The World Turns Upside Down (But The Tories Are Still Lying Scum)

So, in the time since I last posted on a regular basis, what the fuck has been going on?? First Bush nationalises large chunks of the banking sector, making him the biggest socialist in history (tongue firmly in cheek). Then the Tories have the nerve to accuse the Labour party of being obsessed with de-regulation. Now this is certainly true but really, the Tories??? I'm trying to recall a time in the past when the Tories urged for more regulation.........nope, can't think of a single example. Bless them, it must be hard for the poor loves to be anti-free-market and pro-free-market at the same time. Duplicitous swines.

Boris Johnson Determined To Screw Londoners and the Daily Mail Provide 'Proof' of Nuclear Intentions of Terrorists

A couple of stories that I have picked up on from the latest issue of Private Eye (no.1212) that I think are worthy of sharing. First off, more revelations about the Boris Johnson debacle in London. Hot on the heels of Johnson's attempts to recruit former members of Shirley Porter's administration, Johnson has now added Steve Norris to the board of Transport for London. So far, so what. However, Norris has a rather chequered history in relation to transport.

Steve Norris was a director of Jarvis from 2000, and had a seat on the board at the time of the Potters Bar rail crash. Jarvis had a contract to ensure the maintenance of the line and, as a result of the crash, admitted liability for the crash after initially refusing responsibility and suggested that if the accident was a result of wear and tear, it would have been detected and fixed. After the revelation that the incident was not down to sabotage, Jarvis formally accepted "legally justified claims" and provided a provision of £3m. The company eventually wrote letters to relatives and passengers apologising for the "hurt and anger" it caused by blaming sabotage for the crash.

But it doesn't end there. According to PE, Norris sits on the board of a company called AMT-Sybex, alongside one William Hague. AMT-Sybex was a leading subcontractor to Metronet, the consortium running half of the tube PPP. In 2005, it sold Metronet a £15m computer system to list all the firm's assets. As a result of the privatisation, no-one really knew what had actualy been handed over, so a register would help to produce a schedule that would identify which parts of the rail and cabling would need fixing.

In 2006, the Tube regulator found that Metronet's costs were rising, in part due to the extra costs of the AMT-Sybex system. Despite this system, Metronet failed to get a grip on its assets and, due to problems with prices and schedules, eventually collapsed. The system was an unmitigated disaster.

As a result of Steve Norris' record regarding transport, it seems a little odd that Boris Johnson would want to put him in such an influential role in London, particularly as we are supposed to be witnessing the birth of the 'New' Conservatives. Guess they ain't so different after all. Corporations and shareholders first, general public a very distant last. [Much of the above is copied verbatim from Private Eye, who do not actually publish stories to the net yet - as far as I am aware. If you want to find out more, I suggest you seek out the latest issue.]

One other interesting story involved this headline and picture from the Daily Mail:

A terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack

A story to strike fear into the minds of any discerning Mail reader (does such a thing exist). However, it appears this story is not what it seems:

A piece of concept art of a decimated Washington, D.C. from Bethesda Softworks post-apocalyptic RPG Fallout 3 (PC, PS3, 360) has been circulated through a handful of news publications, reported as terrorist propaganda after an intelligence contractor said the image was used in al Qaeda-related videos.

The artwork was released as part of Bethesda's early promotional campaigns for Fallout 3, which takes place in and around the Washington, D.C. area decades after a nuclear catastrophe. The image appeared on the Daily Mail's website under the headline "Al-Qaeda's terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack."

"This is the apocalyptic scene terrorists hope to create if they ever get their hands on a nuclear bomb... posted on an Islamic extremists' website yesterday," wrote the Mail's Barry Wigmore.

The image also appeared on the Australian news outlet News.com.au, citing terror watchdog organization SITE Intel as having released the image "which reportedly appeared on an Islamist forum."

Though several members of the press have since pointed out the gaffe, neither the Daily Mail nor News.com.au have updated their stories with corrections or retractions of the claim.

Interestingly, according to Private Eye, if you try pointing this out in the comments thread on the Mail website, they will refuse to publish it. Still, I guess they made their point and scared enough people (conveniently just a few days before the 42 days vote, hmmm).

Same Old Tories Propose Cuts in Service

Get ready for tax cuts and cuts in funding:

David Cameron today issued his clearest signal that a Conservative government would aim to cut taxes when he declared that Britain had reached the "limits of acceptable taxation" and revived landmark declarations by Margaret Thatcher.

In a major speech on the economy in Birmingham, the Tory leader pledged to "create the space for cutting tax" as he harked back to the early years of Thatcher's premiership.

Cameron, who started working for the Conservative party in the last two years of Thatcher's period in Downing Street, echoed two of her most famous statements when he said: "After a decade of reckless spending under Labour, Britain needs good housekeeping from the Conservatives. We need to start living within our means."

The first part of Cameron's remarks is drawn from one of Thatcher's defining statements in 1979, the year she was first elected as prime minister. "Any woman who understands the problems of running a home will be able to understand the problems of running a country," she told the Observer in May 1979, the month she moved into No 10.

Of course, the reality is that the tax burden isn't really that high when compared with other EU states. According to the latest report, total tax revenue as a percentage of GDP in the UK for 2005 was 37%. The average across the EU (and bear in mind that the accession countries have very law taxation - Romania's is only 28%) is actually 37.6%. In fact, if you were only to include the so-called 'EU-15', the average is actually 40.4% (all figures taken from hyper-linked report), meaning that the the UK's tax burden is actually 3.4% lower than the average. In other words, compared to other member nations, the tax burden in the UK is actually relatively low.

Perhaps it is unsurprising that during a period where people are being told that they will have less money in their pocket, the opposition are making claims about the tax burden. If people start to feel that they are facing financial pressure, they will be more susceptible to this kind of propaganda. And who can blame them? When money is tight and corners need to be cut, one begins to question the amount that is being paid out in taxation. The Tories will, of course, play the tax card heavily over the coming weeks and months, the truth is, as always, very different to what they portray.

The BBC - A Left-Wing Organisation? Part II

Of course, how could it not be??

New London mayor Boris Johnson has hired ex-BBC political correspondent Guto Harri as his director of communications.

Mr Harri, 41, left the BBC earlier this year to work as a consultant for PR company Fleishman Hillard.

But he has now resigned his post to take up his new role at City Hall.

Mr Harri, who was at Oxford University with Mr Johnson, had previously been linked with a job as a spokesman for Tory leader David Cameron.

Mr Harri was at Mr Johnson's side earlier as he held talks with New York mayor Michael Bloomberg at City Hall.

Err.....

David Cameron 'Psychologically Damaged'?

Apologies for the lack of posts in the past week. I have had family staying over and my spare room/study had been given over as living space for the duration of the whole week. This meant that posting was virtually impossible. However, the study is now mine, so posts can once more commence.........

Still struggling with the notion that the people of London have seen fit to vote in a man who is completely out of touch with the average man, I was interested to see a neat little juxtaposition in today's Observer. Firstly, on page 17, there was a two page spread on the rise of the 'new' Conservatives. A rise that was given a hefty nudge by the election of one Boris Johnson. The headline gives an indication as to the tone of the piece:

Is Team Cameron ready to storm Number 10?

The Tories are on a roll after their triumph in the local elections. A survey for today's Observer reveals that voters would overwhelmingly choose David Cameron over Gordon Brown as Prime Minister. Jo Revill examines the Conservative leader's preparations for power and a party starting to believe it might be electable again.

It goes on:

David Cameron is now in charge of a shadow cabinet that increasingly appears to look like a government-in-waiting. Amid economic gloom and uncertainty, and a thunderstorm of bad headlines for Gordon Brown's attempts to regain the upper hand, the latest polls show that the Tories are surging ahead.

Truly a scary prospect, I'm sure you will agree. The thought of a bunch of Eton schooled toffs, who have got no idea what it is to struggle in modern Britain, running the country fills me full of utter dread. In fact, page 19 of The Observer should give everyone cause for concern:

A powerful committee of MPs is to investigate the 'possible dangers' of children going to boarding school amid fears that they could be psychologically damaged. The select committee for children, schools and families will look at the social and emotional impact of separating youngsters from their parents.

Yes, boarding school may 'psychologically' damage children who attend them. That means that David Cameron, Boris Johnson, Oliver Letwin et al, may be 'psychologically' damaged individuals as a result of their time at boarding school. Do we really want to have people leading the country who are 'psychologically damaged'?? I would hope not, but if something isn't done soon, we could have a Prime Minister who is even more mentally unstable than Tony Blair (or even Gordon Brown).

Iain Dale - The Blogging Equivalent of The Emperor's New Clothes

I've never had much time for Iain Dale. He always seemed to be such a smug Tory bastard. That and the fact that he seemed to have nominated himself as spokesperson for UK political bloggers (not to mention that he is the very embodiment of all I hate round my neck of the woods). Quite simply, the rise of Dale has meant that a fall was inevitable and at some point people would realise his grasp on politics is weak to say the least. Hence his contribution to Comment is Free:

Yes they can?

Barack Obama and David Cameron have a lot in common: they're both young men in a hurry, facing opponents who were the future once

Yes, this piece was an attempt by Dale to draw some kind of parallel between Cameron and Obama. Now, I would be the first to admit that there is little real difference between any of the four major parties split between the US and the UK, but this smacks of desperation somewhat (nothing to do with the Tories failing to capitalise on Labour's misfortunes??). Perhaps, with articles such as this, Dale might finally be found out.

Even more interestingly, after receiving a well deserved ridiculing from readers of CiF, Dale posted the following on his website:

Oh dear, I seem to have upset the esteemed readers of COMMENT IS FREE. Last week, my Telegraph column was supposed to have been about what David Cameron can learn from Barack Obama. Sadly, it got overtaken by events and I was asked to write about Andrew Lansley instead. Anyway, rather than let a provocative column go to waste, I thought what better use to make of it than to wind up the Obama supporting fanatics of The Guardian. Judging from the comments beneath the article, I succeeded beyond my wildest dreams. Read the full column HERE.

Yes, seems rather like the response you would expect from a teenager doesn't it?? "Oh, I was only doing to wind them up." Indeed. Truly, Dale's blog is the very definition of the Emperor's new clothes.......and we can all see his winkle.

Michael Gove, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg and the Real Problem With Disengagement

Having watched the BBC's monarchy love fest this morning (also known as the state opening of parliament), I almost choked on my tea when one of the aforementioned politicians pontificated on the real reason for public disengagement from politics. According to Nick Clegg, the fundamental problem was of continual mud slinging between the two main parties. While this may be partly the case, a later remark by Michael Gove (the neo-con crony of the Cameron brigade) was far more (inadvertently) revealing.

During a discussion on foreign policy, Gove spoke of the need to confront Iran, particularly in the light of their leader's wish to "wipe Israel off the map". That this was met with utter agreement by other members of the panel speaks volumes about the current political climate. Not one member of the panel, or the BBC for that matter, chose to challenge the lie that has been perpetuated amongst the mainstream media, entirely unchallenged. And that is the fundamental problem. There is a lack of debate between the parties. The are all standing on the same aggressive, imperialistic patch of political ground. Perhaps, just perhaps, if a politician was to challenge the status quo, more people might be engaged in the political process. Instead, we are presented with a bunch of glove puppets eager to bend to the will of their imperialist masters.

Political disengagement will continue for some time to come because, secretly (perhaps not so secretly), that is what the political establishment desire. How else can policies such as ID cards, 90 detention, not to mention the Iraq war even be proposed? If the public were engaged in the political process none of these things would even be possible. No, disengagement will continue as long as all political parties represent a narrow elite that refuses to indulge in real debate.

David Cameron - The Upper-Crust Guff-Cloud

According to Charlie Brooker, and who am I to argue.

Imagine.......

Imagine for a minute that you were the leader of a political party. Imagine that said party has a reputation for being, I dunno, a little bit on the racist side. Imagine that your primary goal was to change that perception and build a new party based on inclusion. Then imagine that, during the course of your 're-branding' exercise, an MP says something particularly controversial that undermines your appearance of an inclusive political party. Imagine your MP saying the following:

“If there’s anybody who should f*** off it’s the Muslims who are doing this kind of thing. Police should pull out the stops to track down these vile thugs.”

How would you respond if the story turns out to be false? Would you:

a) Demand the report in question is removed from the website on which it appears, and discipline the offending MP for not taking more care in his statements.

b) Instantly dismiss the offending MP from your party and protest in the strongest terms to the reporters of the story.

c) Discipline the MP in question and warn him of his future conduct.

d) Shrug your shoulders and do nothing about it.

If you said b, well done, you are indeed the leader of a progressive, inclusive party. If you said d, you are indeed the leader of the Conservative Party and you have proven beyond doubt that you couldn't give two shits about embracing a multi-cultural society. Here is the response I received from David Cameron (well, his secretary) when I asked why the Conservative Party hasn't pushed The Sun to remove the offending article from their website:



Not our problem mate, we don't care if we appear like a bunch of reactionaries. After all, that's the way we have always been. Thanks, glad you cleared that up.

Why not watch the slideshow of what the new Conservative Party stands for? Go on, you'll love it.

The Windsor Affair - The Story So Far

Here is the code if you wish to embed this on your site (please contact me if you do not use Blogger and I will provide the alternative):

<div><embed src="http://widget-52.slide.com/widgets/slideticker.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" quality="high" scale="noscale" salign="l" wmode="transparent" flashvars="cy=un&il=1&channel=360287970193304146&site=widget-52.slide.com" width="400" height="300" name="flashticker" align="middle"></embed><div style="width:400px;text-align:left;"><a href="http://www.slide.com/pivot?ad=1&tt=1&sk=0&cy=un&th=0&id=360287970193304146&map=1" target="_blank"><img src="http://widget-52.slide.com/p1/360287970193304146/un_t001_v000_a001_f00/images/xslide1.gif" border="0" ismap="ismap" /></a> <a href="http://www.slide.com/pivot?ad=1&tt=1&sk=0&cy=un&th=0&id=360287970193304146&map=2" target="_blank"><img src="http://widget-52.slide.com/p2/360287970193304146/un_t001_v000_a001_f00/images/xslide2.gif" border="0" ismap="ismap" /></a></div></div>

A Leopard Never Changes....

Below is the reply I had from David Cameron's office regarding Philip Davies' comments. I find it rather perplexing:


Two things I don't understand. Firstly, if the MP is truly sorry for those comments, why hasn't he complained to The Sun and had them removed? If I was him, that would be the first thing I would do. Those words are still there on permanent record. Secondly, there appears to be a sense that, had Muslims actually committed the offence, Davies' words would have been acceptable. Surely, no matter what the circumstances, these statements are never acceptable. The line 'no offence was intended' is laughable. Who would not be offended by a public figure using that kind of language about a community? Don't tell me he didn't realise the words 'fuck off' might possibly be offensive. If nothing else, this shows that the Tory party haven't moved an inch from their traditional position.