Kettling

As media attention focussed on Chuck and Camilla there was a related deafening silence about the thugs (and their so-called Commanders) in the Met who call themselves ‘riot police’. The truth of their behaviour is seeping out in papers like the Guardian and the Independent. Just a couple of instances: 

“As university lecturers who were kettled for eight hours on Thursday, we are furious that thousands of very young people were trapped in an increasingly dangerous situation almost entirely of the police's making. Despite media reports that peaceful protesters were allowed to leave, many of us were detained and repeatedly misinformed by police about supposed exits that did not exist. As the evening wore on and, inevitably, some violence did break out, visibly distressed students were forced to huddle in corners of Parliament Square, trying to predict how best to avoid a police charge. One young woman asked us if this was how protesting always was and did she need the courage to face riot cops if she wanted to go on a march. It is shameful that this should be a young person's idea about active citizenship in this country.”

“When did we give away the right to protest peacefully and then walk away when we had finished? When did we endorse the police holding our children for hours in freezing weather and preventing our presence, despite them having committed no crime? Why are we accepting that the police can trample on the rights of thousands because of the behaviour of a few?”

Extracts from the Guardian letters page 11/12/2010 

Good questions. What reasonable human being volunteers to serve in the ‘Riot Police?’ Anecdotal evidence suggests those with thuggish tendencies, who like a bit of a ruck and many who would find themselves at home with the Brownshirts. Not convinced? Read on...

“What an appalling failure in a so-called civilised society to see hundreds of riot police along the road from Victoria, readying themselves to "deal with" protesters. I tried to talk to one officer about a proportionate response to the children and young people there, and I was told if it offended me to see kids "get what they deserved", I should go home and put my slippers on.” ibid

What a big brave chap! 

The massive majority of protests and protesters are peaceful. Yet our craven, inept and deeply reprehensible rulers cannot see further than tomorrow’s headlines. 

Who will be the next Blair Peach?

Tax the Rich

As the students gather in a last ditch attempt to change MPs minds, it is sad to relate how little real opposition there is. All three major parties have clambered into bed with high finance and mega corporations. There is a vacuum where an alternative view should be. 

The rich are brilliant at protecting and enhancing their interests. Nowhere can this be seen to better effect than in the good ol’ US of A.

“Just a day after President Barack Obama met with Republican leaders and came out talking of a new era of co-operation, Republican senators united around Mitch McConnell to sign a letter declaring they would pass no legislation without movement on extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

That legislation they are willing to scupper includes extending unemployment benefits for millions of jobless Americans, still suffering the terrible hangover of the Great Recession. The tax cuts the Republicans are really fired up over will benefit only the top 2% of Americans.

To put it even more simply: Republican leaders are happy to go virtually on strike in order to win a tax cut worth billions of dollars for America's most wealthy people (which includes themselves and many of their top campaign donors). At the same time, they are willing to deny help to America's most vulnerable; standing by as once middle-class people lose their homes as their benefits disappear.

The Republicans are fond of using tough language about Obama. They call him an extremist and a socialist and a revolutionary. Well, perhaps some of that tone should be used back at them. This Republican strategy is not about politics. It is about class war: waged by the rich against the poor.” Guardian Online 2/12/2010

Obama agreed to their demands yesterday. In order to help the poor in America, the very wealthiest must be made even wealthier. It is truly appalling. Government by the rich for the rich.

Politicians talk tough about Banker’s bonuses but do very little. Our value system is cock-eyed. All young people should have the opportunity to push their talents to the highest level. The State should fund this investment in our future. 

Tighten up on tax avoidance and evasion, introduce the ‘Robin Hood tax’ on financial transactions and tax the rich. Problem solved.

Wikileaks, Assange and the US

“On their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for freedom and progress. But the United States does. We stand for a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognise that the world's information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it.

This challenge may be new, but our responsibility to help ensure the free exchange of ideas goes back to the birth of our republic. The words of the first amendment to the constitution [guaranteeing freedom of speech] are carved in 50 tons of Tennessee marble on the front of this building. And every generation of Americans has worked to protect the values etched in that stone.”  Hilary Clinton writing earlier this year in Foreign Office Review.

Oh Yeah!

Another case of judge them by their actions and not by their words. It is probably a little bit late for so-called ‘executive action’ but there are other ways of damaging someone's reputation and therefore influence.

It's certainly not ‘conspiracism’ to suspect that the CIA has been at work in fomenting these Swedish accusations. "The moment Julian sought the protection of Swedish media law, the CIA immediately threatened to discontinue intelligence sharing with SEPO, the Swedish Secret Service."

In an article by Julian Assange, written before his arrest today, he wrote, “The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts: The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties.” 

“Britain's Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect "US interests".

“Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.”

“In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.” The Australian

Quite clearly the authorities in the UK and Sweden have not yet read ‘The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo’ trilogy. Having seen the evidence, the initial response from the State Prosecutor in Sweden was to dismiss the allegations as ‘minor.’ Following pressure from several agencies (CIA anyone?) the decision was to issue a warrant for his arrest. 

Even the Daily Mail - yes - the Daily Mail - is not convinced.

“He is responsible for an avalanche of political leaks. Whether he is also guilty of sexual offences remains to be seen. But the more one learns about the case, the allegations simply don't ring true.” Richard Pendlebury, Daily Mail

On the same day that Julian Assange was remanded in custody this little nugget appeared on Guardian Online. 

“The United States is pleased to announce that it will host Unesco's World Press Freedom Day event in 2011, from 1-3 May in Washington, DC.”

Ironic? Read the next paragraph from the press release:

“The theme for next year's commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and
innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals' right to freedom of expression. At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.”

Shameless. You really could not make it up.

Trust

The LibDems are in a mess of their own making. Watching them twist and turn on the hook of their pre-election pledge to abolish tuition fees has been disturbing and also revealing. Student protests are hurting.  As different factions within the party agonise, there is a fundamental issue to address, namely that of trust. There is a difference between what they said and what they are doing. But are the LibDems unique in this?

Within a few weeks of being elected Andrew Lansley established himself as a Health Minister with a mission. None of his ‘reforming’ zeal was in the Tory Manifesto, “Safe in our hands”, “national treasure, etc etc.” He justifies what he is doing by saying that he mentioned it several times in the years before the election. Maybe he did, but it was not on the radar and it certainly was not in the Tory Manifesto. What we have now is a complete overhaul in the way the Health Service will be run.  

Lansley is the man who showed himself up on ‘Question Time’ when he admitted ‘earning’ what he thought was a perfectly acceptable £30,000 for several hours work in a year, as a non-executive director. He was shocked to find that the vast majority of the audience disagreed. He is in thrall to big business and his ‘reforms’ will open the door to private medicine and the egregious US-led insurance companies. Anyone who thinks this is not likely are advised to look at who he has appointed to advise him on government food policies - McDonalds, Coca Cola and other junk food purveyors. Who said satire was dead?

What is odd is the way Labour are seemingly allowed by the media to have distanced themselves from their recent past. Labour introduced tuition fees - despite there being no mention in their manifesto. Labour were in thrall to big business too, to the detriment of their poorest supporters. Labour lied about the reasons for the Iraq War. Not much trust there. 

One thing Wikileaks can be thanked for is pointing up the difference between what we are told, for example in Afghanistan, and what is actually happening. It also shines a light into some very dark corners such as the Chagos Islanders situation. 

It was revealed this week-end that several MPs have turned their second homes into nice little earners by renting out the property they acquired at taxpayers expense and claiming rent for another. As David Chator awaits sentencing, he can consider himself unlucky. There were many, many more who played the system to massive advantage and who have not been charged. Some of them are now in the government.

And they expect us to trust them. 

Diego Garcia Disgrace

Listened to Jack Straw pontificating on ‘Any Questions’ about the rights of the people and at the same time claiming the Wikileaks were damaging to good governance. Straw is a fine one to talk about democracy. He used special powers to slip controversial measures through the Privy Council thereby avoiding trouble in Parliament. The issue was a continuance of the displacement of the Chagos Islanders in the 1960’s to make way for a giant US air base (Diego Garcia). The Wikileaks revelations give a glimpse into the Fortescue-Brown world of the FO, who still behave as though we have an empah. 

“The Foreign Office misled parliament over the plight of thousands of islanders who were expelled from their Indian Ocean homeland to make way for a large US military base, according to secret US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks.

More than 2,000 islanders – described privately by the Foreign Office as "Man Fridays" – were evicted from the British colony of Diego Garcia in the 1960s and 1970s. The Foreign Office, backed by the US, has fought a long legal battle to prevent them returning home.

The islanders' quest to go back will be decided by a ruling, expected shortly, from the European court of human rights.

New leaked documents show the Foreign Office has privately admitted its latest plan to declare the islands the world's largest marine protection zone will end any chance of them being repatriated.

The admission is at odds with public claims by Foreign Office ministers that the proposed park would have no effect on the islanders' right of return. They have claimed the marine park was a ploy to block their return, claiming it would make it impossible for them to live there as it would ban fishing, their main livelihood.

The disclosure follows years of criticism levelled at Whitehall over the harsh treatment of the islanders, many of whom have lived in poverty in other countries since their deportation.

In the past, National Archive documents have revealed how the Foreign Office consistently lied about the eviction, maintaining the fiction that the islanders had not been permanent residents.

The latest leaked documents are US state department cables recording private meetings between Foreign Office mandarins and their American counterparts.

In May 2009, Colin Roberts, the Foreign Office director of overseas territories, told the Americans Diego Garcia's value in "assuring the security of the US and UK" had been "much more than anyone foresaw" in the 1960s, when the plan to set up the base was hatched.

"We do not regret the removal of the population since removal was necessary for [Diego Garcia] to fulfil its strategic purpose," he added under a passage that the Americans headed "Je ne regrette rien".

Roberts, admitting the government was "under pressure" from the islanders, told the US of the plan to set up the marine park on 55 islands around Diego Garcia, known as the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). "Roberts stated that, according to [Her Majesty's government's] current thinking on a reserve, there would be 'no human footprints' or 'Man Fridays' on the BIOT uninhabited islands," according to the American account of the meeting. The language echoes that used in 1966 when Denis Greenhill – later the Foreign Office's most senior official – described the inhabitants as "a few Tarzans and Man Fridays".

The leaked documents also record that Roberts "asserted that establishing a marine park would, in effect, put paid to resettlement claims of the archipelago's former residents".

This private stance differs from the Foreign Office's public line in April when a series of MPs asked Chris Bryant, the then Foreign Office minister, if the marine park ruled out the islanders, known as Chagossians, ever returning home.

Bryant told parliament the proposed park "will not have any direct or indirect effect on the rights or otherwise of Chagossians to return to the islands. These are two entirely separate issues". There is no suggestion that Bryant was aware of the conversation between Roberts and the Americans about Diego Garcia.

Leading conservation groups have supported the marine park plan. Roberts is quoted as telling the Americans that Britain's "environmental lobby is far more powerful than the [islanders'] advocates". Guardian Online 3/12/2010

What is it about power? Why does it turn people into such twats? The hubris revealed in these leaked documents is quite breathtaking. ‘Man Fridays’ and ‘Tarzans.’ Oh how they laughed at the Carlton Club. 

The whole episode gives an insight into the way our rulers operate. Parliamentary scrutiny? Transparency? Fairness, honesty and decency? You must be joking

 No wonder the excremental Straw is not happy at the leaks. They shatter his smooth veneer and expose him and his colleagues for what they are - deeply loathsome human beings.

The Chagos Islanders situation is one of the most shaming episodes in our history. 

What does ‘FA’ stand for?

It is not exactly a secret that FIFA is one of the most rotten and corrupt organisations in the world. At least six members of its Executive Board have been caught with their hands in the till. As one of them admitted in a sting by the Sunday Times, “The only offence is to get caught.” 6 out of 22 have been caught - and a glance at www.transparencyinsport.org will tell you that they are the tip of a large iceberg. The handful of honest men on the FIFA Executive could meet in a cupboard. Why do they collude with their openly corrupt colleagues?

“The decision will come as a bitter blow to the Football Association, which has spent £15m on the bid at a time when it is under financial pressure.” Guardian Online

This is the same FA who paid well over the odds for Wembley, who have done sweet FA to rein in the excesses of the Premiership, who do not support referees when challenged by overpaid arrogant self-serving fools, who prevaricated for many years about opening an academy for talented young footballers and and who have overseen the gradual decline in participation within the game.

Yes, the same FA.

They spent how much? Difficult to accept but true - £15 million!

Imagine if you can Al Capone, Bugsy Siegel and a few of their chums sitting around a lovely big table listening to ‘presentations’ from various grovelling wannabees. Among those wannabees are a Prime Minister, a future king, plus several more rated ‘great and good.’ All leaving their dignity, common sense and honour at the door. Could never happen? It just has!

"We have had four bidders for 2018 and we can have only one winner. Three of the bidding associations must go home saying 'what a pity'. But they must say football is not only by winning but football is also a school of life where you learn to lose. That's not easy," said Blatter, under huge pressure following a series of scandals.” ibid 

Easy for him to say when FIFA win all ways round. Tax exemption? Tick. TV rights to a relative? Tick. Sweeteners to delegates? Tick. Seemingly above the law? Tick. Supine organisations around the world who know the score yet do nothing to change anything? Tick.

England got two votes (£7.5 million each). Bid Leader Anson, ‘It was very surprising, given the promises that were made... the folks who got the best reviews went out early, those with the weakest reports won.’ Doh! What a thicky. These are deeply corrupt, nasty bastards. They will look their grannies in the eye and cross their hearts and hope to die, butter wouldn’t melt etc. 

‘Call Me Dave’ says it is, “desperately sad.” It is for him. What a fiasco to have around your neck. As Portillo said on ‘This Week’ tonight, “the bid team seem to have lost their moral compass.” 

Two votes Cameron. Badly advised or a massive ego? You decide.

£15million  poured down the drain playing a game that was fixed from the start.

Russia - a corrupt nation which has a record of football corruption - to the extent that the result can be posted on the internet in the week before the game - and the result does not change! 

One of the most corrupt organisations selects one of the most corrupt countries. Surprise surprise.

Qatar: barely a million people, 94% sand, but lots of money.....some of which no doubt will end up in certain executives pockets.

So remind me. What does FA stand for? 

Try effing appalling.

Special Relationship and Cluster Bombs

Never has Armando Iannucci’s description of politicians as, “Crap little people, really bad at their jobs, trying not to be found out,” been more true. The revelations coming from Wikileaks show just how much of a disconnect there is between our rulers and us poor plebs. As each day goes by there are fresh nuggets giving the game away. Today’s little gem reveals how Parliament were deceived by Foreign Office officials and the odious David Miliband about cluster bombs.

“According to leaked US embassy dispatches, David Miliband, who was Britain's foreign secretary under Labour, approved the use of a loophole to manoeuvre around the ban and allow the US to keep the munitions on British territory.

Unlike Britain, the US had refused to sign up to an international convention that bans the weapons because of the widespread injury they cause to civilians.

The US military asserted that cluster bombs were "legitimate weapons that provide a vital military capability" and wanted to carry on using British bases regardless of the ban.

Whitehall officials proposed that a specially created loophole to grant the US a free hand should be concealed from parliament in case it "complicated or muddied" the MPs' debate.

Gordon Brown, as prime minister, had swung his political weight in 2008 behind the treaty to ban the use and stockpiling of cluster bombs. Britain therefore signed it, contrary to earlier assurances made by British officials to their US counterparts.

The US had stockpiles of cluster munitions at bases on British soil and intended to keep them, regardless of the treaty. (My emphasis)

When the bill to ratify the treaty was going through parliament this year, the then Labour foreign ministers Glenys Kinnock and Chris Bryant repeatedly proclaimed that US cluster munition arsenals would be removed from British territory by the declared deadline of 2013.

But a different picture emerges from a confidential account of a meeting between UK and US officials in May last year.

It shows that the two governments concocted the "concept" of allowing US forces to store their cluster weapons as "temporary exceptions" and on a "case-by-case" basis for specific military operations.

Foreign Office officials "confirmed that the concept was accepted at highest levels of the government, as that idea had been included in the draft letter from minister [David] Miliband to secretary [of state Hillary] Clinton".

US cluster munitions are permanently stored on ships off the coast of the Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean, the cables reveal. The base is crucial for US military missions in the Middle East. Diego Garcia, still deemed British territory, has been occupied by the US military since its inhabitants were expelled in the 1960s and 1970s. (My emphasis) The British concept of a "temporary exception" to oblige the US does not appear to be envisaged in the treaty. But the British arranged that "any movement of cluster munitions from ships at Diego Garcia to planes there, temporary transit, or use from British territory ... would require the temporary exception".

Nicholas Pickard, head of the Foreign Office's security policy unit, is quoted as saying: "It would be better for the US government and HMG [the British government] not to reach final agreement on this temporary agreement understanding until after the [treaty] ratification process is completed in parliament, so that they can tell parliamentarians that they have requested the US government to remove its cluster munitions by 2013, without complicating/muddying the debate by having to indicate that this request is open to exceptions." Guardian Online 2/12/2010

So let’s get this straight. A foreign country stores weapons that we have banned on our soil. This is done with the collusion of the Foreign Secretary and Foreign Office Officials. None of this is reported to Parliament. By using the weasel words ‘temporary exceptions’ all this can be kept under wraps. 

It is little wonder the Government has used every legal device to keep the Chagos Islanders from their home (Diego Garcia). It helps them keep up the pretence that we are players on the global stage. It keeps them in with the US like weak kids will be nice to bullies. People suffer so these unprincipled bastards (Blair, Straw, Miliband et al) can strut their stuff around the world.

One aspect of the Wikileaks documents is the way the US regards the rest of the world as their dominion. The ‘Special Relationship’ is a one way street. 

The spineless, gutless, little willied wonders who ruled us colluded with keeping the cluster bomb arrangements secret. 

What else did they collude with? 

Rendition?

Torture?