secret profit" from her story when he brokered a £15,000 deal between himself and the News of the World at the same time as he was selling her tale to that Sunday tabloid. She said he did not give receipts or invoices, and secured deals with handshakes.
Mr Clifford was questioned about his claim that he told Ms Allwood about his arrangement with the News of the World in a coffee shop the day before her story was to appear in the newspaper.
Mr Crystal suggested it was "highly improbable" that the meeting would have been in a public place when the paper would have been anxious to ensure no rivals approached Ms Allwood. But Mr Clifford replied: "When it comes to breaking a story I have had more experience than you. No story I have been involved in in 30 years has leaked out."
Mr Clifford was also asked about Ms Allwood's claim that after he was paid his commission on a £39,000 cash fee she received for an television interview, he told her he was not going to put his cut, of £8,000, through the books.
The publicist said such deceit was "more consistent" with the behaviour of Ms Allwood and Mr Hudson, who had "driven away from garages without paying and had cheques bounce".
Mr Justice Park intervened to stop the case degenerating into a "general onslaught". Mr Clifford replied: "They can attack me and I can't attack them? Doesn't their past history say something about the sort of people they are? They don't have a reputation to protect. My whole business is based on my reputation."
Asked why he had not given Ms Allwood a receipt for the £8,000 he said: "For what point? I knew I had been paid. They knew I had been paid. It was paid into my company bank account so everybody knew I had been paid."
Edmund Cullen, counsel for Mr Clifford, said it was not surprising his client had "come close to losing his temper" after hearing "grotesque untruths" levelled against him.
Mr Cullen said Ms Allwood, 35, and Mr Hudson originally claimed "hundreds of thousands of pounds" from Mr Clifford but now the claim was limited to £16,200. He said of the couple: "They [made] outrageous, professionally damaging and gratuitously offensive allegations irrelevant to the issues, that could only have been made with the intention of causing Mr Clifford harm."
Their only purpose, he added, was a "misguided attempt to portray him as a man who could not be trusted".
Judgment was reserved.
At one point the judge, Mr Justice Park, intervened when Mr Clifford attacked the reputation of Ms Allwood and her partner, Paul Hudson.
Mr Clifford also became angry when Jonathan Crystal, her counsel, questioned him over allegations that he said he would not put a cash payment through his books.
He claimed that the action at the high court in London was nothing more than an attempt by Ms Allwood to damage his professional reputation.
Ms Allwood, who is suing for breach of trust, alleges that Mr Clifford made a "secret profit" from her story when he brokered a £15,000 deal between himself and the News of the World at the same time as he was selling her tale to that Sunday tabloid. She said he did not give receipts or invoices, and secured deals with handshakes.
Mr Clifford was questioned about his claim that he told Ms Allwood about his arrangement with the News of the World in a coffee shop the day before her story was to appear in the newspaper.
Mr Crystal suggested it was "highly improbable" that the meeting would have been in a public place when the paper would have been anxious to ensure no rivals approached Ms Allwood. But Mr Clifford replied: "When it comes to breaking a story I have had more experience than you. No story I have been involved in in 30 years has leaked out."
Mr Clifford was also asked about Ms Allwood's claim that after he was paid his commission on a £39,000 cash fee she received for an television interview, he told her he was not going to put his cut, of £8,000, through the books.
The publicist said such deceit was "more consistent" with the behaviour of Ms Allwood and Mr Hudson, who had "driven away from garages without paying and had cheques bounce".
Mr Justice Park intervened to stop the case degenerating into a "general onslaught". Mr Clifford replied: "They can attack me and I can't attack them? Doesn't their past history say something about the sort of people they are? They don't have a reputation to protect. My whole business is based on my reputation."
Asked why he had not given Ms Allwood a receipt for the £8,000 he said: "For what point? I knew I had been paid. They knew I had been paid. It was paid into my company bank account so everybody knew I had been paid."
Edmund Cullen, counsel for Mr Clifford, said it was not surprising his client had "come close to losing his temper" after hearing "grotesque untruths" levelled against him.
Mr Cullen said Ms Allwood, 35, and Mr Hudson originally claimed "hundreds of thousands of pounds" from Mr Clifford but now the claim was limited to £16,200. He said of the couple: "They [made] outrageous, professionally damaging and gratuitously offensive allegations irrelevant to the issues, that could only have been made with the intention of causing Mr Clifford harm."
Their only purpose, he added, was a "misguided attempt to portray him as a man who could not be trusted".
Judgment was reserved.
Max Clifford the circus master
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/feb/21/max-clifford-interview-goody
With the Goody and Alfie stories going full pelt, this has been one of those weeks in which Clifford appears to have been behind every headline. As bizarre as the photos of the youth's estranged father, Dennis Patten, wearing a devil mask might have looked, there was something very familiar to the placard he held: "No comment. Ring Max". Yet Clifford stresses that this is only the all-too-visible part of his business. "I have been just as busy this week on Simon Cowell as on either of those two because of a particular story, a business story, which was coming from America that I've been trying desperately to stop and that we so far have stopped."
The point he repeatedly makes is that he is running a serious business - "PR is about 80%, people coming to me with stories about 20%" - but that all anyone is ever interested is are his more lurid dealings with the media. His work for banks, restaurants and property firms may pay the bills, but it's his role in orchestrating spectacular tabloid scoops - who can forget "Freddie Starr Ate My Hamster" and "Mellor Made Love in Chelsea Strip"? (not Clifford, the framed front pages of both adorn his office wall) - that have brought him fame, or, if you believe that he is part of the cheapening of public discourse, notoriety.
The Alfie story, it seems to me anyway, is likely to be closer to the notoriety end of the spectrum. Parents apparently cashing in on teenage son's stupidity has to be a morally hard sell, and I can't quite fathom why he got involved. "Had they come to me in the first place," he says, "I would have said, 'Keep it between the families, sort yourselves out, sort the little one out, don't go public, don't talk to anybody,' as I do frequently when people come to me. 'It's not in your interest. You might make a few thousand pounds from this, but believe me you'll have a nightmare and you'll be torn apart, because apart from anything else if you do an exclusive everybody else is your enemy. So short-term gain, long-term pain.' That's what I would have said, but by the time they came to me it was too late."
They hadn't initially come to him. Someone had given the story to the Sun, a moral panic had ensued, and only then did Alfie's parents ask Clifford for help. "There was everyone camping out - I'd like to tell you the full story but I can't," he says. "Shall I say they weren't happy about a lot of the things that were going on, and what they were reading and hearing, so it was a question of saying, 'Well, we'll do our best to control as much as we can as quickly as we can.'
"There's nothing in it for me from a financial point of view, but I felt, I suppose, a bit sorry for them. I feel I've been able to help them make the best of a bad situation. It's difficult to understand how the whole thing works unless you've had experience of it. They basically thought they had a story, they'd get themselves a few thousand pounds, and that would be it." Once the Sun and the News and the World started to trade blows about who was the real dad it manifestly wasn't it. Even Clifford himself openly doubts whether Alfie is the true father: "It's possible he is the father, but ... my money would be that he isn't." All Clifford could do was try to contain the firestorm. "I've already stopped some things that would have been even more damaging."
I don't find any of this very convincing: Clifford says he isn't being paid, and he clearly thinks the parents have made a mistake in going public. My guess is there are two other reasons. First, the challenge. When I suggest this is a no-win situation for a PR man, he says: "I love that. I like these kind of situations." Clifford once likened what he did to "playing 15 games of chess a day", and here he has a sticky position from which to try to extricate himself.
The second reason is that, to mix games, bargaining on behalf of Alfie and his parents gives Clifford another set of chips to throw into the pot. "The reality is that being at the centre of so many things is extremely advantageous in lots of different ways," he says. "It's trading, it's awareness, it's all kinds of things." What becomes clear talking to Clifford is that the way he operates is to have a vast store of stories and contacts which he can trade off against each other. He says stopping stories is more central to what he does than placing them, but sometimes to stop a story you need to be able to offer something in return.
I find it hard to grasp that journalists who have their tentacles around a story will let go, but he tells me how it works. "The good thing about being in my position is that you know so many things. Sometimes a story that was so important for you to stop five years ago isn't now. It's changed. You can suddenly reveal that happened, so you, the journalist, have got a much bigger story."
He even implies that occasionally the manipulation comes close to bribery. "Most journalists would sell their own mothers for a great story, but sometimes you're able to make them an offer that they think they shouldn't refuse." A leg up the career ladder, a word in the ear of a friendly editor. "I'll find them a job or I'll come up with something that means they won't lose their job."
Clifford also sees his relationship with the media as one of mutual exploitation. "I would like to think that most media people I work with, at the end of the year, would think, 'Well, we had a good year with Max Clifford and we've used him as much as he's used us.'"
The lies which he says he has to tell on behalf of his clients do not upset that yearly stocktaking. "It's a game and they [the media] understand the game, and if you take every game as 12 months, as long as after 12 months they're in front from your relationship then they're quite happy. They might well know I'm lying anyway. Just as they lie to me all the time. Journalists are just as devious as PR people."
Goody's reaction at being struck down in this way at 27 and with two young sons has been impressive and moving, but how does the artificiality of Sunday's public wedding - OK! has paid £700,000 for exclusive magazine coverage, Living TV £100,000 for broadcast rights - square with that stark reality?
"I don't think there's any artificiality about it at all. It's being done in the media spotlight; she's lived in the media spotlight; it comes naturally to her. She loves it; it fulfils her ... You're talking about Jade Goody. It might not be a genuine event for you, but for her it's extremely real, and it's probably the one thing she's focusing on now that gives her an awful lot of pleasure. It's been the biggest single factor in her staying focused, staying positive, enjoying life."
Equally important, in his eyes, is that the money from the wedding and the christening of her sons will ensure their future, and that coverage of her plight has encouraged more women to get cervical smear tests. It is a watertight case.
What Goody will not do, he says, is expose her final weeks to public view. "We are very close to the end in terms of what we're going to do media-wise," he says. "She wants to do maybe a one-off with Piers [Morgan] for ITV - she's known Piers for a while and that would be the definitive interview. There might be one or two other things and some charity work ..." But no more: reality TV can only take so much reality.
Clifford was diagnosed with prostate cancer 18 months ago, but the prognosis is good and, at 65, helped by regular tennis - "I have to win; I can't do anything halfway." Despite, or perhaps because of, the succession of camera crews, and calls about wedding cakes and whether Girls Aloud are going to play at the reception, he is remarkably jaunty. "This is not a career," he tells me at one point. "It's really a way of life." Then he turns around and points to a picture that has the status of a religious icon - of him with George Martin and The Beatles in 1962, taken just after Clifford, 19, had started working in the EMI press office.
"That's the first publicity photos they ever did," he says. "I'd literally that day just come from a meeting with the marketing director of EMI, and he said: 'Don't waste too much time on this lot, son, they've got no chance.'"
Almost 50 years on, Clifford is still operating much as he did then: everything kept in his head rather than on computer; handshakes rather than contracts; constantly on the phone, available to everyone (he makes a point of giving me his mobile number); conducting as much business as he can personally. "I could never manage a football team - I'd have to play, even at 65, because I couldn't just stand there and watch it all go on." But what happens to Max Clifford Associates in 10 years, when even the irrepressible one may be slowing down? "We'll worry about that in 10 years. My daughter's out there [in the office]; who knows?" Retirement, however, is ruled-out. "I'll go on for as long as I can. I love it."
And that, whatever lies Clifford might tell on behalf of his clients, is true. From the early Beatles to the tragic late pairing of Goody and Alfie, Clifford has had an extraordinary career - or non-career as he would prefer. His ego is clearly massive, his will to win not is just confined to the tennis court, and his belief that he can manipulate we unswerving servants of the truth is disturbing. But, damn it, you can't help liking him. "He'll be writing 2,000 words of slanderous nonsense about me," he tells his daughter Louise as I'm leaving. As if I would. (Now Max, about that job ...)
Saturday interview
The circus master
When Max Clifford signed Jade Goody, she was a fading reality star. Her cancer brought her to the front pages, with Jack Straw and even Gordon Brown offering support. But is she being exploited? And if so, by who?
"It's organised chaos," Max Clifford tells an Irish journalist with whom he's doing a live radio interview over the phone. He's talking about the arrangements for Jade Goody's wedding tomorrow, but he could equally well be referring to his own small office in Mayfair, which is accommodating the ebullient Clifford, seven members of staff (all female), three camera crews and numerous packages which members of the public have sent to be forwarded on to Goody, a hate-figure turned national icon.
The Irish radio interview goes well, except that he can't remember the name of the interviewer, which is Bláthnaid. "Don't worry, I'll just call her sweetheart," he tells his assistant. Everyone is sweetheart, or occasionally sunbeam. Impenetrable phone calls interrupt our conversation. The first apparently involves Clifford giving the story of Goody's wedding cake, which is being made by the hyperexpensive London restaurant Sketch (another Clifford client), to one of his media chums. The next sounds like it's someone trying to prise information about another of his high-profile clients, Alfie Patten, the "baby-faced dad", out of him, but he is giving nothing away. Except the phone, which he hands to his secretary to save us further disruption.With the Goody and Alfie stories going full pelt, this has been one of those weeks in which Clifford appears to have been behind every headline. As bizarre as the photos of the youth's estranged father, Dennis Patten, wearing a devil mask might have looked, there was something very familiar to the placard he held: "No comment. Ring Max". Yet Clifford stresses that this is only the all-too-visible part of his business. "I have been just as busy this week on Simon Cowell as on either of those two because of a particular story, a business story, which was coming from America that I've been trying desperately to stop and that we so far have stopped."
The point he repeatedly makes is that he is running a serious business - "PR is about 80%, people coming to me with stories about 20%" - but that all anyone is ever interested is are his more lurid dealings with the media. His work for banks, restaurants and property firms may pay the bills, but it's his role in orchestrating spectacular tabloid scoops - who can forget "Freddie Starr Ate My Hamster" and "Mellor Made Love in Chelsea Strip"? (not Clifford, the framed front pages of both adorn his office wall) - that have brought him fame, or, if you believe that he is part of the cheapening of public discourse, notoriety.
The Alfie story, it seems to me anyway, is likely to be closer to the notoriety end of the spectrum. Parents apparently cashing in on teenage son's stupidity has to be a morally hard sell, and I can't quite fathom why he got involved. "Had they come to me in the first place," he says, "I would have said, 'Keep it between the families, sort yourselves out, sort the little one out, don't go public, don't talk to anybody,' as I do frequently when people come to me. 'It's not in your interest. You might make a few thousand pounds from this, but believe me you'll have a nightmare and you'll be torn apart, because apart from anything else if you do an exclusive everybody else is your enemy. So short-term gain, long-term pain.' That's what I would have said, but by the time they came to me it was too late."
They hadn't initially come to him. Someone had given the story to the Sun, a moral panic had ensued, and only then did Alfie's parents ask Clifford for help. "There was everyone camping out - I'd like to tell you the full story but I can't," he says. "Shall I say they weren't happy about a lot of the things that were going on, and what they were reading and hearing, so it was a question of saying, 'Well, we'll do our best to control as much as we can as quickly as we can.'
"There's nothing in it for me from a financial point of view, but I felt, I suppose, a bit sorry for them. I feel I've been able to help them make the best of a bad situation. It's difficult to understand how the whole thing works unless you've had experience of it. They basically thought they had a story, they'd get themselves a few thousand pounds, and that would be it." Once the Sun and the News and the World started to trade blows about who was the real dad it manifestly wasn't it. Even Clifford himself openly doubts whether Alfie is the true father: "It's possible he is the father, but ... my money would be that he isn't." All Clifford could do was try to contain the firestorm. "I've already stopped some things that would have been even more damaging."
I don't find any of this very convincing: Clifford says he isn't being paid, and he clearly thinks the parents have made a mistake in going public. My guess is there are two other reasons. First, the challenge. When I suggest this is a no-win situation for a PR man, he says: "I love that. I like these kind of situations." Clifford once likened what he did to "playing 15 games of chess a day", and here he has a sticky position from which to try to extricate himself.
The second reason is that, to mix games, bargaining on behalf of Alfie and his parents gives Clifford another set of chips to throw into the pot. "The reality is that being at the centre of so many things is extremely advantageous in lots of different ways," he says. "It's trading, it's awareness, it's all kinds of things." What becomes clear talking to Clifford is that the way he operates is to have a vast store of stories and contacts which he can trade off against each other. He says stopping stories is more central to what he does than placing them, but sometimes to stop a story you need to be able to offer something in return.
I find it hard to grasp that journalists who have their tentacles around a story will let go, but he tells me how it works. "The good thing about being in my position is that you know so many things. Sometimes a story that was so important for you to stop five years ago isn't now. It's changed. You can suddenly reveal that happened, so you, the journalist, have got a much bigger story."
He even implies that occasionally the manipulation comes close to bribery. "Most journalists would sell their own mothers for a great story, but sometimes you're able to make them an offer that they think they shouldn't refuse." A leg up the career ladder, a word in the ear of a friendly editor. "I'll find them a job or I'll come up with something that means they won't lose their job."
Clifford also sees his relationship with the media as one of mutual exploitation. "I would like to think that most media people I work with, at the end of the year, would think, 'Well, we had a good year with Max Clifford and we've used him as much as he's used us.'"
The lies which he says he has to tell on behalf of his clients do not upset that yearly stocktaking. "It's a game and they [the media] understand the game, and if you take every game as 12 months, as long as after 12 months they're in front from your relationship then they're quite happy. They might well know I'm lying anyway. Just as they lie to me all the time. Journalists are just as devious as PR people."
Happily, the Goody story, which culminates in tomorrow's wedding to Jack Tweed, requires no dissimulation. If Alfie is a no-win situation for Clifford, Goody has become a gimme, though it was anything but when he took the former Big Brother celebrity on a year ago. "Everything had gone and her career was at rock bottom," he recalls. "She came to me and said, 'Will you look after me?' I was happy to. I knew her well enough to know that she was far more sinned against than sinning, so I started to try to rebuild her career."
Goody was diagnosed with cervical cancer in August, it was reported to be "advanced and life-threatening" in September, and last week Clifford announced it was terminal. The imminence of death has revived her career and put to flight those who criticised her as a creature born of reality TV. "I think there are a lot of journalists out there. That maybe have actually got a twinge of conscience, which doesn't often happen, having said the things that they said, particularly initially - saying it was just a publicity stunt."Goody's reaction at being struck down in this way at 27 and with two young sons has been impressive and moving, but how does the artificiality of Sunday's public wedding - OK! has paid £700,000 for exclusive magazine coverage, Living TV £100,000 for broadcast rights - square with that stark reality?
"I don't think there's any artificiality about it at all. It's being done in the media spotlight; she's lived in the media spotlight; it comes naturally to her. She loves it; it fulfils her ... You're talking about Jade Goody. It might not be a genuine event for you, but for her it's extremely real, and it's probably the one thing she's focusing on now that gives her an awful lot of pleasure. It's been the biggest single factor in her staying focused, staying positive, enjoying life."
Equally important, in his eyes, is that the money from the wedding and the christening of her sons will ensure their future, and that coverage of her plight has encouraged more women to get cervical smear tests. It is a watertight case.
What Goody will not do, he says, is expose her final weeks to public view. "We are very close to the end in terms of what we're going to do media-wise," he says. "She wants to do maybe a one-off with Piers [Morgan] for ITV - she's known Piers for a while and that would be the definitive interview. There might be one or two other things and some charity work ..." But no more: reality TV can only take so much reality.
Clifford was diagnosed with prostate cancer 18 months ago, but the prognosis is good and, at 65, helped by regular tennis - "I have to win; I can't do anything halfway." Despite, or perhaps because of, the succession of camera crews, and calls about wedding cakes and whether Girls Aloud are going to play at the reception, he is remarkably jaunty. "This is not a career," he tells me at one point. "It's really a way of life." Then he turns around and points to a picture that has the status of a religious icon - of him with George Martin and The Beatles in 1962, taken just after Clifford, 19, had started working in the EMI press office.
"That's the first publicity photos they ever did," he says. "I'd literally that day just come from a meeting with the marketing director of EMI, and he said: 'Don't waste too much time on this lot, son, they've got no chance.'"
Almost 50 years on, Clifford is still operating much as he did then: everything kept in his head rather than on computer; handshakes rather than contracts; constantly on the phone, available to everyone (he makes a point of giving me his mobile number); conducting as much business as he can personally. "I could never manage a football team - I'd have to play, even at 65, because I couldn't just stand there and watch it all go on." But what happens to Max Clifford Associates in 10 years, when even the irrepressible one may be slowing down? "We'll worry about that in 10 years. My daughter's out there [in the office]; who knows?" Retirement, however, is ruled-out. "I'll go on for as long as I can. I love it."
And that, whatever lies Clifford might tell on behalf of his clients, is true. From the early Beatles to the tragic late pairing of Goody and Alfie, Clifford has had an extraordinary career - or non-career as he would prefer. His ego is clearly massive, his will to win not is just confined to the tennis court, and his belief that he can manipulate we unswerving servants of the truth is disturbing. But, damn it, you can't help liking him. "He'll be writing 2,000 words of slanderous nonsense about me," he tells his daughter Louise as I'm leaving. As if I would. (Now Max, about that job ...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)