Rise of the filth

When we were kids, the police were known by their more mellifluous title of “the filth“. They managed to gain this nickname, by insisting on turning up and supervising any group of teenagers standing around doing nothing. The result was not only a bunch of teenagers standing around doing nothing, but a bunch of police standing around doing nothing, and both groups inherently disliking and mistrusting each other. The difference between the two groups standing around doing nothing, was that the taxpayer didn’t fund teenagers to stand around doing nothing. If public funds were directed more at the kids, maybe we wouldn’t have been so bored we ended up standing around doing nothing, and maybe the police could concentrate on, you know, their job.

As we grow up, we learn to respect the police a little more. You note that they protect your property rights and at times, it must be difficult for them. And, we all love Gene Hunt. We suddenly respect what they do a little more, because we know we’d need their support if our house was broken into. Granted, that support would turn up 45 minutes after the actual brake in, take notes, and then spend the rest of the evening not actually finding your stolen stuff and instead supervising the next generation of bored teenagers in case they light up a spliff; but it’s nice to know they exist. But the respect we have for the police, does not give them the freedom to be vicious thugs.

The Metropolitan Police in London seem to have gained even more reason for the public to refer to them as “filth” recently. They are a formidable force of filth. Whenever they are on TV explaining themselves, I find I am more and more inclined to dismiss everything they say, as a crock of shit.

This tendency toward my absolute dismissal of everything the Met say (so that’s The Met, The CBI, and The IMF), stems entirely from the fact that they are, in fact, a crock of shit. First, the shooting in the head seven times, of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube Station, by the Met, because he looked a bit like a terrorist. Despite an IPCC investigation, which found that not only did the Met kill an unarmed innocent man, in the most violent of ways, but they tried to cover it up. It stated the Met:

made or concurred with inaccurate public statements concerning the circumstances of the death. The alleged inaccurate information included statements that Mr de Menezes had been wearing clothing and behaving in a manner which aroused suspicions.

The Chief of the Met at the time, Sir Ian Blair even tried to suppress an investigation, wishing instead to conduct an internal inquiry. Internal inquiries always clear the party involved. It is the equivalent of being your own judge at your murder trial. You’re not likely to send yourself down. Later, it became known that Metropolitan police surveillance officer codenamed “Owen” had deleted files off his computer, that involved a recording of deputy assistant commissioner Cressida Dick saying that de Menezes was not a threat at all.

The Crown Prosecution Service decided it would not press charges against anyone in the shooting of de Menezes. Shooting an innocent man seven times in the head apparently doesn’t even come under manslaughter.

And then we move onto the infamous G20 protest in London in 2009. The Met used the kettling technique to contain the crowd. A bystander on his way home named Ian Tomlinson had a heart attack and died during the kettle. First, the Met denied they had anything to do with his death. Suddenly, a youtube video appeared, showing PC Simon Harwood hit Ian Tomlinson with a baton, and then push him to the ground with ridiculous force, about a minute before Tomlinson had a heart attack and died. The police do not help him off the ground, instead they stand there, smug, doing nothing. A fellow bystander helps Tomlinson back to his feet.
Again, the Crown Prosecution Service said that they were unable to bring any charges against PC Simon Harwood. Harwood was known to have taken his police number off, and covered his face, to avoid detection. In 2009, a second and third postmortem on Ian Tomlinson revealed that he had died as a result of massive internal bleeding caused by a shock to the abdomen. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to point out that Harwood first hit Tomlinson with a baton, to the abdomen, and then shoved him to the floor…… a pretty closed case.

This is where the Met tend to act like great saviours in a land of crazed Anarchists, just trying to protect us all. They released a statement four hours after Tomlinson had died, stating that the police had noticed a man collapse, and had tried to rush in and help him but were bombarded by missiles from protesters. Those damn protesters. The only problem was, another youtube video surfaced, minutes later, after Tomlinson had collapsed. It shows police surrounded him, but not actually helping. It shows a female protester trying to help and saying “these are the bastards that did it“, and curiously, absolutely no “missiles” at all. This video surfaced just after The Sun, in its vast attempt to insult all protesters whilst masturbating furiously over the wonders of The Met, lead with:

“Man dies as bottles lobbed at rescuers.

POLICE were battered with beer bottles and cans as they desperately tried to save a dying man at the height of the G20 riots in London last night. But when cops struggled through the crowd to reach him, they were pelted with missiles. They finally got to him and set up a cordon as two ambulances rushed to the scene. ”

It’s amazing “journalism“. The Sun appear to have received a press statement from the IPCC, and manufactured a story around it. What is even more amazing, is that Harwood was hired by the Met, even though he had previous disciplinary action taken against him over the past decade. The Met are hiring lunatics.

Skip forward to the Student Protest in London last week.
Alfie Meadows, a Philosophy Student from Middlesex University is found wandering in a dazed state covered in blood, by his Philosophy Professor also at the protest. Meadows had been struck on the head by a police baton, with such force that he required brain surgery. The Met were kettling again at this point, and when the Professor begged them to let him and Alfie out of the kettle, they only allow Meadows to leave….. on his own……. in the middle of London……. needing brain surgery. Despite students and reputable professors from across the Country all claiming the violence started after kettling began, and after several unprovoked horse back charges by police took place, the media and the government still seem intent on keeping quiet on the subject of police brutality, instead choosing to focus their crocodile tears on a bit of paint on Charles’ armoured car.

This monday night, the BBC conducted a shameful interview of a man named Jody McIntyre. They asked him if he’d been throwing rocks at the police and if he were a “revolutionary” attempting to paint him as violent. The reason for this, is a video surfaced showing a Met officer pull Jody McIntyre ……. from his wheelchair…… which he can’t operate without the help of his brother, because of his celebral palsy, and dragged across the street. The BBC interviewer asked him if he’d provoked the attack….. by wheeling toward the police…. the muscular, trained, armed police. The BBC surely shouldn’t be acting as a mouthpiece for the angry right wing who are stuck in a tornado of shouting “omg it’s political correctness gone mad” arguing for “sanity” whenever it suits them, but claiming rather outlandishly that they’re second class citizens whenever someone with slightly darken skin complexion gets a job ahead of them? They aren’t the Daily Mail. Although The Daily Mail took it one step further, by comparing McIntyre to Andy from Little Britain, with the quite insufferable turd Richard Littlejohn stating:

“…he should have kept a safe distance.

Jody Mcintyre is like Andy from Little Britain.
‘Where do you want to go today, Jody?’
‘Riot.’
‘Are you sure? Wouldn’t you rather go to hear Bob Crow speak at the Methodist Central Hall. You like Bob Crow.’
‘Yeah, I know.’
‘So, we’ll go there, eh?’
‘Riot!’
‘Ken Livingstone will be there, too. He’s your favourite.’
‘Riot!’
‘All right, then.’
Five minutes later at the riot . . .
‘Don’t like it.’ ”

Littlejohn apparently thinks disabled people should not stand up for what they believe in, and if they dare to, they apparently shouldn’t complain when police drag them out of their wheelchair.

The Tory Party aren’t exactly the friends of disabled people, what with cutting adult social care funding for those suffering a disability. But Tory Councillor Phil Taylor took it one step further, when, on his blog, he said:

” Although he presents himself as a cerebral palsy victim in a wheelchair he does not mention that by his own account he walked up the 9 stories of stairs of the 30 Millbank building during the student riots of 10th November.”

- How utterly irrelevant. Even if he did an elegant handstand, all the way up the stairs, with a cartwheel finish, into a double somersault….. it still doesn’t justify police dragging a kid from a wheelchair and throwing him into the street.
Taylor posts a quote from McIntyre’s website, in which Taylor highlights certain areas of the text, that in Taylor’s odd opinion, paint a picture of a disabled kid who deserves to be pulled from his wheelchair by The Met. Let’s take the sections of McIntyre’s blog that Taylor highlighted one by one:

The sun was shining on the morning of November 10th, and our blood was boiling.

- Yup. That was the feeling among all 50,000 of us. I was there too. We didn’t go down to show how happy we are with the Coalition. Absolutely no reason to highlight this. Also, John Major, the former Tory Prime Minister, and a man who lost his personality in the 1970s, told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, that Labour’s attacks on Coalition policy……. “makes my blood boil“. The violent bastard. The Met need to be kicking the shit out of the ex Tory PM for that. They can count on Phil Taylor’s support too!

We passed Trafalger Square, and half way down Whitehall found ourselves approaching the main bulk of the demonstration, which had assembled there. It was an endless sea of people, but unfortunately, they had been corralled by police and NUS stewards into one lane of the dual carriageway. Me and Finlay immediately set to work, tearing down the metal barriers which separated the two lanes.

- Good! I’m glad someone did. We were squeezed in. For a guy in a wheelchair, it couldn’t have been easy. Even if he were stood up and walking, it couldn’t have been easy. I moved a barrier twice, to make a bit more space. There was no reason for the divide whatsoever. Taylor wasn’t in the mesh of people being held together like sheep.

A group of 200 followed, including me in my wheelchair, and Finlay pushing at full speed.

- Erm, okay. So he quite likes to go fast. I’d hate to see how angry Taylor gets at the Paralympics. “THEY AREN’T DISABLED!!! THEY’RE GOING TOO FAST TO BE DISABLED!!!” presumably.

We continued down the sixty stone steps at the other end of the Treasury road without so much as a pause for breath. We were on the rampage.

- It’s a figure of speech. He wasn’t literally on a rampage, shooting innocent bystanders (or pushing them over inducing a heart attack). It is a figure of speech, and its a soundbite. Like when Taylor himself refers to a man in his constituency who said “I see broken windows as being totally justified compared with the damage being done to the public sector. This is just the beginning“, as a “Leftie, nutter headbanger“…….. he isn’t literally saying that the man quite likes to bang his head, nor is he even suggesting that the man in question listens to music one might “headbang” to. Figure of speech, Phil. The same sort of figure of speech that he used, when in his latest blog about a rather useless cowboy builder, with the phrase “It took a lot of kicking and screaming from local councillors to get this site sorted out“……. if we are to go by Phil’s new found literal approach to sentences that quite clearly, aren’t meant that way, we must presume that local councillors Taylor is speaking of, literally did kick and scream……. the violent thugs.

It was an epic mission to the top. Nine floors; eighteen flights of stairs. Two friends carried my wheelchair, and I walked.

- Having just spoken to my lovely girlfriend Ashlee about the effects of cerebral palsy (she is a physio at a disabled kids school, and deals with this everyday), she has informed me, after watching the BBC interview herself, that of course McIntyre can walk, but judging from his posture, and the way he spoke and his twitching, he would find it difficult to get too far without help. It would take him a long time to get to where he was heading, he wouldn’t be able to balance himself properly for very long at any one time, and he’d get overly tired very very quickly. So, he should be commended for fighting for what he believes in, at the same time as going through the trouble it must have been to achieve it. But, the fact remains, the police considered it perfectly okay to pull a man from a wheelchair and drag him across the street. Phil Taylor, is a tremendous scrotum. His entire blog is drivel. Right winged, miserable, vicious drivel in which anyone slightly left of Reagan is considered a thug. It is people like Taylor that make me proud to wear the badge of the Left Wing, with pride.

Tory Blogger Guido Fawkes waded in on the subject, stating on his blog:

“Jody Macinytre, radical pro-Palestine supporter and sufferer from cerebral palsy”

- They are his only two attributes apparently. He also isn’t “radical” pro-Palestine supporter, although even if he was, i’m not sure why that’s a bad thing. Fawkes continues:

“However he has revelled in, and incited, violence on his website……”

“Macintyre can’t hide behind his disability when the police treat him like any other violent trespassing thug. It’s called equality…”

- Yes he can. Because he’s disabled. And the police are fully armed, trained guards. And also, because 1) he wasn’t trespassing, and 2) he wasn’t being violent. What a horrible sense of equality Tory bloggers have. Disabled people causing no problems are apparently just as equal as the rest of us causing no problems, in being beaten by the Met. We should all be thankful for that little gem of equality.

The point is, despite the talk of violence from protesters…. the only serious injury, was caused by the police, and the only shameful attack on a disabled man, was caused by police. The media tend to tread carefully with the issue, because criticising an institution like The Met, who they clearly still consider to be a reputable source, could provoke anger amongst right winged commentators like Phil Taylor and Guido Fawkes, who would inevitably refer to the BBC as “left wing” if they dared to criticise the police. The Government keep telling us that the “full force of the law” will come down on violent student protesters, but never mention any such repercussion for Police. The Met are not on a higher moral plateau. They are dangerous, provocative, murdering, violent, lying…………. filth.

The exciting New World Order

THE NEW WORLD ORDER IS COMING!
I swear they were a wrestling group in WCW about fifteen years ago? So it’s not surprising that conspiracy theorists aren’t happy with Gordon Brown describing a “New World Order” emerging yesterday at the close of the G20. Quite what Eric Bischoff and Hulk Hogan can do to solve this economic crises, is beyond me. But hey, i’m not the expert here.

Gordon Brown used the phrase “New World Order” in the context of the economic crises. He was referring to the new powers and funds of the IMF and the way it’s going to be run. He was referring to the entire economic package with it’s rules and regulations. He was referring to leaving the old order of irresponsibility into an era of sustainable growth. An era of less Nuclear weapons in nations like America and Russia. A new era of energy efficiency and responsibility. A New World Order. That’s it. That’s the meaning of the phrase in the context of the summit. And to people like me, the phrase New World Order is exciting, because it means the old days of Right Winged economic and environmental nonsense, is over.

Politicians unfortunately, do not seem to be aware the a few American college kids refer to a bunch of shadowy rich people like the Rothschild’s, Kissinger, the Bush’s, and the Rockefellers as The New World Order, or Illuminati, or any other fictitious name they can come up with. This “New World Order” they refer to, are all trying to create a new world order in which they control the World by orchastrating events like 9/11. Now, i’m not aware that the Rothchild family and the Rockefeller’s were lacking power in the first place. But apparently so. And given that this “New World Order” or “Illuminati” has supposedly been around for centuries trying to create a one World Government (which i’m in full support of given that I despise Nationalism), they haven’t done a very good job. And if they are behind the E.U, they could have created a better constitution and framework. It would seem that they’re pretty incompetent. We need a New new World Order to replace the New World order that tried and failed to replace the old New World Order. Or, we can just accept that this concept of the New World Order, doesn’t exist!!!

The genius’s over at Infowars don’t appear to take the line i’m taking on this, which isn’t surprising. A few examples of the quotes from infowars about this “New World Order” Brown quotation, include the rather frightening, yet completely unfounded and masterfully funny:
“The NWO Illuminati have darker goals in mind, eugenics,genocide and Third World War violence” – Quite why Hulk Hogan is wanting to commit Genocide, I don’t know. But hey, it’s infowars, these kids know their FACTS! They’re also very loving. One poster on infowars, named “Bob” echoes my thoughts quite eerily (even if he is being a sarcastic Conservative):
“I think brown is right. We need change, we need to evolve past this patriotism and national identity nonesense.”
It’s funny that whenever Conservatives are trying to take the piss out of Liberals like me, I actually end up agreeing with them. Sarcastic Conservatives speak sense…. they become Liberals.
His fellow Conservative Nationalists did not see the sarcasm, even after he suggested singing kum bi yah and signed off the post with “NWO“, they still failed to see that he’s actually attacking people like me (hippies) for our left wing beliefs. This is evident with one guy replying quite comically with:
“Your friend satan don’t tell you that he want to microchipping you?
You master satan have soo much love for you and your friends!!!”
You know what are preparing the Mighty God Savaot for you, your friends and your master satan and his demons?”
Clearly coherent sentences is beyond the capabilities of “Mighty God Savaot” and his followers.
Another wondrous reply comes from “Kim“. I’ve always liked the name Kimberley, it’s got a melliflous quality to it. Sophistication. Intelligence. So imagine my surprise when “Kim” writes:
“The Hebrew Money Changers LOVE the NWO since they are the synagogue of Satan.”
Of course, no where is safe from crazed Christians with warped readings of the Bible, and useless opinions seeped in prejudice. An internet opinion based forum just wouldn’t be the same without them. And so the poster “FED UP”…. i’m assuming that’s a fake name, otherwise that person has really harsh parents… is quoted as saying:
“The NWO freaks control the governments. What do the governments control if they have them? THE NUKES AND BIOWEAPONS. When they’re ready to go…. they’re not worried. They’re going to kill all of us. They make it no secret they want to decrease the world’s population by 80%. There won’t be much of anyone left to fight back when they really implement it. Haven’t you heard of the mass graves being completed all over the U.S? If you’ve not read Revelation in the Bible… it’s a good time to start.” – Where are these mass graves, and given that the global population is set to shoot past the 9 billion mark within the next fifty years, where is the source that says there’s a chance that 80% are about to be systematically wiped out? I must have missed the news that day.

Brown is quoted as saying:
“Today’s decisions, of course, will not immediately solve the crisis. But we have begun the process by which it will be solved, I think a new world order is emerging with the foundation of a new progressive era of international co-operation” – I’m not a big Gordon Brown fan, but in this short paragraph of transcript, in comparison to Infowars, he’s speaking sense, and infowars failed. Miserably.

I’m pretty certain that when Gordon Brown used the phrase “New World Order” he wasn’t using it to either describe a WCW Eric Bishoff creation, nor was he using it in the same way that infowars use it, nor was he advocating the deaths of 80% of the World’s population, but then that’s just my thought, i’m no David Icke!

If anyone comments on this, and tells me about the pyramid with the eye, i’m going to cry.

The G20: The exciting and the disappointing

The G20 has certainly produced some disappointing and yet paradoxically exciting results for those of us who do not still worship the flawed notion of trickle down economic theory. Disappointing, because there seems to be no radical decision on climate change, and no radical moves to end World Poverty, and no radical global stimulus, like i’d hoped. However, the strict attack on tax havens and hedge funds is very much welcome. The news that The London FTSE 100 closed up 4%; the Dax up 6%, the Dow Jones up 3% and the Nasdaq up 4% for us in the West, can’t be a bad sign. The markets seem to be responding remarkably well to the G20.

American Financial “Experts” have for far too long successfully managed to get around regulation that was put in place to stop this kind of mess happening in the first place. The G20 needed to put a stop to that. The IMF and the World Bank have for far too long acted in the interests of Western Capitalism only. The G20 needed to put a stop to that. Whilst he was European Commissioner for Trade, Peter Mandelson would insist that unless the impoverished Nations of the World offered something of equal worth in return, he’d offer no help whatsoever in regard to access into EU markets. The G20 needed to put a stop to that kind of heartless sentiment.

It has been “tradition” that the IMF and the World Bank be headed by an American and a European. In 2011, the rules look set to change, which means the US will most probably lose it’s veto power, and the rules of the global financial game change on a huge scale.

What was my take on the G20, using my limited knowledge of Global economics?

There are certainly a number of points that have come out of it, that have the potential to literally change the World in regard to financial regulation, the third World, the power that the IMF will now wield among other things. However, perhaps it doesn’t go far enough. It appeared to look good on paper, but when it comes to the poor of the World, I think the fact that the entire Continent of Africa is not represented at the G20 has produced a lack of sympathy and a lack of adequate support. The G20 outcome, whilst beneficial to the West, is lackluster in it’s attempts to please those of us who wanted to see dramatic and radical change when it comes to World poverty.

Of the $750bn hike in available resources that the IMF will be able to lend out, just under $20bn is available for the World’s poorest nations. Those poor nations have suffered immensely recently. The collapse of commodity prices, the downturn in tourism, and the spiking of food prices have brought even further down than they were. They appear to be less important. You can see just how useless an attempt the G20 have made on helping lift millions out of poverty, by contrasting the obscene amounts of money used to help Wall Street, with the fact that Oxfam have concluded that: “the resources devoted to the global financial bailout are sufficient to end world poverty for half a century.” I begin to wonder if perhaps this financial crises hasn’t been such a disaster as to align our priorities in the direction that has been much needed for decades. And whilst Conservatives insist that their distorted version of trade is enough to lift developing Nations out of poverty if it weren’t for their pesky leaders; this simply isn’t true. According to the Hong Kong Deal reached in 2006, by a group of World trade ministers attempting to reach an agreement which would see developing nations given help to trade their way out of poverty; a provision was put into the small print. The idea was to give poorer countries free access to the markets of developed nations in order to trade their goods without being taxed. The USA however decided that it wanted the right to tax 3% of the products to be traded within it’s market. And although this is just a small number, those products are the small amount of products that the poor nation can competitively produce, and so according to economist Joseph Stiglitz; “Thus this exception gives the US scope to exclude the majority of the goods they can actually export.” Our EU politicians continue to ask African Nations to bring something to negotiating tables, regardless of the fact that they have absolutely nothing to “trade” for help, and so they’re just ignored further.
These poorer nations need help developing the means by which trade can be opened up smoothly, creating the prosperity needed, because at the minute they exist as a pawn in the game of Western Capitalism. They need new infrastructure, they need strong government programs, they need new roads, new ports, new trade routes, new regulations and rights. They need that support, and the fact that the G20 has offered spare change found at the back of Sir Fred Goodwin’s couch, is something that disappointed me greatly.

I can’t fault the G20 entirely though, when it comes to the World’s poor. Although the IMF fund is far too low, and even then the use of it’s funds will come with strict conditions, the $250bn in Trade Credit is a welcome inclusion into the business of the meeting. The poorer nations had specifically asked the G20 for help in getting their goods out and moving and trading and bringing in much needed cash flow and address the shortage of available credit. Gordon Brown before the G20 had promised; “The G20 will come out with a concrete proposal to reopen credit lines to support import/export operations”… he appears to have come good on that promise and then some. Originally he’d hoped for $100bn in Trade Credit for poorer nations, so $250bn can only be a good thing. However, that cannot be mistake for a much needed Global Trade Deal.

Lack of a Global Trade Deal may seem disappointing to those of us who were hoping for it. However, it is still early days, we’re still in crises, and the fact – the beautiful and liberating fact that a U.S President referred to the days of unfettered and deregulated Globalisation as outdated, is a huge step in the right direction.

The G20: Excuse my pessimism.

I wish i’d have travelled down to London today for the G20 marches.
In Seattle ten years ago, riots broke out ahead of a World Trade meeting. The people marching on that day were marching for a fairer economic system, an end to poverty and care for the environmental issues. Ten years on, those same issues are fresh in the minds of the protesters. It stands to reason then, that we have the most incompetent politicians possible. It’s the reason i’m not a big fan of Democracy. So my ideal G20 meeting, would end up with…..

The end of the idea that a CEO earning 300 times more than his workers is “fair”. Because it isn’t. That CEO is not working 300 times harder. He’s taking the wealth created by his workers, and “redistributing” it to himself. It’s so overly wrong.

The end to the idea that higher taxes means less freedom. If it takes higher taxation on the rich, to lift people out of poverty, to feed children, to feed the World. Then go for it. If my pay check means I can’t afford a couple new Xbox games this month, because it’s going to feeding the poor, i’m all for it.

The end to tax havens. Let’s give developing Nations what they need and are fundamentally owed, by tax dodging criminals in expensive suits.

The end of Fox News telling me that capping the salaries of Bank CEOs who took bail out money is going to do more harm than good because those CEOs will just go elsewhere, to banks that offer better uncapped salaries and so places like AIG lose out further. No they don’t. That’s utter nonsense. Firstly, if you have to “pay bonuses” to get the best people, and those best people then destroy the World economic system because their interest in short term profit at the expense of borrowers; they aren’t the “best people”. And secondly, if those better placed banks decide they want to hire the Sir Fred Goodwin’s of the World, the men who destroyed their banks, at a higher salary; then good luck to them, it’ll be the death of them.

Tough penalties for companies who are found to be exploiting the people of poorer nations. Primark for example. Who just seem to be allowed to get away with it. Coca Cola, who poison the much needed water supplies of poor villages for extra profit.

Tough decisions on Climate Change. Huge investment in alternative energy to gradually pull us away from dependency on shrinking oil supplies. A real new Green, low carbon economic deal.

Instead of further bank bailouts, i’d like to see the Government do something for the people. Perhaps pay the mortgage debts of all those who took out sub prime. The banks therefore get the money back that they lent out, and the customer now has a higher share of disposable income to pump through to the rest of the economy.

Those CEOs who are directly responsible for the collapse of the system, should face a jail sentence. If a single mum “plays” the tax system to help her feed her family can face jail, then there is no reason that Sir Fred Goodwin shouldn’t face jail. In fact, there’s more reason.

Occupation, like America in Iraq, or Israel in Gaza, needs to be expressed as a disease of the 20th Century, that isn’t welcome in the 21st Century. Let’s stop the growing concern that resource wars might become common place in the future. Peace should be on the agenda.

Let’s join people together. We’re all in this mess together. So let’s not look at this crises in terms of “our nation against their nation” because it isn’t. A global new deal is needed. Call it a “New World Order” if you want to, but a deal is needed that brings nations together, and benefits everyone, not just the wealthy West.

An end to private campaign funds for democratic elections. Let’s make politicians agree that they are accountable to the people, and to the progress of the World. Not to business. Campaigns should be paid for out of public funds. Nationalised. Because of all public projects, this is the most important.

Put me in charge of the World.

Of course none of that will happen. It’ll just be 20 leaders, coming to no agreement, and we’ll soon be back to business as usual. Tax havens will still exist; African children will still be seen as less important than an American’s right to suck up as much wealth as possible for that new yacht he quite likes the look of; America and Russia will still be utterly suspicious of each other to the detriment of the rest of the World; occupation will still be “necessary” to secure new oil supplies; and of course there will be talk about how climate change is essential but not as essential as masturbating the ego and “freedom” of big business.

Excuse my pessimism.

The Labour Leadership

When President Sarkozy of France indicated that the VAT cut over here in Britain, had not worked, Downing Street released the statement…

“It is important to remember the context in which he was making the comments, which as I understand it, was a domestic debate on television about the way forward for the French economy and French proposals for an economic stimulus.”

I think they missed the point. They always appear to miss the point. I’m not quite sure that the context matters at all. If Sarkozy had said “The VAT cut didn’t work” during a domestic debate about the French economy, or if he’d have said “The VAT cut didn’t work” during a sensual bath with Gordon Brown himself, it means the same thing. Not only that, but he’s right. The VAT cut didn’t work. It didn’t go far enough. Especially given that most retailers had cut prices distinctively more than ever before anyway.

The German Chancellor has accused Britain and America of failing to understand and control under-regulated areas of the economy, which in turn has lead to this whole disaster. Like Sarkosy, the German Chancellor is right. It doesn’t matter how many times Brown refuses to acknowledge his role in this crises, nor does it matter how many times he says “It’s a global problem“, the recent poll numbers, putting the Tories at a 20 point lead suggest that the public just doesn’t buy into what he says.

So why then, is it being suggested that Brown may step down as Prime Minister, to head up a Global Financial Regulator body? Although he’s denied his interest in such an appointment, it must be tempting for him. He has endured 10 years as Britain’s Chancellor before taking over from Blair as Prime Minister in 1997. But that begs the question, if Brown has been in charge of the Economy for the ten years leading up to the biggest economic disaster in generations, in which a lot of blame can be placed directly at the door of the new Prime Minister, why does anyone think, of the billions of people that live on our wonderful planet, that he, above all others, is the right man for the job? Surely along with people like Alan Greenspan and George Bush, he’d be kept well away from any kind of financial responsibility? We do not need failed Brownomics. We do not need failed Thatcherite economic policies. We need something new; something that preaches social morality within the confines of the free market model.

Labour After Brown.

I do not ever want to see a Conservative Government in this Country again. The roots of the economic crises today, can be traced in an almost perfect line back to the years in which Thatcher beat it into an entire generation, that the free market could solve everything. It didn’t work, clearly.

However, the Tories will win the next general election. That’s now a given. And they wont win by a small majority either, they will command a significant majority. So the worry is, who is to lead the Labour Party if Gordon Brown were to step down to take on a Global Regulatory role, or when Labour lose the next general election?

The talk of Journalist town appears to suggest that Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, Harriet Harman is gearing up for a leadership bid. Does Labour really lack the talent? This is a woman who once said “Yep “ when asked if Labour should apologise for the false intelligence of the Iraq war, and then a few nights later claimed she’d never said that and demanded evidence.
The same Harriet Harman who once said that she would happily go out at night in her town of Peckham and not fear for her safety, but then went out in a stab proof vest.
The same Harriet Harman, who quite disgustingly, tried to nullify the high court ruling that all MPs receipts should be published, by trying to exempt MPs from the Freedom of Information act.
I would rather not vote at all, than be given a choice between Harriet Harman and David Cameron.

She certainly appears to be stepping up her profile recently, agreeing to speak at a ‘Womens Conference’ at the exact same time as the G20 meetings take place. She also started pushing for bank bonus caps recently, having kept relatively quiet for months. Is she trying to win over the support of the Labour left? According to politicalbetting.com, Harman is doing what Labour leaders do prior to an election and sucking up to the Unions. Politicalbetting asks if Harman is becoming our version of Palin…. I can safely say, yes she is, because she’s ridiculous, and useless all at the same time.

Harman certainly seems to be positioning herself one step above the competition, which would include David Miliband (my favourite as successor to Brown) and Alan Johnson, who really aren’t making any effort or publicity. In 2008, Miliband wrote an article in the Guardian about his vision for the future of the Labour Party. He doesn’t mention Gordon Brown’s involvement in that future once. He also suggests here… “The odds are against us, no question. But I still believe we can win the next election.”… That Labour has issues and must over come those odds. That issue, at that time, was Gordon Brown. Miliband looked set to offer an alternative to Brown. He ended up backing down. Perhaps that’s a weakness that should not be brought to the Prime Minister’s chair. He does however, attack the Tories, and David Cameron in particular. That isn’t what a Foreign Secretary does. It is however, what a man with big ambitions does. So perhaps the subtle hint at an ambitious future, was enough to start the ball rolling in 2008. He seems however, to have stayed quiet so far this time around, allowing Harman to get the publicity over a possible leadership contest.

For the sake of the Labour Party, let’s inject new blood into the system. Harman is not leadership material. She’s a typical Politician who cannot answer questions straight, and repeatedly contradicts herself, whether it be on her comments over a much needed apology for flawed intelligence leading up to the Iraq war, or preaching how wonderfully safe the streets of London are, whilst herself strolling around in a stab proof vest; just stands to show she is in fact a disaster of a Leader-in-waiting.

The public do not like Harman. She has made too many PR mistakes to claw back any ounce of respect. And whilst I’d push for The Foreign Secretary, David Miliband as next Labour leader simply because he reflects my own Blairite tendencies whilst looking young and fresh enough to pose an adequate threat to Cameron’s Tories; why should we leave it to the Party itself to decide? Why can’t we have a real democratically elected leader through perhaps a Primary system as in America?

Because if Harman is given the top job, she doesn’t stand a chance against the fresh looking, but lacking fresh ideas; Cameron’s Tories.