posted on Nov, 3 2010 @ 06:58 PM
I don't usually post in the political section of ATS, but this just seems so gob-smacking I just had to. If it's a hoax or a bad joke, PLEASE tell
Hansard is the official printed transcript of the proceedings of the houses of parliament — in other words, the working log of the British
government. It is an authoritative primary source, and records every speech made in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Interestingly, it
also records words spoken under parliamentary privilege. So when an eminent member of the House of Lords stands up six hours into a debate and blows
the gaff on a shadowy foreign Foundation making a bid to buy the British state, and this is recorded in Hansard, one tends to sit up and take notice.
And one takes even more notice when His Lordship tip-toes around actually naming the Foundation in question, especially after the throw-away about
money-laundering for the IRA on behalf of the Bank of England. Parliamentary privilege only stretches so far, it seems, and Foundation X is beyond its
reach. I'm going to quote at length below the cut — if you want to read the original, search for "1 Nov 2010 : Column 1538" which is where things
begin to tip-toe into Robert Ludlum territory.
The site this is from is getting 90,000 page views an hour and soon we will probably have more coverage from more sources. It's hard to comment until
I've thought some more about this, some of the claims and information are quite astounding and the characters seem REALLY shady....just read for
I am left rubbing my eyes. Did a not-obviously-insane member of the government — a corporate troubleshooter and Conservative life peer — really
just stand up in the House of Lords and announce that a shadowy Foundation (that might or might not represent the Vatican) was offering the British
government an investment of umpty-billion pounds in order to reboot the economy — free, gratis, with no strings attached? Or am I just imagining
the "no strings attached" clause?
A prelude to what I wonder? Surely this sort of stuff would have been discussed outside of The House Of Lords?
Added: November 1st 2010, Lords Hansard Text. See "Column
edit on 3/11/2010 by nerbot because: added text link