Taxes are definitely being paid to wankers in the UK

A BBC report today says:-

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is facing fresh questions over her future after "mistakenly" claiming the cost of two adult movies on Commons expenses.

Tory leader David Cameron said it was "hugely embarrassing for her and the government" but said he thought it was not a resignation issue on its own.

However such revelations were "dragging everyone down into the mire".

Ms Smith did not see the films, which were watched by her husband, but was said to be "mortified" by the error.

'Deeply embarrassing'

Mr Cameron said there had to be "complete transparency" in the way MPs' expenses were handled.

He told the BBC he had told his MPs: "If you can't defend what you are doing, don't do it. We've got to get public opinion with us."

Ms Smith uses her allowances to employ her husband, Richard Timney, as her parliamentary aide on a salary of up to £40,000 a year.

And Ms Smith is already being investigated by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards over her decision to claim at least £116,000 in second-home allowances for her family home in her constituency in Redditch, Worcs, since becoming an MP.

She says she did nothing wrong over her second home claims as she had approval to say her main home was her sister's house in South London where she rents a room.

Mr Cameron said: "I think she has got some questions to answer about the second home issue. It does seem to me pretty incredible to claim that the home where her family is, that is not her main home."

'Credibility in tatters'

"I think this goes to a deeper problem which is the second home allowance for MPs. The prime minister has ordered a review but he has sort of kicked it into the long grass," he added.

"The review doesn't start until September, it is not going to report until after the next election. That is hopeless. We have got to get on with it."

He said "there was something wrong with the culture of the system" shown by the fact that the expenses claim which included the adult movies had been approved.

Former shadow home secretary David Davis said there would be little sympathy for Ms Smith.

He said: "I don't call for people to go unless I think there is absolutely a smoking gun, but I just do think in this circumstance the sympathy for her will be even less than it otherwise would have been because she is not that good at her job."

Angus Robertson, the Scottish National Party's leader at Westminster, said Ms Smith's credibility had been undermined claiming "the on-going allegations of expenses irregularities have left the home secretary's credibility in tatters and present real questions over her future as a senior minister".

However, Labour MP Stephen Pound said that although the matter was "excruciatingly embarrassing" for Ms Smith, her future was not in question.

"Nobody's responsible for what their partners do to that extent but it will be embarrassing. I don't think it will be fatal because she's really not done anything wrong," he said.

Public apology

Mr Timney made a public statement on Sunday in which he apologised for embarrassing his wife.

Ms Smith said she had "mistakenly" claimed for a TV package when billing for a web connection and would repay the cash.

MPs can claim for subscription television services but they have to be used wholly, exclusively and necessarily to perform their duties.

The Sunday Express reported that two films, which cost £5 each, were viewed on 6 and 8 April 2008 at Ms Smith's constituency home.

The claim was also said to include two viewings of the film Ocean's 13 - at £3.75 each - and an additional £3.50 to watch the film Surf's Up.

Ms Smith said in a statement: "I'm sorry that, in claiming for my internet connection, I mistakenly claimed for a television package alongside it.

"As soon as the matter was brought to my attention, I took immediate steps to contact the relevant parliamentary authorities and rectify the situation.

"All money claimed for the television package will be paid back in full."

Downing Street said on Sunday that Ms Smith was doing a "great" job and would not let the incident distract her from her role as home secretary.

A spokesman said: "Jacqui Smith has done the right thing by taking steps to rectify this inadvertent mistake as soon as she became aware of it."

The independent Committee on Standards in Public Life has previously announced a wide-ranging review of MPs' pay and allowances, due to start later this year.

LINK

Here are tonight's Head Lies from FKN News

And a report about recession at South Park

CERP Report 2007 on Globalisation and Das Kapital

CEPR 2007 June Bulletin

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Religion & Spiritual bible events

Marx Capital Vol 1

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Presentations & Slid

Common Purpose - Brian Gerrish and Alex Jones

Dan Hannan on Newsnight

"People are fed up of being, “taken for granted, ripped off, lied to and ignored”.

"Our democracy isn't working and it doesn't matter how I vote because nothing will change"

EU says Lisbon Treaty is "In Gods Hands"

Spiegel Online International, interviewed Martin Schulz, socialist MEP leader of the EU today and here's what he said about the Lisbon Treaty:

On Tuesday, Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, acting president of the European Union, lost a no-confidence vote in the Czech parliament. Martin Schulz, chairman of the Socialist group in European Parliament, argues that now the EU has to struggle not just for leadership, but for its very survival.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Mr. Schulz, does the EU currently lack leadership?

Schulz: No. Definitely not. President Topolanek is in office, even if its just in a caretaker role. He can continue his coordinating role as head of the European Council. The EU's ability to function hasn't been impaired. Topolanek himself of course has less room to maneuver. But, he hadn't exactly been the strongest council president to date anyway.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: How do you mean?

Schulz: Just look how he blathered about the United States yesterday in Parliament.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: He said America's attempts at fiscal stimulus were leading it down the "road to hell."

Schulz: That's an ideology. Topolanek was one of George W. Bush's closest allies when it came to the missile-defense system in eastern Europe. Now he uses the platform of the European Parliament to campaign against Bush's successor. He can do that in Prague, but not in the EU.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is the Lisbon Treaty now in danger?

Schulz: We'll see. The fact is, the two legislators who caused the collapse of his government were opponents of the treaty. That's not an encouraging sign.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: In April, the Czech Senate will vote on the Lisbon Treaty. What result do you expect?

Schulz: I hope it will pass. But, it's like being on the high seas. We're in God's hands.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: This fall, the Irish also plan to vote on the Lisbon Treaty. If the Czechs reject the treaty, would the Irish vote still be relevant?
Schulz: If the Czechs reject the treaty, we're going to be in a serious crisis. We might as well then bury the treaty. We'd then be thrown back to the Treaty of Nice, which was passed by 15 member states. But those same 15 governments, not to speak of the new member states, are unsatisfied with the old arrangements. That's why there was supposed to be a constitution. When that failed, we tried to include the essence of the reforms in the Lisbon Treaty. If that also fails, it would be a fiasco.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What would it mean politically for the EU?

Schulz: We would have to continue to live with a very old treaty. We would still remain an economic giant, but we would not have the instruments needed to do justice to our own power and to cope with international challenges.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Many view Czech President Vaclav Klaus, a decisive euroskeptic, as the person behind Topolanek's fall. Does he personally represent a danger to the future of the EU?

Schulz: When this man was in the European Parliament, he left no doubt that he would use every instrument to make sure the Lisbon Treaty failed. He rejects the EU in its current form. With the toppling of the Topolanek government, he will be decisively in charge of the next steps taken in the Czech Republic. He will certainly be a person, similar to Polish President Kaczynski, who tries to slow the unification process.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: When Slovenia held the EU presidency in 2008, it had to rely on French support. Now we have the Czech dilemma. Are new members of the European Union overstrained by the responsibility?

Schulz: No. The Slovenians did a good job. I worked very closely together with the prime minister. And what is happening now in the Czech Republic has nothing to do with the size of the country or its recent accession (to the EU, in 2004). It has to do exclusively with the idiosyncrasies of the government.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The next European Parliament elections are in June. Do you understand voters who are asking why they should even bother to vote in light of the uncertainty of EU issues?

Schulz: No.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Why not?

Schulz: Because it deals with so many important issues in Europe. Take, for example, the question of whether we regulate financial markets and whether we drive ahead with our environmental policies so that we can stave off climate change. This is also about creating a better social safety net, more jobs, international controls and the closure of tax havens. Anyone who wants to contribute to those efforts must vote.

Interview conducted by Veit Medick

Vaclav Klaus - Accepts resignation of Topolanek's cabinet - Elections may be in October

Prague - Czech President Vaclav Klaus accepted the resignation of the centre-right coalition government from Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek (Civic Democrats, ODS) this afternoon.

The cabinet of the ODS, the Christian Democrats (KDU-CSL) and the Greens (SZ), which was voted no confidence by the lower house on Tuesday, will continue to rule the country.

Klaus said after a meeting with Topolanek that the government in resignation should not rule long, that is till the end of the Czech EU presidency on June 30, or till early elections

Klaus also said the new government must be formed on the basis of a political consensus in the Chamber of Deputies.

Klaus said he would give a chance to form a new government to anybody who would bring an absolute majority of 101 votes for the government in the 200-seat lower house.

Klaus pointed out that the solution to the government crisis must be mainly quick due to the economic crisis and the Czech Republic's EU presidency in the first half of 2009, which requires a government with a full mandate. Klaus said he would not accept a temporary government until the end of the Czech presidency, early or even regular elections.

Topolanek also confirmed that time plays an important role.

However, he added that the quickest possible path to early elections should be found since he does not believe that a new government would have a "full" mandate.

On Wednesday evening, Topolanek accused Klaus of being behind the fall of the government, along with Prague Mayor Pavel Bem and ODS deputy Vlastimil Tlusty.

Klaus today did not comment on Topolanek's allegations.

"I was prepared to ignore this debate in order to achieve something positive," Klaus said after meeting Topolanek.

Klaus stressed today that he would only appoint the government based on a political consensus that would not depend on deputies-defectors.

"Defectors are out of question, this practice of the past government has drawn us into the current situation," Klaus said.

He recalled he would consult the situation with opposition Social Democrat (CSSD) chairman Jiri Paroubek and junior ruling KDU-CSL head Jiri Cunek on Friday.

Paroubek told journalists today that it would be difficult for anyone to meet the president's conditions.

He said he himself did not want to form a new cabinet.

"It would not be fair. It would only be possible with the help of the deputies who left their mother political parties in the past and if I criticise such practice it would not be good for me to do it myself," Paroubek said.

He again said that Topolanek's government should complete the Czech EU presidency or a large part of it.

Topolanek's government could lead the EU presidency until the elections to the European Parliament that will take place in the Czech Republic on June 5-6, Paroubek said. Then a government of experts should take power and rule with the support of all political parties, he said.

Early elections could be held in October, Paroubek added.

LINK

Road to Hell was invented by an Englishman

Is Gordon Brown on the road to hell I wonder. Tramping around the globe trying to drum up support for a global bailout which his own Central Bank Governor Mervyn King has ruled out before he set off on his jaunt? It reminds me of a post I did recently about politicians speaking with forked tongues when making bargains. First he's with the EU, then he's with most of the EU but Merkel and Sarkozy (who happen to be most of the EU), appear to be doing their own thing yet smiling sweetly (or sickly), for the cameras and slapping Gordon on the back (or backside), when reporters are around. However, history tells us well, that nothing ever really goes as plan, and already when tackled with the question "where's the money coming from Gordon and what's this your governor at the Bank of England saying", Gordon launches into a "well he signed up for it" reply where I just know Mervyn King is going to at least deny in private, having been to see Her Majesty, snitched on Brown's plans, and gotten a nod that things will be okay because she'll have one of her minions "have a word with him" before the coffers run dry.

So what's Gordon's plan now then?

I think he's got to at least be a bit jumpy about whether Her Majesty is going to snip his credit card up when he gets back. But as I say, it reminds me of history, and in this case I refer once more to the Native Indian Americans who were pushed, not sold, down the river of tears over their 'treaties' and agreements with the same guys Brown is seeing many years ago. This is the story of one such man, "Chief Joseph", about whom Gordon may do well to read if he has time in between flights and telephone calls back and forth to London and the Palace.

When I think of The European Union, and of our "treaties", I'm minded much of history and of the U.S. Federal Governments dealings with native American Indian Chiefs and their many peace treaties, which when it came down to it were broken because words were treated differently so as to have wholly different meanings to both the native Indians and to their new 'friends', the white man who took their lands. This of course led to much unnecessary bloodshed and to terrible wiping out of much of native American culture, and to an eventual apology some 150 years later by U.S. Congress to all native Indians. Yet without any hope to put right the damage done to the native peoples of America, the native American culture was virtually all but destroyed.

One man I bring to mind, is Indian Chief Joseph. (In-mut-too-yah-lat-lat) - 1840-1904 - who's famous eloquent and memorable words; "White man speak with forked tongue", still ring true today as if he'd spoken them only yesterday and not back then in the nineteenth century. Only this time they apply to treaties between the nations of Europe, and in particular to the Treaty of Rome that gave birth to the European Community of trading nations, which people agreed to, rather than to "The Union" on which no one has since been asked. Yet the Union blindly travels onward, leaving much anger behind it in its wake amongst other 'braves', who wish to be free from it, to tread their own paths, and to preserve their own cultures, their own laws and their own ways of life which are distinctly inherent to all of us just as they were also once inherent to the native Indians of America who sadly fought and died only to be replaced by a union of forked tongues that cared nothing for their beliefs until it was too late.



Imagine if Chief Joseph had signed a treaty with the 'white man', which undertook to create a common market where he and the white man could trade in peace and to work in ever closer union, only to find that it really meant he would have to give up hunting Buffalo. That, despite there was no mention of this in his treaty with the 'white man', 'the Union' had decided to outlaw his only source of meat? What would Chief Joseph say to his young braves when they argued that stopping them hunting Buffalo wasn't in the treaty?

Well this was precisely the kind of thing which led to many Indian uprisings as Indian braves argued that the white man spoke with forked tongue. To them, the white man had 'broken his word', and so they predictably fought to maintain their own way of life and to keep their native culture. Yet as they fought to keep their Buffalo, the white man was annihilating large numbers of Buffalo to near extinction along with the Indian's own means to survive, and this meant there was no turning back for the Native American Indian to regain his former peaceful state, as this gave him little chance to survive without the once plentiful Buffalo. How could he live and feed his family? Thus, the native American Indian culture was obliterated in much the same way as it is happening today, as our cultures and our existence, is threatened by "the union" we did not want. Did we 'braves' vote to trade or did we vote to end our means to survive without the union? When were we ever asked whether we wanted to be a part of the United States of Europe?

Chief Joseph of the Nez Percé (1840-1904)

Chief Joseph, known by his people as In-mut-too-yah-lat-lat (Thunder coming up over the land from the water), was best known for his resistance to the U.S. Government's attempts to force his tribe onto reservations. The Nez Percé were a peaceful nation spread from Idaho to Northern Washington. The tribe had maintained good relations with the whites after the Lewis and Clark expedition. Joseph spent much of his early childhood at a mission maintained by Christian missionaries.

In 1855 Chief Joseph's father, Old Joseph, signed a treaty with the U.S. that allowed his people to retain much of their traditional lands. In 1863 another treaty was created that severely reduced the amount of land, but Old Joseph maintained that this second treaty was never agreed to by his people.

A showdown over the second "non-treaty" came after Chief Joseph assumed his role as Chief in 1877. After months of fighting and forced marches, many of the Nez Perce were sent to a reservation in what is now Oklahoma, where many died from malaria and starvation.

Chief Joseph tried every possible appeal to the federal authorities to return the Nez Perce to the land of their ancestors. In 1885, he was sent along with many of his band to a reservation in Washington where, according to the reservation doctor, he later died of a broken heart.

Chief Josephs Story

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Politics & Governmen Presentations & Slid white man speak with chief joseph speech

The man who became a national celebrity with the name "Chief Joseph" was born in the Wallowa Valley in what is now northeastern Oregon in 1840. He was given the name In-mut-too-yah-lat-lat, or 'Thunder Traveling Over the Mountains', but was widely known as Joseph, or Joseph the Younger, because his father had taken the Christian name Joseph when he was baptized at the Lapwai mission by Henry Spalding in 1838.

Joseph the Elder was one of the first Nez Percé converts to Christianity and an active supporter of the tribe's longstanding peace with whites. In 1855 he even helped Washington's territorial governor set up a Nez Percé reservation that stretched from Oregon into Idaho. But in 1863, following a gold rush into Nez Percé territory, the federal government took back almost six million acres of this land, restricting the Nez Percé to a reservation in Idaho that was only one tenth its prior size. Feeling himself betrayed, Joseph the Elder denounced the United States, destroyed his American flag and his Bible, and refused to move his band from the Wallowa Valley or sign the treaty that would make the new reservation boundaries official.

When his father died in 1871, Joseph was elected to succeed him. He inherited not only a name but a situation made increasingly volatile as white settlers continued to arrive in the Wallowa Valley. Joseph staunchly resisted all efforts to force his band onto the small Idaho reservation, and in 1873 a federal order to remove white settlers and let his people remain in the Wallowa Valley made it appear that he might be successful. But the federal government soon reversed itself, and in 1877 General Oliver Otis Howard threatened a cavalry attack to force Joseph's band and other hold-outs onto the reservation. Believing military resistance futile, Joseph reluctantly led his people toward Idaho.

Unfortunately, they never got there. About twenty young Nez Percé warriors, enraged at the loss of their homeland, staged a raid on nearby settlements and killed several whites. Immediately, the army began to pursue Joseph's band and the others who had not moved onto the reservation. Although he had opposed war, Joseph cast his lot with the war leaders.

What followed was one of the most brilliant military retreats in American history. Even the unsympathetic General William Tecumseh Sherman could not help but be impressed with the 1,400 mile march, stating that "the Indians throughout displayed a courage and skill that elicited universal praise... [they] fought with almost scientific skill, using advance and rear guards, skirmish lines, and field fortifications." In over three months, the band of about 700, fewer than 200 of whom were warriors, fought 2,000 U.S. soldiers and Indian auxiliaries in four major battles and numerous skirmishes.

By the time he formally surrendered on October 5, 1877, Joseph was widely referred to in the American press as "the Red Napoleon." It is unlikely, however, that he played as critical a role in the Nez Percé's military feat as his legend suggests. He was never considered a war chief by his people, and even within the Wallowa band, it was Joseph's younger brother, Olikut, who led the warriors, while Joseph was responsible for guarding the camp. It appears, in fact, that Joseph opposed the decision to flee into Montana and seek aid from the Crows and that other chiefs -- Looking Glass and some who had been killed before the surrender -- were the true strategists of the campaign. Nevertheless, Joseph's widely reprinted surrender speech has immortalized him as a military leader in American popular culture:

I am tired of fighting. Our chiefs are killed. Looking Glass is dead. Toohoolhoolzote is dead. The old men are all dead. It is the young men who say, "Yes" or "No." He who led the young men [Olikut] is dead. It is cold, and we have no blankets. The little children are freezing to death. My people, some of them, have run away to the hills, and have no blankets, no food. No one knows where they are -- perhaps freezing to death. I want to have time to look for my children, and see how many of them I can find. Maybe I shall find them among the dead. Hear me, my chiefs! I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more forever.

Joseph's fame did him little good.

Although he had surrendered with the understanding that he would be allowed to return home, Joseph and his people were instead taken first to eastern Kansas and then to a reservation in Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma) where many of them died of epidemic diseases. Although he was allowed to visit Washington, D.C., in 1879 to plead his case to U.S. President Rutherford B. Hayes, it was not until 1885 that Joseph and the other refugees were returned to the Pacific Northwest. Even then, half, including Joseph, were taken to a non-Nez Percé reservation in northern Washington, separated from the rest of their people in Idaho and their homeland in the Wallowa Valley.

In his last years, Joseph spoke eloquently against the injustice of United States policy toward his people and held out the hope that America's promise of freedom and equality might one day be fulfilled for Native Americans as well. An indomitable voice of conscience for the West, he died in 1904, still in exile from his homeland, according to his doctor "of a broken heart."

JUST AWESOME!

To play 'The Didjeridoo' you have to be able to breathe in through the nose at the same time as breathing out through the mouth whilst vibrating your lips continuously.

Putin slaps down EU deal with Ukraine

Vladimir Putin is not pleased that the EU has tried to trick Russia by making an agreement on Ukraine's gas supplies without Russian involvement.

"Russian Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, has condemned the signing of an agreement between the EU and Ukraine on overhauling Ukraine's gas pipelines, saying it is meaningless without Russian involvement".

MEP asks for votes to Leave the EU "asylum"

MEP, Ashley Mote says he wants your vote to leave the EU "asylum" LINK

The European Parliament has launched a glitzy campaign to promote the European elections in June. No mention is made of the fact that the parliament is an elaborate charade, an illusion of parliamentary accountable democracy, home to over 700 expensive “monkeys pushing buttons for bananas” once a month to alleged legitimacy to the laws invented by the unelected ruling elite – more usually known as the Commission and its tens of thousands of secretive bureaucratic staff and advisors.

The parliament’s building in Brussels was last week hung with banners encouraging people to vote. The banners displayed supposedly provocative questions, as if elected members could make any real difference to the answers handed down by the Commission. “How open should our borders be? How much should we tame financial markets? How much food labelling do we need? How much security is too much?”

Who do they think they are kidding? Vote, of course, but only for those who want the UK to leave this dangerous European lunatic asylum.

We've got those Occupation GI Blues Gordon

Many Brits must long for happier days in Brown's Britain.

As banks maintain Indian operations which handle current and deposit accounts for British account holders, HSBC is cutting 1,200 UK jobs across call centres and back room operations to add to the British job loss toll of other banks such as The Royal Bank of Scotland, which is one of several banks that have been bailed out by the UK government in exchange for stakes. It has said it will cut 2,700 jobs in the UK.

In January, Barclays cut 4,200 jobs from its UK banking business, with half coming from back office operations and the other half coming from its fund management, private banking and investment banking units. Insurers Royal Sun Alliance, Legal & General and Standard Life have all said they will cut jobs and thousands of jobs are in jeopardy across all financial sectors, whilst the FSA, the regulator responsible, plans to hire 280 more staff to join its already bloated ranks of bureaucrats demanding ever more pain to an already deathly sick patient, otherwise known as the UK's Financial Services.

A union representing HSBC staff responded angrily.

"Unite can see no justification for the efficient and dedicated staff in the UK to lose their jobs and all basic and standard current accounts to be serviced from India," said Derek Simpson, the joint general secretary of the Unite union.

"This is a kick in the teeth of the bank's employees."

Financial firms have been cutting workers and trying to raise money as they struggle to cope with the worst crisis since the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Interest rates are the lowest ever recorded in British history and mortgage approvals are down month on month. February was 60% down against last years figures and the situation is getting worse as an ever decreasing number of borrowers prevail upon decreasing retail sales except for food.

The only way out of this mess is for people to borrow and spend, and to manufacture goods to sell abroad to people who experience their own economic woes.

Gordon Brown launches himself around the earth like a headless chicken not knowing where to turn next with his battle cry of let's borrow our way out of debt but let us do it together and all sink together into a maelstrom of global debt as if he doesn't understand figures or politics. Obama appears to be in tune with his plans with the biggest stimulus package ever undertaken by a U.S. President, whilst many U.S. Senators want to call time and others want the money spent in their own economy. It seems Gordon doesn't really understand the desire amongst Americans to want their money to benefit Americans. Nor does he understand that Angela Merkel isn't really on board his ship of hope as she has different problems to solve as well as an economic view that throwing money at a problem won't make it go away. Whereas French President Sarkozy, reaches for harmony in France to quell the millions of economic protesters who want more for them with their money than they do for the banks. Sarkozy himself flies in the face of non-protectionist agreements by ordering French cars to be built in France with the 'creation' of 400 jobs to the loss of jobs in Slovakia.

Ukraine and Latvia are struggling to meet their national debts which just happen to be with French and German banks. Spanish construction, much like that of France, UK, Poland and Hungry, has dried up with a million jobs lost since December, and little hope of revival unless property values rise, lending is restored and people have jobs which give them confidence.

Meanwhile, savers are stood in innocent disbelief that the incomes they relied on in their retirement are being whittled away with every month that passes, and the only plan Gordon can come up with is that they should spend.

Come on Gordon, let someone else have a go and try to stop all this nonsense there's a good chap. We've got those Occupation GI Blues.

Wake Up Gordon! Wake Up!

Let us not rock the boat or the good ship Britannia here, and instead let us support Brown's global dream to save the planet with regulation. I mean regulating things works doesn't it? Like 11 years of regulation for the finance industry worked because there isn't an economic crash, UK banks are not stuffed to the gunnels with taxpayers money, 4 5ths of them aren't nationalised, business is booming, no businesses are closing, there are no homes being repossessed, there are no job losses, and everyone's savings are totally safe.

Brown didn't increase National Insurance and he didn't increase business tax, and 140,000 more businesses are not saying they can't afford this rise and will have to close if forced to pay.

Good old Gordon is making a lot of headway with his plans to globalise the banking industry and to install a global regulator, which will be good for business because bankers love to tick boxes all day, they love being constricted in their activities by having to account for minute detail in their daily lives, and all their customers will be totally happy with the extra costs they will have to incur to pay for it all. In fact America will have no problem being under European scrutiny, Germany and France will love to give more money away despite their banks are on the verge of going bust due to Ukraine and Latvian economies already being bust and unable to repay their national debts, and everything in Europe, bar the rioting in several countries at the same time, is perfect. But only in Brown's dreams.

I had to resurrect this video from my side bar as it saves me a lot of bother typing out the real world for good old Gordon as to the state the UK economy will be in if he doesn't wake up soon and hand the reigns over to someone else who is prepared to deal with the reality of the mess he left behind when he went to sleep in 1997.

Protests across Europe:

http://rugfish.blogspot.com/2009/01/economic-protests-across-europe.html

Others have since been added.

BEIJING — China is calling for a new global currency to replace the dominant dollar, showing a growing assertiveness on revamping the world economy ahead of next week's London summit on the financial crisis.

The surprise proposal by Beijing's central bank governor reflects unease about its vast holdings of U.S. government bonds and adds to Chinese pressure to overhaul a global financial system dominated by the dollar and Western governments. Both the United States and the European Union brushed off the idea.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/24/china-super-currency-need_n_178592.html

Of course Gordon's plan is working but we just don't see it.

1,200 people are about to be made redundant by HSBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7962833.stm

Meanwhile, Ex-RBS CEO Sir Fred Goodwin's home and car were smashed by vandals last night and is now under police guard.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7962825.stm

Only politicians are putting a face on, the people are not.

Czech Govt Toppled by MP's

The Czech Republic's centre-right minority government has lost a vote of confidence in parliament midway through the country's six-month EU presidency.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7962177.stm

The result came after a group of four rebel MPs voted with the opposition Social Democrats and Communists against Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek.

Together they garnered 101 votes in the 200-seat chamber, the minimum required.

Mr Topolanek said he would step down, but correspondents say it is unclear how long he will remain in the post.

Social Democrat leader Jiri Paroubek said ahead of the vote that the government could "complete the Czech EU presidency or its substantial part".

However, Mr Topolanek has ruled out the idea of a caretaker government until June, when the EU presidency passes to Sweden.

According to the constitution, Czech President Vaclav Klaus must decide who to choose to form a new administration. If three attempts to do so fail, early elections will be called.

'Surprise result'

Tuesday's confidence vote in the lower house followed accusations that one of Mr Topolanek's advisers had attempted to pressure state TV into dropping a programme critical of a former Social Democratic MP who had decided to back the coalition.

It was passed by a majority of one vote after four former members of Mr Topolanek's minority coalition, who had become independents, sided with the opposition.

"The government got what it deserved," Mr Paroubek said afterwards.

The BBC's Rob Cameron in Prague says this surprise result, which threw observers completely off guard, could have far-reaching consequences beyond the country's borders.

In addition to chairing the European Council, the Czech Republic is also in the middle of ratifying the Lisbon Treaty and is in talks with the United States on placing a radar base on Czech soil.

All these important foreign policy initiatives are now thrown into doubt, our correspondent adds.

After losing the vote, Mr Topolanek said he believed the country's position in Europe would inevitably be weakened.

"I believe it can complicate our negotiating power... partners in Europe have grown used to us negotiating hard," he told reporters.

Truth unveiled about Georgian Aggression in Probe - Saakashvili had 12,000 Troops "Planned"

Saakashvili under Pressure from EU Probe

"In fact, the Georgian leadership, as Western observers noticed, had already amassed 12,000 troops and 75 tanks on the border with South Ossetia on the morning of Aug. 7. In a decree ordering a general mobilization, which was not published until Aug. 9, Saakashvili noted that the Russian troops had advanced through the Roki tunnel on Aug. 8, which was after the Georgian attack."

By Uwe Klussmann


An EU enquiry investigating the events of last summer's conflict between Russia and Georgia is shining an unfavorable light on Mikheil Saakashvili. A secret document may prove that the Georgian president had planned a war of aggression in South Ossetia.

Mamuka Kurashvili, the commander of the Georgian peacekeeping forces that had been stationed in South Ossetia before last summer's war, is no expert on the fine points of international law. But when the stout general, wearing a uniform festooned with medals, appeared before the television cameras of his native Georgia on Aug. 7, 2008, he proved to be surprisingly well-versed in the legal justification for the attack on the province, which had declared its independence from Georgia in the early 1990s.

Georgia, Kurashvili told the press, had decided "to reestablish constitutional order in the entire region." The general's words came at the beginning of a five-day war between Russia and Georgia, which quickly escalated into the most dangerous confrontation between East and West since the end of the Cold War. The conflict suddenly demonstrated to Europeans that an armed conflict with Russia on their own continent was no longer inconceivable.

Thanks to the determined crisis management efforts of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the European Union managed to broker a speedy cease-fire. Nevertheless, Europeans still lack a long-term strategy for the explosive region, a deficit that prompted the Council of the European Union to launch an enquiry into the conflict. Since December, diplomats, military officials, historians and experts in international law have been examining the factors that may have contributed to the war. Their efforts have paid off.

According to information obtained by SPIEGEL, the television appearance by General Kurashvili plays a key role in the investigation. His remarks indicate that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was not repelling "Russian aggression," as he continues to claim to this day, but was planning a war of aggression.

This is because Kurashvili may have been quoting directly from Order No. 2 from Aug. 7, a Georgian document that could shed light on the question of who started the war. When the commission questioned the Russian deputy head of the general staff, Anatoly Nogovitsyn, in Moscow, he quoted from the very same Georgian order. According to Nogovitsyn, the document also contained the phrase "reestablishment of constitutional order." If the order, which Russian intelligence intercepted, is authentic, it would prove that Saakashvili lied.

The Georgian government still refuses to show the controversial decree to the commission. Officials in Tbilisi argue that they cannot do this because the document is a state secret.

The EU investigators are particularly interested in the political leadership's possibly treacherous choice of words. "Most of South Ossetia's territory is liberated," Saakashvili, who is a trained lawyer, announced at 12:20 p.m. on Aug. 8, blaming "separatist rebels" -- South Ossetian militias -- for the fighting.

But four days after the war began, when the Russian military had already driven the Georgian army out of South Ossetia and was only 50 kilometers (31 miles) from the capital Tbilisi, Saakashvili made the surprise claim that he had learned at 10 p.m. on Aug. 7 that the Russians planned to send 150 tanks through the Roki tunnel, which connects South Ossetia and North Ossetia, which is part of Russia.

At that point, he claimed, he had "no other choice." Suddenly it was no longer a question of liberation, but of self-defense.

In fact, the Georgian leadership, as Western observers noticed, had already amassed 12,000 troops and 75 tanks on the border with South Ossetia on the morning of Aug. 7. In a decree ordering a general mobilization, which was not published until Aug. 9, Saakashvili noted that the Russian troops had advanced through the Roki tunnel on Aug. 8, which was after the Georgian attack.

The commission, which questioned senior military officers and politicians in Moscow and then Tbilisi in recent weeks, is closely examining such contradictions. But the EU representatives also received their fair share of ambiguous answers from Russian military officials and their allies in South Ossetia.

For example, the EU investigators sharply condemn the Russian military for not having prevented South Ossetians from burning down Georgian villages in their territory and driving out the inhabitants.

The commission's report, which is expected to be submitted in early summer, will also likely criticize Russia for having provided South Ossetians with Russian passports for years. International law experts see this as meddling in Georgia's internal affairs. Nevertheless, the EU investigations seems to be more of a problem for Tbilisi than for Moscow.

The stance taken by Temur Yakobashvili, Georgia's "minister for reintegration" of the breakaway province, shows just how nervous the Georgian president and his supporters are about the independent commission's findings. Yakobashvili, a Saakashvili confidant, has criticized the commission and its experts, who he claims are funded by Russian energy giant Gazprom -- a charge the commission strongly rejects.

Swiss diplomat Heidi Tagliavini, who was the UN secretary-general's special representative for Georgia and Abkhazia from 2002 to 2006, heads the commission. Her deputy is Uwe Schramm, a former German ambassador to Georgia. Former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer is an adviser to the commission.

The EU representatives' investigations are already seen as politically sensitive in Tbilisi today, long before their official publication, because more and more former allies of Saakashvili are now blaming the authoritarian president for the war and calling for his resignation.

Irakli Alasania, the Georgian ambassador to the UN during the war in the Caucasus, has become the spokesman of the opposition. Alasania is respected as a serious politician by the Obama administration. Saakashvili's adversaries include a former prime minister, a former foreign minister, a former defense minister and the former speaker of the parliament, Nino Burdzhanadze, who, together with Saakashvili, led the country's "Rose Revolution" in 2003.

Now Saakashvili's former comrades-in-arms want to mobilize the people once again. In a repeat of the events of six years ago, they want to stage a demonstration on Tbilisi's main thoroughfare, Rustaveli Avenue, calling for the ouster of the current president. For the Georgian opposition, the painstaking investigations of the EU enquiry come at a very opportune time.

Translated from German by Christopher Sultan

LINK

Daniel Hannan MEP gives it to Gordon Brown at the EPP

Daniel Hannan MEP gave a speech in the European parliament today which must stand as an historical piece for Euro Realists to savor. Well done Daniel Hannan.

He said "You are the devalued Prime Minister of a devalued government".

Meanwhile, Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England, has cautioned against further significant government spending to stimulate the economy. Given the high levels of UK debt as a result of recent stimulus packages, Mr King questioned the wisdom of increasing debt by spending more.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7961900.stm

Shadow chancellor George Osborne said the comments were a vindication of Conservative Party policies. "The governor is sending a very clear warning that this country cannot borrow its way out of debt," he said. "We are already heavily indebted and plans for a second stimulus package, which Gordon Brown has been talking up, should not go ahead."

And a statement was delivered today by Marek Belka, Director European Department, International Monetary Fund (IMF), excerpt as follows:

"This crisis was not caused by financial integration. It has long been understood that integrated financial markets can allow the transmission of shocks, which has happened in an unprecedented way. But these shocks themselves were caused not by financial integration, but by a combination of flawed financial innovations, incentive problems, inadequate and sometimes faulty regulations, and macroeconomic policies".

http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2009/032409.htm

And of course, another well done to Nigel Farage of UKIP who also gave a splendid speech to Gordon Brown today at Strasbourg.

Let us not rock the boat or the good ship Britannia here, and instead let us support Brown's global dream to save the planet with regulation. I mean regulating things works doesn't it? Like 11 years of regulation for the finance industry worked because there isn't an economic crash, UK banks are not stuffed to the gunnels with taxpayers money, 4 5ths of them aren't nationalised, business is booming, no businesses are closing, there are no homes being repossessed, there are no job losses, and everyone's savings are totally safe.

Brown didn't increase National Insurance and he didn't increase business tax, and 140,000 more businesses are not saying they can't afford this rise and will have to close if forced to pay.

Good old Gordon is making a lot of headway with his plans to globalise the banking industry and to install a global regulator, which will be good for business because bankers love to tick boxes all day, they love being constricted in their activities by having to account for minute detail in their daily lives, and all their customers will be totally happy with the extra costs they will have to incur to pay for it all. In fact America will have no problem being under European scrutiny, Germany and France will love to give more money away despite their banks are on the verge of going bust due to Ukraine and Latvian economies already being bust and unable to repay their national debts, and everything in Europe, bar the rioting in several countries at the same time, is perfect. But only in Brown's dreams.

I had to resurrect this video from my side bar as it saves me a lot of bother typing out the real world for good old Gordon as to the state the UK economy will be in if he doesn't wake up soon and hand the reigns over to someone else who is prepared to deal with the reality of the mess he left behind when he went to sleep in 1997.

Don't these twats have anything better to do than to abolish laws against insurrection against the state?

4 MP's have today put their names to an amendment to the Coroners and Justice Bill, to ABOLISH the act of sedition and seditious libel. The acts have layen in English Common Law since Elizabeth I was on the throne, yet these 4 MP's want the law abolished because they think it is illiberal to stop insurrection against the state and the monarchy.

It may have escaped their notice, but liberal views are not a majority view in this country, anti-monarchists are not a majority in this country, and insurrectionists, although there may well be plenty, would not I doubt feel pleased if insurrection, hatred and the wrath of revolutionaries, was aimed at their Queen. What possible purpose could they have to want to abolish laws which protect the Queen and the state?

They are staunch supporters of anything European and 'republican', and to my mind, are all in league with one another to abolish this law which protects the monarchy along with our constitution from insurrection. - WHY?

Also, WHEN did they consult with their constituents with these views?

When was the intended abolition made public, and are the public aware at all of their intention to abolish the laws of sedition and seditious libel? - I don't think they are. However, the amendment is up today to be heard in a 'debate' lasting 45 minutes. So worthless is the matter before our parliament, it will not permit more time than 45 minutes, to debate laws which have existed for over 400 years.

Incidentally, how many plotters are there in the country?

Evan Leslie Harris MB ChB MP is an EnglishLiberal Democrat politician. He is the Member of Parliament for Oxford West and Abingdon. Evan Harris was born in Sheffield, South Yorkshire, the son of South African Jewish parents (his father was a medical professor), and brought up in Liverpool, where he attended the Blue Coat School. He went on to Wadham College, Oxford, where he was awarded a Bachelor of Artsphysiology and a diploma in medical sociology. He completed his education at the Oxford Medical School where he received a Bachelors of Medicine and Surgery.

Denis MacShane is the Labour MP for Rotherham, and was the Minister of State for Europe at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office until the ministerial reshuffle that followed the 2005 general election. He was born as Denis Matyjaszek, to an Irish mother and her Polishwho had fought in the Second World War and remained in exile after it. He worked for the BBC from 1969 to 1977. He changed his surname to his mother's maiden name at the request of his employers. MacShane supported the Solidarity trade union in Poland.

Andrew Hartley Dismore (born 2 September 1954) is a British politician and lawyer. He is the Labour Member of Parliament for Hendon in London. Andrew joined the Labour Party in 1974. After a brief time during his studies when he worked as an education officer with the General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trade Union, he began his professional career as a partner with Robin Thompson and Partners Solicitors in 1978. He became a partner in the firm Russell Jones & Walker Solicitors in 1995.

Robert Graham Marshall-Andrews, known as Bob Marshall-Andrews, QC (born 10 April 1944) is an English politician and barrister. He is Labour Member of Parliament for Medway in Kent. Marshall-Andrews entered Parliament in the 1997 general election. He is perceived as being on the libertarian-left wing of the Labour Party, and is a member of the Socialist Campaign Group.

As follows, the amendment:-

Consideration of Bill: 23 March 2009 520
Coroners and Justice Bill, continued
New Clauses, New Schedules and Amendments relating to Part 2 except
those relating to hatred on grounds of sexual orientation
Abolition of offences of sedition and seditious libel

Dr Evan Harris

Mr Denis MacShane

Mr Andrew Dismore

Mr Robert Marshall-Andrews

NC5

To move the following Clause:— (1)

The offences of sedition and seditious libel under the common law of England and Wales are abolished.

All we need now is to hear who voted AYE and NAY to find the republican MP's amongst us who have never asked their constituents about this PLOT.

I don't see anything great in these people. You might, but maybe you'd like to tell me what they've accomplished.

What's so good about wanting to repeal laws that protect the state from revolution, when the intentions by these 4 individuals, to seek to repeal those laws, has not been put to the people?

What is their 'purpose' and who if anyone has come to harm under those laws except for terrorists.

The laws are:

Sedition is a term of law which refers to covert conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Because sedition is typically considered a subversive act, the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where those legal codes have a traceable history, there is also a record of the change of definition for what constituted sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within study of persecution.

The difference between sedition and treason consists primarily in the subjective ultimate object of the violation to the public peace. Sedition does not consist of levying war against a government nor of adhering to its enemies, giving enemies aid, and giving enemies comfort. Nor does it consist, in most representative democracies, of peaceful protest against a government, nor of attempting to change the government by democratic means (such as direct democracy or constitutional convention).

Put simply, sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or state and has to do with giving aid to enemies or levying war. Sedition is more about encouraging the people to rebel, where treason is actually betraying the country. Sedition laws somewhat equate to Terrorism and Public Order laws.

Less is more: Economic class-rape - ENOUGH!

Exceptional commentary from Less is More:

Less is more: Economic class-rape - ENOUGH!

Where is the social justice in this - The I.O.U. isn't mine!!!!

I guess a government that's printing lots of money and throwing it into banks so as the banks can make a profit from the money which taxpayers will have to repay, is not really likely to inspire much confidence.

However, if they'd chucked it into our pockets in tax rebates, then I think most people would generally be pleased. Many would have went shopping, some would have no doubt added it to their dwindling savings pot, many would have repaid their loans and met their bills, and many would have avoided bankruptcy, repossession, redundancy and the demise of living in a broken economy. Who knows too, whether some may have just fancied buying a new car because they felt more confident?

Given that many banks are in fact not really able to lend money on their own account, but rather have to be saved by the taxpayers according to government. I was wondering why we're being asked to LOAN our own money out to people who haven't saved, cut the rate of interest for people who HAVE SAVED, and charge everyone more tax regardless whether they became a new borrower? - The simple question to government then, is why am I having to pay for others who either didn't bother to save, or for banks that threw their own and shareholders money away on dubious finance deals, for bankers payoff's and pensions and high salaries, and why is the interest on my savings fucked up as well as the value of my home, which I've paid for already along with interest to the mortgage I had which presumably the banks threw away?

Where is the social justice in this?

I consider I've done the job right. I saved, I repaid my mortgage. I planned to downsize my property on retirement, and I didn't go on a spending spree with money I didn't have. So why the fuck am I paying for these clowns and why is the government helping THEM but not me?

This I.O.U. Is NOT Mine!

Okay, so there's a lot of people facing repossession. The government has given them help. The banks are fucked through their own fault, and the government are helping them rebuild their profits with MY money. The motor industry is being helped and MP's are fiddling left right and center, yet there's nothing in the way of assistance for the very people who had nothing to do with any of this shit.

Where is the social justice in this - The I.O.U isn't mine!!!!

MP's fob us off on their fiddles

According to the BBC, A wide-ranging inquiry into MPs' expenses is being "considered" by the independent Committee on Standards in Public Life. No one is reported as saying it and no one is stated as hearing it, but the BBC reckon they 'could' be considered in the Autumn. The BBC also say, "The investigation could also consider MPs' pay and their office expenditure", but frankly how they would know what the committee will consider, several months away is a bit beyond my ability to fathom. Especially since neither source or recipient of the 'news' is quoted in their 'report'.

Just a rumor?

So let's have a 'rumor' then, to pacify public outrage that MP's are fiddling taxpayers. I say fiddling because it is. Clearly, they make their own rules up which fly in the face of common honesty as I doubt anyone in private life would be able to take expenses from their employer for a house they didn't live in, which was within practical walking distance of their place of work, whilst claiming it was an inconvenience in need of support. Mortgages paid for parental homes, expenses paid for sisters homes, money doled out for people who don't work for you and an array of freebies from garden plants to new kitchens, and all at the taxpayers expense. I defy anyone to come up with such an expense rich line of employment which would not be illegal under Inland Revenue rules, and I defy anyone to say that MP's who neither listen to the public or abide by their own promises, are in any way worthy of this support system whilst suffering no inconvenience at all like the rest of society, a third of which cannot pay their mortgages because of a lack of money. Yet what do we get? - "Someone" says to "someone", that "someone" "might" look into it in 6 months time, and "someone" might "consider" it.

Politics is full of fiddling twats and the BBC is full of spivs who let them continue without investigation or noise on behalf of the public which pay their license fee.