Andrew Marr had the pleasure of George Osborne’s company on his Sunday morning show on the Beeb today. The Shadow Chancellor treated us to more waffle about the “… values …” of a Tory government – but no actual plans. Particularly irritating was the deflection of questions on specifics by continually spouting that he knows the electorate best and what we really want is the end of a Labour government. So “Labour Out” then, at any cost.
Is it fair that the Conservatives cannot be specific (about cuts in public services, for example) without more economic data ? Seems reasonable but surely they could posit something more tangible than George’s “specific examples” ? They come across as being scared of being called out (again) by government economists who disparage any figures they generate (prompted by the likes of Darling and Brown who inappropriately used Treasury civil servants to rubbish previous Tory pronouncements).
Marr’s guests Greg Dyke and Jane Moore had already raised the interesting Sunday Times headline that Brown is on track for retaining power – the result of a YouGov poll which sees the difference between the two nags in this electorial race dropping to 2%. A prominent Labour-loving headline from a News International brand is certainly a bit of a surprise !
As the interview progressed, I felt Osborne did say more. The problem with this – and Osborne is not alone – is that to the viewer, the die is cast when he has spent 10 minutes already NOT answering the question. By the time he gets to telling us something, we have stopped listening.
So once again: what do the Tories have in store for us ? When are they going to say something tangible and stop blowing raspberries and going ‘nah nah nah’ to Labour ?
What will a Conservative government really do to the BBC ?
How will promised tax reductions (in inheritance and corporation tax) be paid for ?
What plans do the Conservatives have for electoral reform ?
What plans do the Conservatives have for reforming MP’s remuneration and standards in public life ?
What are the key foreign policy plans that the Conservatives wish to pursue ?
Foreign policy specifics, please: Afghanistan, Iraq and Europe would be a start. Israel, Gaza and the Falklands would also be nice to know. Come on William (Hague) !
Maybe we will hear more as the Tories gather in Brighton for their last hurrah before the election. Hope so. With luck, perhaps today’s middling media coverage will prompt Cameron to be more positive and less patronising in talking to voters. If not, he needs to learn that all Labour need do is sit back, say little and they will win. The latest Labour tactic of scaremongering about a return to a “right-wing” government under the Tories is working. Cameron needs to counter it – but with policies, not pouting.
OK – so this subject is getting a fair bit of blogosphere babbling at the mo. Does not make it a bad idea, of course, so I thought I would chuck in a few words of my own on the matter.
A “Robin Hood Tax” has generally been taken to describe a tax on the Banks and, twitchy but mislead that we all are, it has not been embraced wholeheartedly. It may be seen as kicking them when they are down. Complete bollox, of course, and I am sure the righteous-indignation meter is starting to peak frequently. Background is that a minor campaign for a version of such a tax is starting to get twittered, blogged and generally pushed via the internet. A neat little video from Richard Curtis and starring Bill Nighy is doing the rounds – scroll down to watch it.
Sounds like a winner to me. A few fractional points on each Bank transaction that does not involve an individual – presumably sparing personal accounts but not so sure about company current accounts – would be applied. The video suggests this would raise over £100billion (I am guessing per year). With a £700billion plus public spending overdraft, this sounds like a cracking move.
I wonder which of the political bands of merry men will jump on this bandwagon first. Certainly the Tories need to do something sensible and quickly, as whichever idiot Cameron has advising him should be fired PDQ ! The Eton Rifle’s playground attacks on Brown of late smack of desperation – the public already knows what an egomaniac Brown is and they are looking to the opposition to provide some genuine policies. On this latest performance, Cameron Ain’t Cutting It. Today, I would not vote Conservative ….. and I actually want to. Go figure.
So, I await with interest a more thorough analysis of the Curtis/Nighy Robin Hood Tax proposal from wiser souls. If you spot a decent article then please add a link as a comment to this article. (Click on the article headline and scroll down the page to find the comments box).
Last Monday saw the broadcast of Afghani reporter, Najibullah Quraishi’s film of his time spent with elements of the insurgency in the north of the country. It included footage of operations against local government forces, as well as frank and open interviews with Islamic units – typically members of al-Qaeda linked islamist groups, mainly Hesbi Islami. This largest group is inspired and commanded by Gulbudin Hekmatyar, a former darling of the undercover war against SOviet occupation aided by the USA and Britain.
For most of the presentation, Quraishi appeared to be granted amazingly open access to all the fighters – the only coyness observed came from the Arabic members who seem to drive the various operational insurgent groups, albeit through the command of locals. Emphasising the Wahabist influence which gave birth to these guerilla groups – mainly from the Russian occupation – these people tended to come from Saudi Arabia and Yemeni.
There were a number of points made clear by this different film. There is a gulf between the central Afghan government with its Western sponsors, and these self-styled freedom fighters. Certain insurgents stated they would lay down their arms when the “kaffir” (non believers) leave Afghanistan. Others – and one suspects these are the manipulative foreign elements from Yemen, Saudi etc. – said this was merely the place for jihad; when they won, the fight moves on to the Middle East and Europe (where the West “feels too safe” at the moment).
Scary stuff but nothing particularly consistent or new in the message. What did strike the viewer was the aquiesence – even support – from the local population. Locals may have been cowed or coerced – but Barnaby Kay’s narration suggested there was no evidence of this. Hence, the central government is deluding itself in its strategy to see the Taliban starved of indiginous support. The cameraderie within each fighting unit seemed strong, whilst the operations illustrated were not altogether professional or cohesive. These were guerillas, after all. One wonders whether, given something else to do with their lives, they might consider a different path ? Far from raving nutters, these bands of lethal and focussed fighters were seen in the film as dedicated, clear thinking and in for the long haul.
Certainly this film suggests that neither the staying or leaving of ISAF forces would make little effect to the lives of ordinary Afghans. There may be some support for the argument that our presence there reduces terrorist efforts at home – at least by keeping the hardline Arabs embedded on this battlefield. Otherwise, the film did not guve me any ideas or hope for the situation there, and the wider extremist issues facing the world. Given its point of view, it is worth a look for those interested in understanding more about the Afghan situation. Catch it on 4oD and approach with an open mind.
The ‘iSlate’ hubbub increased with the official launch (although not yet for sale) of Apple’s iPad device in San Francisco yesterday. It is looking very much like an upscaled iPhone, although its eBook reader and store – iBook – is a new take on the e-reader-craze which seems to be gathering steam. Lack of multi-tasking and the usual Apple lock-ins on certain media formats (lack of Flash, video codes support etc), will probably not hold it back and the price tag is very amenable, putting the device back within the realms of subsidised SIM / contract deals offered by mobile providers. But therein lies the rub.
The blogosphere seems even-handed about the new device – celebrated twitterer and blogger, Stephen Fry, is being wined and dined as a new expert, having attended the SF launch and blogged his charming review. It will be a hit, without doubt. However, the mobile providers face a significant conundrum. The iPhone was very much a winner for the exclusivity afforded to the likes of O2 and AT&T – drawing huge numbers of new mobile subscribers and allowing Telefonica/O2 to breeze past Vodafone for the top provider spot in the UK. It was not without its difficulties, though. O2 struggled to adapt its provisioning and customer service infrastructures to meet expectations and volumes but moreso, their underlying data network has woefully underperformed (with a similar story for the Yanks via AT&T). This prompted O2 to block free tethering when it was provided by Apple under OS 3.0. The real problem for them was that the iPhone generated a (reported) five fold increase in data traffic which their network was simply not built to support. A complex mix of EDGE and HSDPA/3G infrastructure, O2 has had to manage data use through marketing and technological traps to avoid saturation. My point is that the iPad represents another huge leap in data demands for any mobile network. Nagging users to switch to WiFi wherever possible or penalising those that draw more data through the air than others ain’t gonna cut it.
So the iPad looks wonderful and raises the already impressive App Store game that Apple have pioneered so beautifully. I feel it hammers a few more nails in Microsoft’s coffin but, my prejudices aside, the real challenge will be for the mobile operators that jump at the chance to market the new device with an airtime contract. Will their networks be able to cope with the coming of the iPad ? Can those providers with weak capacity growth, legacy pre-3G radio or just not enough IP transport be able to resist the marketing allure and customer draw that the new device represents ? I am of course making the assumption that the iPad will be marketed predominantly as a mobile smartphone under customer-retaining long term contracts – seems likely. There must be a few large network operators sweating with glee (if such a thing is possible)
Stop Press: If you actually make your way through the Steve Jobs’ launch video (link above) then he does announce that Apple has already cut an airtime deal with AT&T for the iPad in the USA (jump to 1 hour and about 12 mins into the vid). The deal looks pretty good – with an Unlimited usage package for $29.99 a month. (Other country deals to be announced by June / July. Hopefully a UK network deal will be similarly priced but – based on my arguments above – I would not bet on it.). I am not sure how practical the iPad is as a telephone; I doubt it is intended to replace the iPhone in any sense. I assume therefore that the AT&T deal is data-only. It includes unlimited use of AT&T’s WiFi network in the USA – similar to the deal in the UK by O2 whereby they included tie-ins with The Cloud and other WiFi aggregators in order to persuade users to offload data traffic from the core 3G network.
Another significant announcement is that individual apps in the iWorks Suite will be available from the App Store for $9.99 each. I have not used these apps on my Mac but the presentation was impressive. Assuming the iPad can become a serious business tool then Microsoft could be severely under threat – iWorks making Office look decidedly dated, slow and lacking in user-friendliness.
To while away a few minutes of boredom, become your own political PR guru and design a new Cameron poster, courtesy of Andy Barefoot. What fun ! Just need a Labour/Brown version now (for balance, natch !).
“If we communicate for 2 minutes only
It will be enough ….”
In a brief follow-up to my recent post on “Into Tomorrow”, comes the news that Paul is about to release a new album – Wake Up The Nation. 14 brand new tracks including collaborations with such names as Bev Bevan, and a reunion with Bruce Foxton from The Jam.
Release date yet to be announced. Check out the link above to the main Paul Weller site for details.
Amidst the revival of the backward Unite union’s attempts to convince their cabin crew members at British Airways to strike, it is worth repeating some of the material the press has unearthed about this bizarre dispute. The background to Unite’s recommendation for strike action – which was endorsed by members wholeheartedly in a vote before Christmas – are BA’s plans to implement working practices already in force at Gatwick, at Heathrow. Apparently the union was a bit miffed at not being consulted. It has since been reported that they were consulted but blocked the new working stipulations in a rather 70’s flexing of their shop-steward muscles.
These lunatic lemmings seem hell-bent on damaging the airline despite an economic crisis which the airline industry feels all the more acutely. I was lucky to chat with BA employees and customers to get their views. According to those I talked to, the high vote for strike action last year was due in part to the fact that the Unite members assumed they were voting for occasional, low-key actions as opposed to an all-out, death-match permanent strike. As Unite got kicked in their collective goolies by the High Court in the UK, a Christmas strike was averted but not before the damage to BA’s reputation was done – particularly amongst its North American customers. So these left-wing muppets are having another go in an exercise that seems more about the egos of the union representatives than it really does about protecting their members.
BA Cabin Crew earn on average almost double their counterparts at other airlines. Attempts by management to reduce the level of staffing on their flights to manage the impact of this inflated cost-base are also being given the 2-fingered salute by Unite. For example, a typical 747 flight requires 16 cabin crew; BA are asking to reduce this to 15. Redundancies are already happening; those cabin crew looking to keep working and to move into ground roles are being faced with the rude realities of pay cuts as they lose their flight allowances. BA Pilots have already accepted a pay cut, arguably because their larger salaries can accommodate a little pruning.
Willy Walsh has responded to the threat by asking non-crew to volunteer to fill-in for striking cabin crew and is actively asking for applicants to undertake training. You cannot fault him for trying to get ahead of the game and, above all, avoid the large scale cancellations that will prompt fliers to switch in advance (as I did over Christmas – sampling the lesser charms of Continental to ensure I could get back to Blighty for a family do). Sadly, customers booking ahead cannot predict the availability of BA flights so will naturally plump for another airline. Will they, like me, return ? Possibly.
Consider the backdrop to this sorry affair. Japan Airlines (JAL) went into receivership today. Surviving airlines are rushing to find allies in code- and cost-sharing agreements in order to survive. Analysts have responded positively to the pending BA-Iberia merger and are reportedly seeing this as the dream ticket in the industry. The British Airways’ reputation for quality means they stand to gain most from any recovery in corporate travel spending. (Certainly my clients in the City are now resuming air travel with gusto). All of this is now jeopardised by Unite’s ridiculous exercise in futility. See their press release, in response to Walsh’s call for internal support, which includes the following gem:
“Tony Woodley, Unite joint general secretary, said: “This is a provocative attempt by BA to disrupt negotiations. It is inconceivable that BA should even be thinking of running its airline – the national carrier – with scab labour who have had only minimum training. This shows contempt for professionalism of cabin crew.”
It is indeed “… inconceivable that BA should even be thinking of running its airline….”. That – of course – is the job of those pillocks at Unite. I do strive to keep a certain level of professional analysis and perceptive comment here at BabbleTalk; so please forgive the following observation: Tony Woodley – you are a complete tosser ! I bet your salary is sorted should BA go down the crapper or get taken over by a foreign airline. Well done !
Receiving some small media attention is the decision to allow the first criminal trial to be decided by a judge alone – that of 4 alleged armed robbers due to start this week – as the Lord Chief Justice decreed last year that jury tampering in this case was a real threat. This is the thin end of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 whereby those nice NuLabour types decided that a right enshrined by Magna Carta was a tad too difficult for them to manipulate and oh so terribly expensive – leaving them less millions to squander on Infrastructure UK, Partnerships UK or some other bloody quango-money-pit-do-nothing jobs-for-the-Labour-boys.
I only spotted this from an article by Lord Jezza (Jeremy Clarkson, for it is he) hidden away in today’s Sunday Times’ News Review. It was also reported again by Marcel Berlins in the Guardian. Perhaps there are too many other crises vying for our limited attention these days to warrant getting any airtime but this for me is a terrible turn of events.
As Clarkson says, Jury Duty is a pain. Having done it when I was a single parent, it could not have come at a worse time for me. However, there was a feeling of ‘the system works’ and ‘having done one’s duty’ on its completion. It is good that it takes effort; that it is out of the dirty hands of politicians and away from the whim of the nutter. Above all, it is crucial that the presence of a jury means that the ‘executive’ has less chance to influence the ‘judiciary’ – and the result of a trial – unduly. That independence is potentially more under threat – although it would be interesting to hear the views of Britain’s judges on the matter. I know there has been some discussion on the presence of juries in complex technical cases – such as fraud in the financial markets or hacking/technological crime. Perhaps we could adopt a Grand Jury approach ? A group of 12 wise-and-true are at least called upon to decide whether a trial is eligible for judge-only decisions (of course then those chosen to serve may well plump for judge-only to get themselves off the hook to serve in the trial-proper…). Tricky stuff.
Sure, the right to a jury was withdrawn in Northern Ireland during the Troubles. I am not sure it was a fine day for freedom but the circumstances may well have been appropriate. Dunno. For sure, the trial of allegedly gun-toting thieves in London sounds like run-of-the-mill stuff and, protection of jury members aside, no reason to forego one of King John’s key come-uppances.
I doubt this issue will hit the radar in any big way in the run up to the election but I will be looking to see what the parties have planned for Criminal Justice reform, if anything. Perhaps those nice people at 38 Degrees might look into it ?
US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, has apparently been briefed by Google on their plans to remove censorship of search results on their Chinese site. This could lead to the banning of the search leader from far eastern shores and their withdrawal from China. Google are further claiming that operating in possibly the strongest economy in the world has its drawbacks, aside from Beijing’s insistence on massaging the results of any searches. Specifically, that Google’s servers are constantly threatened by hackers, along with those of other companies operating in the country, and lays the blame for this squarely with the Chinese state. PC Pro reported that the cyber-attacks culminated in the compromise of the email account details of at least 2 human-rights activists.
Within hours of reports that Clinton has asked China to explain the allegations, the White House appeared to be isolating her by saying that the administration had left its response “to Secretary of State … who is scheduled to give an address on Internet freedom next week”. Presumably in an attempt to avoid pissing Beijing off, they are trying to climb back onto the fence.
That the Chinese State uses hacking techniques as part of its intelligence arsenal is not exactly news. I worked for 2 years with a major Chinese supplier of telecommunications and networking equipment. I was deeply suspicious about some of the software that was provided and my attempts to block access by their ‘engineering’ teams drew accusations of racism, mis-trust and fraud. Charming ! Admittedly, there was little proof – just a feeling – and network traces proved little. I doubt any data would have revealed much anyway as the company failed to get significant traffic flowing – mainly as a result of the poor quality of the system – but it did generate a little paranoia in my otherwise trusting soul.
That said, I have also dealt with the more traditional Chinese economy by using factories over there to produce goods for sale over here. Quality was occasionally suspect but the people I dealt with were straight and for the most part responsive. Keen to do business with Europe, they enjoyed the bargaining and pretty much met their promises. Don’t paint the people with the same brush as the State.
If Google’s actions do result in them being kicked out, it will be interesting to see the effects – if any. They have been slagged off for their original decision to kow-tow despite the defense that any online visibility for the people of the, er, People’s Republic is better than none. Certainly, I would hate to be the poor sod grappling with the security of my servers out there. Lest we forget, physical borders have no immediate presence within cyber-space so the fact that certain Minions of Mao may be hacking local servers should wake the world up to the fact they are probably doing similar nasties to networks across the globe.
In the words of the Great KiddyFiddler himself:
“All reactionaries are paper tigers. In appearance, the reactionaries are terrifying, but in reality they are not so powerful. From a long-term point of view, it is not the reactionaries but the people who are really powerful.”
So to the second installment of Ross Kemp’s mission to the Middle East on Sky One and his time in Israel had a very different feel to the first programme’s trip to Gaza. Perhaps reflecting the westernised, more affluent nature of the country, this felt far less sensational and risky – more Michael Parkinson than Jeremy Bowen.
The production started poorly with limited shots from a taxi which gave no real flavour of the impact of the sites Kemp was visiting – places where terrorist ’spectaculars’ had been perpetrated to devastating effect by suicide bombers of the ilk depicted the previous week. This was frustrating, as were the pieces with members of the Border Defense force and the Police which revealed little in terms of threats, history, politics or even progress.
The apparent religiously-driven settlers – whereby 500,000 Israelis now illegally occupy homes in territory denied to Israel by the UN and various peace accords – are perhaps the equivalent of Arab extremists elsewhere. Or so I thought until Kemp described the Ultra Jewish Orthodoxy – particularly in West Jerusalem – who consider their own Police to be Nazis and detest any secularist tendencies from their government. As Kemp points out, faced with such extremists within one’s own ‘ranks’, it is no wonder that Israel is as much threatened from within. Pity then that he chose to avoid any attempt to interview Jews on the Ultra right; restricting himself to the nutty “Queen of the Settlers”, Daniella Weiss who arrogantly and depressingly stated that “…Arabs will never have a state of their own…” because “God gave it to us”. Does this not sound strikingly similar to rhetoric of the Islamic extremists ?
The taxi driver who featured at the start – Amos Levy – was an interesting chap who lost his 17 year old daughter to such an attack in 2002. Despite the obvious pain, Levy appeared phlegmatic and almost resigned to the presence of perpetual conflict in Jerusalem. Amplified at their daughter’s grave, he felt that there will never be peace because of the endemic hatred. This segment was dominated by his ex-wife Abigail whose contributions I was about to dismiss as she was understandably distraught. However, she said something which I thought was particularly revealing: the conflict was “…not about land, it was about hate”. Whereas the earlier sections on land-grabs, settlers and UN illegalities got me thinking about action against Israel to stop these geographical injustices, her words made me realise how pointless that would be. What is really needed is what Kemp infers at the close – a community led approach which brings all parties together to speak out against the extremists on both sides.
Not much to take away from this other than a lingering sense of depression that a ’solution’ is unlikely down the current path being followed by all parties, including the international audience. I wonder whether a new political party or movement – inclusive, which acts to bring the community together to solve problems regardless of their origin or religion – is ever possible. To achieve what was done in Northern Ireland in this part of the world would be a true miracle.
Sky One had low-keyed the build-up to Ross Kemp’s latest trip to a conflict zone – perhaps as the period prior to tonight’s first of two parts was the Christmas holidays. Regardless, I watched with low expectations that Kemp would provide much insight into the origins of the conflict or the true realities of life on the strip. The opening scenes exaggerated my impatience for some explanation into the geography and history. I became frustrated. But then Kemp got busy ……………..
Rattling off the sorry statistics of the January retaliatory attacks by Israel into Gaza, he confirmed the targetting of schools and political infrastructure in Gaza by the IDF (Israeli Defence Force) last January. Kemp amplified the view of the local UN rep that this went beyond any practical attempt to limit the elected government of nominated terrorist organisation Hamas to otherwise wage war on Israel. Whilst perhaps not exactly news, the destruction of 200 schools followed by the blockade of the territory could perhaps be seen as beyond any justification. When Ross dipped into the economic consequences, the folly of the policy becomes clear. In parallels with the short-sighted efforts in Iraq – where the triumphant coalition promptly put the world’s 4th largest standing army on the dole and released over 1 million highly trained armed men to an indistinct future – Israel’s blockade ensured the closure of an inland port responsible for 10,000 jobs. These jobs alone provided the means for support for 10,000 families suggesting a figure which is approaching 10% of the entire territory. Ignoring the death and injury, this economic pressure alone is subjugating an already poor and bewildered population.
It was difficult as a removed viewer to watch as Kemp was shown an active operation to plant an IED targetting Israeli Special Forces. I am not sure if this constitutes propoganda, journalism or immoral voyeurism but it certainly caught my attention. Kemp asked many questions of these operatives of Islamic Jihad but never a straight “Why … ?”. You might argue that the objectives of their campaign are obvious. I don’t and I feel it was the burning question and one which – in next week’s show – he will hopefully ask of the Israelis.
Kemp then interviewed a group of affected children and provided the most poignant and altogether scariest observations of the 60 minute slot. All the children were clear in their desire to die in any cause against “the Jews” for two reasons: one to avenge loved ones killed in front of them but also because they saw Paradise as infinitely better than what they were forced to live through on earth. This kind of belief – deftly illuminated by Kemp’s otherwise blunt style – demonstrates the ‘rationale’ behind the desire to martyr oneself. It is less about jihad or even faith – more about escaping the misery of their current existence. Growing within such youngsters, you could see through this programme how it would take root into adolescence and prevail amongst youths with little other reason to carry on living. Horribly informative stuff. Surely the Israelis must see the counter-productivity of their tactics ?
To end, Kemp was hurriedly invited to meet another military / terrorist faction. I would not have gone near this potential trap with an armoured tank division but Kemp characteristically dived in – and I have to concede that it was hard to discern any element of stage-managing this for the cameras. I was horrified to see Ross marshalled into a makeshift tent to witness the recording of a martyrdom video by a 24 year old Law graduate. I am sure there will be protests about this element of the documentary but it was dreadfully compelling. The viewer could look into the eyes of this devout young man as he stood there dressed in explosives and – not too convincingly – declared his commitment to die and seek the deaths of others. Again, Kemp drifted around actually asking the chap outright why he was doing this. To his credit, Kemp did attempt to elicit whether the young man saw his potential act as peace-making. No surprise that the depressing answer was of course, no.
I am still trying to make up my mind about the programme. Sensational ? Sure – but in a revealing, terrifying and deeply saddening way. Immoral ? – in my view not. There is some insight here. This is not the explanatory political documentary I have written about before as something I want to watch. Yet, the production – from Tiger Aspect / Mongoose and helmed by Olly Lambert – went so much further than I expected. Kemp himself said – rather like Jeremy Bowen’s report for BBC Panorama last year – that he had no answers to offer. Yet he did go further than Bowen in suggesting that the Israeli policies were incomprehensible and indefensible. Let’s see how he tackles the Israelis next week.
BBC Four re-ran a 2006 retrospective of the career of Paul Weller before Christmas which caught my attention. The 90 minute cycle struck chords as much for its parallels with my own life as the music and Paul’s career to date. From The Jam, into The Style Council and onto various solo adventures through various music styles, Weller’s life also picked its way through world events which influenced my life, politics and musical tastes. That is not to say we were in sync; in fact, his musical and political leanings were in perfect opposition to my own growing pains and experiences. Paul and I finally came together with the release of Wild Wood in 1993 which for me became a singular musical experience – an album I played end-to-end and over-and-over.
Stepping back, the gently biographical presentation included lengthy contributions from his Mum and Dad and reflected his warm, Woking upbringing with the family support which underpinned his success. His father was his manager through the band years of Jam and TSC and a key figure in his life (John Weller sadly died last year). Some minor resonances with the likes of Ian Curtis whose stable, polite and pleasant background belied the angry-man stage presence which diffused Joy Division and which, likewise, became the subtitle for Weller’s Jam. As a writer, Weller majors on meaning before he tackles the melodies. His lyrics come first, followed by the score, whereas I was always captured by the music before I even considered the words.
I had bought or stolen most of the vinyl that The Jam released at the end of the 70s and the start of the 80s but, strangely, I am not sure that (then) I really liked it. More a product of my fascination with the Mod resurgence at the time, I remember preferring Two Tone and the softer influences of Ska than the harsher, Tory tones of the Jam. The band was pushed into politicisation – prompted to publicly support the Conservatives at the 1979 election. I was firmly a Callaghan fan as part of my emerging political awareness at 13 years old, and virtually distraught at the coming of Thatcher. Come the Falklands and the subsequent patriotic outpourings, Weller and I swapped sides again as he closed down The Jam and whistled up The Style Council. He changed and embraced a new musical and political ethos with the TSC coming out for the Labour Party, CND and other trendy, left-wing causes – and at the same time poncing ostentatiously round Paris. Keeping to our opposing life choices, I was writing teenage treatments in praise of monetarism and despairing at the naivete of nuclear disarmament, whilst discovering the softer delights of The Eagles, ELO and Steve Winwood. The contrasts continued as he moved into romantic stability with his TSC vocalist – the wonderful Dee C Lee – at a time when my Too Much, Too Young marriage was disintegrating following the birth of my son.
Characteristic of Paul Weller is that – musically anyway – he never looks back. And me ? Of course I beg to differ. I am rediscovering The Jam and loving them. Being at school in Slough and frequently competing with the privileged kids ‘up the road’, “Eton Rifles” always resonates and “Start!” gets me pogo-ing dangerously round the living room. Even hearing the occasional Style Council track prompts a degree of comfy nostalgia. Paul’s divorce and return to writing which prompted “Wild Wood” and then “Stanley Road” finally unites us. The programme revealed this later incarnation of Weller as mature, comfortable and relieved (that he still had ‘it’). Gone is the almost pompous posing of the TSC years, as are the shy, clipped stutterings of the younger man – Paul talks confidently and calmly to camera as a man who is enjoying life and sees his journey continuing.
“Into Tomorrow” then is all about my life as seen through the career of Paul Weller. I am convinced by this documentary that Paul is my best mate …. but we’ve never met. As opposites, we would probably punch each other. As fellow travellers through the 80s and 90s, we might perhaps just kick back and get pissed down the pub – bitching about Blair, laughing at Foot or Kinnock, and bemoaning Thatcher. Of course, I would ask the usual NME crap about Jam reunions, TSC justifications and Wild Wood influences. Weller would no doubt spit back with thinly disguised disdain and wry humour at my lack of cred; before we burst out laughing.
The programme content is compelling (and not just because of its parallels and contrasts with my own life). Director Stuart Watts and Editor Duncan Hill have cut together a charming stroll through Weller’s career which lacks any lofty pretence. It stops short of Studio 150 and 22 Dreams and hence could do with an update but for those like me who hanker for reminders of the 80s, well worth catching on iPlayer.
The bigger European sites for booking late deals to travel are all much of a muchness. Digging a little deeper, which fare fairer and which deal dearly ? Planning a Christmas break, I took a quick punt on Opodo, Expedia and the market-making Lastminute.com. My mission was to pick either a week in the sun or 7 nights in the Big Apple. Here briefly are my experiences:
Worst of the bunch – LastMinute.com
The golden calf reared by Martha Lane-Fox and Brent Hoberman was my first stop to seek a quick and inexpensive getaway. The simpler layout on hitting the site is welcoming and the Flash adverts draw the eye towards some interesting packages. However, the initial looks were deceiving. Having dug into New York breaks without luck, I was tempted by the many adverts for Egypt all-inclusive packages. Pre-Christmas, I skipped through the links to be presented with a tempting array of sun, sea and sand options at tempting prices. Once I got far enough to determine the particular combination – and this exercise had taken 15 to 20 minutes – I was maddeningly informed by the site that the selected package was “…no longer available …”. This outcome was so common that I was beginning to think the site had a major bug so I did a few random flight searches which succeeded. The ‘draw’ of the package deals, then, proved to be a set of frustrating mirages. Lastminute.com adds in insurance and Carbon Offset automatically to the final itinerary (can be removed) and whatever package I selected, the price always jumped by a few pounds from the original quote for no other apparent reason. As with prior experiences on this site when searching for theatre and weekend jaunts in the UK, I will steer clear of LM in the future.
Middling Opodo
As much an aggregator with a less sophisticated interface, Opodo.co.uk yielded results with a relatively simple mechanism to customise the selected combinations of flights and hotels. Slow but steady, the system initially told me it had “… no packages for New York City” but then going via its City Breaks links generated over 100 hotel + flight combinations at reasonable prices. More fool them that I had to persevere with the site to get what I wanted. Flight selections in particular were sporadic and complicated – sometimes including layovers where I had asked for direct only. A poor selling site, then, but with a reasonable yet slow interface.
Best of the bunch – Expedia.co.uk
Expedia was a snap. Straight to a list with a suggested package that, whilst not the cheapest, was pretty close to my ideal. I could quickly run through the hotel and flight combinations and adjust my booking to create the perfect package. The jump to hotel details was smooth and informative. The combined itinerary was well presented with options available but not automatically added (unlike Lastminute.com) so that the base price is what was quoted on the initial search. So impressed, I added in limousine collection and helicopter trips which were not especially cheap but added finesse to a reasonably good deal. (I plumped for this and committed my credit card. The limo service in particular was excellent and avoided hassling with cabs on reaching Newark – having arrived 2 hours late amidst the worst East Coast snowstorm this year.) The onwards links to airline, hotel and ancillary booking systems were seamless and for the most part, transparent.
Neatly executed, honest and clear. Expedia is to be recommended.
Thanks to political blogger Iain Dale, who twittered the latest on the Trafigura saga. The New Statesman reports that the BBC have apparently pulled all reference from their website to their Newsnight piece on freedom of speech and the Minton Report in response to pressure from lawyers, Carter Ruck.
Worthy of a look. The material includes Paxman interviewing Mark Stephens – a ‘media lawyer’ and a Trustee of the Index On Censorship – alongside Matthew Nicklin – a barrister specialising in media cases. I am not sure what prompted the BBC’s latest timidity but I do hope this story rebounds back into the limelight so the shameful practice of limiting reporting of parliamentary affairs (let alone genuine, global public interest stories) is stopped. Trafigura must be rueing the retention of Carter Ruck with their rather extreme tactics pushing the polluting petroleum producer back into the media – assisted by Britain’s antique libel laws (i.e. old, quaint, useless and very expensive).
Thanks to Dani for this excellent contribution : Political Spin – How It Is Done !
It’s all in the wording you see. It just all depends on how you look at some things…
Judy Wallman, a professional genealogy researcher in southern California , was doing some personal work on her own family tree. She discovered that Congressman Harry Reid’s great-great uncle, Remus Reid, was hanged for horse stealing and train robbery in Montana in 1889. Both Judy and Harry Reid share this common ancestor.
The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows in Montana territory:
The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows in Montana territory in 1889
On the back of the picture Judy obtained during her research is this inscription: ‘Remus Reid, horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889.’
So Judy recently e-mailed Congressman Harry Reid for information about their great-great uncle. Believe it or not, Harry Reid’s staff sent back the following biographical sketch for her genealogy research:
“Remus Reid was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory . His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to government service, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed..”
Thanks to today’s Hotmail joke circulation for this little snippet:
Let me see if I understand all this…
IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOUR.
IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.
IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.
IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.
IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.
IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.
IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.
IF YOU CROSS THE BRITISH BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET A JOB, A DRIVERS LICENSE, PENSION CARD, WELFARE, CREDIT CARDS, SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE, FREE EDUCATION AND FREE HEALTH CARE.
For some time, the Murdoch / News Corp. empire has been making noise about and against Google and other media entities. The up-front objective is to protect the value of its online content but News Corp.’s tactics are so loud and aggressive, one wonders whether there is a subtext. It may be that Rupert and son, James, are simply taking advantage of political and economic distraction to further commercial aims with the full expectation that comment will be restricted to mere reporting and the risk of negativity is minimal. In short, people don’t care too much about who tells them the news and Google surely is fair game as a virtual search monopoly and the go-to supplier of internet advertising – the only real growth market within an industry that traditionally pays to fill the Murdoch coffers.
Google-eyed
There are so many articles and follow-ups on Murdoch’s “plans” to pull all News Corp content from Google. More recently, the crescendo builds with Microsoft teaming up to take that content – presumably through its MSN and Bing estates. The thing is, it all makes no sense. The Murdoch marques rely on user visits to absorb adverts. Charging for online journalism will fail spectacularly for a variety of reasons. Those sites that do survive on subscription services do so purely from a customer base centred on research, market analysis and media-watching / regulation. Paid-for or not, engines like Google bring customers to those sites and fuel the necessary page browsing engine. News Corp knows this so what is the real game ? Is this simply an exercise to force a bigger cut of ad impressions and click-through revenue or to sucker Microsoft and others into trading ad serving revenue to News Corp in return for publicity and loyalty ? Perhaps it is just altruistic concern about the monopoly power of Google ? (yes, I am laughing my arse off at this point !).
Mercy dash for Microsoft
More than surviving, Microsoft is playing the Windows 7 card well to ensure user take-up of its desktop software and to extinguish the threat posed by Apple, Linux and the Open Source community. I have often written that Microsoft’s future is not rosy. I was not fooled by the ‘Out of stock due to high demand’ bullshit appearing in PC stores around the UK. The blatant attempts to stoke up a Windows 7 hysteria to rival demand for, say, the iPhone is obvious and – if I am correct – desperate. This feeds the hypothesis that the Redmond posse need to claw back an online presence and are prey to offers of commercial mutuality which may not have any payback for them. There are some diamonds in the rough of the Redmond product set but these are so typical of Microsoft’s output – usually tech-plays which are the work of one or two gifted individuals whom the Corporation was lucky enough to retain and rally. I cite Windows NT as the key example. This operating system still forms the core of the MS OS product set and was essentially designed by a team snatched from DEC and lead by Dave Cutler. This core was launched over 16 years ago thus adding to my charge that Microsoft’s ability to innovate was – and continues to be – suspect. Microsoft remain the supplier of desktop and core server technology globally – whatever I say about their poor quality output and longevity – but they need to bolster their content and online offerings. Desperate indeed when they are now reported to be offering to pay content owners to switch from Google. So is Murdoch getting a Seattle Bung to pull from Google ?
Gelding The BBC
Cameron’s Conservatives and the Currant Bun appear to have dealt to counter the BBC’s independence. Under threat also from New Labour in terms of its funding, the BBC will no doubt have to tread carefully. In fact, the BBC is a content provider which – revenue aside – is an equal to Google, Yahoo and MSN in the worldwide online impact stakes. The UK broadcaster still retains some reputation in terms of the independence and quality of its output and despite domestic criticism from those with other agendas, continues to push digital output which is globally admired. The implicit threats from both mainstream UK political parties have gone largely unremarked. Whilst the BBC would the commentator-of-note on such stories – the commercial ITN news service is all but reduced to celebrity reporting these days – but is stymied by the obvious conflict and risks. Influencing the media is one thing; cowing it into timid observance is quite another. Labour avoided following through on their top-slicing threat to the Beeb in the recent Queen’s Speech but the Tories believe they will have the whip-hand come the next election and have perhaps kept this in the bag to ensure Auntie’s compliance. With the ITV network a lame duck, the BBC continues to challenge Murdoch’s Sky successfully for British audiences. Curbing the BBC’s steady international influence must be high on the News Corp. agenda.
The Murdochs Marshalling Their Men
Is News Corp. the global aggressor here ? With treaties and media tactics well coordinated to launch an online Blitzkrieg, could it be that they will win the day ? Winning in this scenario would be presumably mean replacing Google as the de-facto finder and distributor of content especially advertising. Attacking a variety of targets on several fronts is likely to provide a return in publicity alone. The objective after all may be to simply keep its existing territories in the face of a Google guerrilla army. If true, perhaps the BBC will be left alone but I doubt it. Amidst the distraction, maybe ITV will quietly join the Murdoch stable ?
Yesterday’s Sunday Times carried a startling and otherwise unreported brief on “…danger money…” paid to Ministry of Defence civil servants working in conflict zones (NB: not on the front line, natch).
A “junior” civil servant gets £6,750 PER MONTH
(£1,500 Conflict Zone and £5,250 for “long hours”)
Thanks to my big sis for sending in this little giggle whilst swanning round Vietnam :
“The Ferrari F1 team fired their entire pit crew yesterday.”
This announcement followed Ferrari’s decision to take advantage of the British government’s ‘Work for your Dole’ scheme and employ some Liverpudlian youngsters. The decision to hire them was brought about by a recent documentary on how unemployed youths from Toxteth were able to remove a set of wheels in less than 6 seconds without proper equipment, whereas Ferrari’s existing crew could only do it in 8 seconds with millions of pounds worth of high tech equipment.
It was thought to be an excellent, bold move by the Ferrari management team as most races are won and lost in the pits, giving Ferrari an advantage over every other team.
However, Ferrari got more than they bargained for! At the crew’s first practice session, not only was the scouse pit crew able to change all four wheels in under 6 seconds but, within 12 seconds, they had re-sprayed, re-badged and sold the car to the McLaren team for 8 cases of Stella, a bag of weed and some photos of Lewis Hamilton’s bird in the shower.
I was lucky recently to meet some of the chaps behind the launch of SpiderCloud. They are offering a “Radio Access Network” or RAN solution to extended mobile coverage within larger organisations and are at pains to point out that this is not a Femtocell solution. Unlike the current fad, the Enterprise-RAN solution from SpiderCloud connects securely with the operator network over existing internet capacity and effectively extends cell coverage within a building. Uniquely it can then switch voice and data traffic over the (hosting) company’s existing fixed and IP infrastructures, as well as providing what is in effect additional cell capacity on the operator’s network for traditional mobile traffic. The user’s handset registers with the E-RAN node and is recognised within the Location Registers of the operator as normal. SpiderCloud’s access control mechanisms determine whether the handset is recognised as a company phone and traffic / call requests routed accordingly. The HLR registration with the operator ensures that incoming voice is also received and handled correctly.
The devices are installed locally and are akin to WiFI access points (and reportedly for similar costs). Where they seem to score over femto- and picocell technology is the intelligence built into the spectrum management software of the central Services Control device which manages the individual Radio Nodes. Gone are the competitive signal power battles endemic in the femto- solutions which can have a detrimental effect on nearby commercial cell sites. The E-RAN nodes are an extension of the operator’s network and hence SpiderCloud’s selling model will be through major network operators – looking not only to extend their network but to offload traffic from their backhaul and core networks to save on expansion costs. Certainly data capacity is very much an issue in the UK and in other European locations, as the tidal-wave effects of wider BlackBerry and iPhone use are exacerbated by newer, sexier models which continue to find their way into business use.
The system appears to include interconnection using VoIP (SIP) to traditional fixed infrastructures to route ‘on-net’ calls. As a step towards fixed-mobile-convergence, this could be a goer. With desktop phone extensions alone costing £200 plus, and PABX installations stretching to £1,000 per desk plus maintenance and usage, companies could eliminate proportions of their fixed infrastructure and move employees to mobile handsets without incurring increased mobile spend. Hot-desking and remote working still apply but perhaps with more efficiencies using the SmartCloud offering. It would be interesting to see how a working solution integrates with Microsoft OCS or Cisco to provide a complete solution. With imagination from the operators, might such technology convince orgranisations to ditch their fixed infrastructure ? Highly unlikely, but this could be a useful FMC stepping stone.
The SpiderCloud approach opens up some intriguing business models. For example, the hosting company is effectively housing the operator’s network – space, installation, power and network capacity. There could be a business model that sees payments (or at least subsidies) back to the customer. Rather awkwardly, their website describes their technology as ‘disruptive’ but I think it unwise to use this VC-catching buzzwod in the context of radio and 3G networks. Ho Hum.
The company was launched in California last week with VC backing from Charles River Ventures, Matrix Partners and Opus Capital. Some of the main players are from mobile broadband provider Flarion (now Qualcomm) so the pedigree is there. They are not due to start shipping kit until well into 2010 but worth watching to see what happens with this product.
Britain has a new World Heavyweight Champion tonight as London boy David Haye showed great stamina to stand up to monolithic Russian, Nikolai Valuev, in Nuremberg. Not the most dazzling of bouts, Haye had to dance to keep the massive Valuev frustrated and wait for his chance to land a few punches. The points win was a slight surprise given the defensive nature of the movement in the ring. Valuev punched at air most of the night but Hayes was also pushed to land the key punches needed to convince the judges to pass on the WBA Championship belt. The final round took the fight, as the handslapping, Fred-Astaire-stuff of the first 11 rounds was blown away by a collection of blows which hurt the Russian.
There was much pre-fight trash talk from former Cruiserweight Champion, Haye who was immensely confident but had never fought 12 rounds at Heavyweight. Valuev towered over him and carried a huge 7 stone advantage but his bulk has made him the least entertaining of fighters – able to command the shape of a fight around the ring and take a huge amount of punishment. A veteran of 51 fights, there was really only one way to beat Valuev and Haye played his tactics to the max. Whilst it was touch and go that he had impressed the judges enough, the final round saw the lumbering Russian visibly sway under a sideswipe left hander from Haye that appeared to all but glance off Valuev’s noggin.
Not an exhibition of pugilism at its best, Hayes deserved the win. Disciplined, confident and stuck to a tactic that was at once both boring and effective. Valuev had to move and duck more to make things happen, spent most of the night punching at fresh air and ultimately was frustrated enough to let Haye in. David really did slay Goliath tonight. A shame Sky decided to play adverts between rounds – despite charging for the pleasure of watching the fight.
Congratulations to our newest World Champion – well fought David.
Announced in December 2007, the independent review into the crash of Nimrod XV230 in Afghanistan in 2006 by Charles Haddon-Cave QC reported today. The outcome contains some of the harshest criticism of government and civilian contractor mis-management ever heard. Jeremy Paxman challenged a contrite Defence Secretary, Bob Ainsworth, on tonight’s BBC Newsnight. Ainsworth – to his credit – recognised that the report contained “… justifiable criticisms…of the MoD [Ministry of Defence]“, and said that he was “dreadfully sorry for the loss of life…”.
Haddon-Cave specifically pointed to the breakdown of the covenant between Britain and its armed forces as a result of the “organisational trauma” generated by Labour Party policy. His criticism contains yet more strident echoes of earlier attacks on defence procurement ‘policy’ which have indirectly led to loss of life in Afghanistan (through inadequate or non-existent equipment). This is a terrible example of how this government cannot implement policy in a coherent manner. The loss of 14 lives is a tragic outcome of incompetence for which, at the very least, a resignation or two might be expected.
If this were a company (and 2 companies are involved in the maintenance of the Nimrod – BAE Systems and Kinetiq) then Corporate Manslaughter prosecutions might surely be considered. However unlikely – given an Administration that is so totally separated from moral realities – it seems reasonable that such negligence is punished severely. Another dreadful example of the real results of incompetent implementation of arrogantly short-sighted and criminally inefficient government policies. If Cameron and the Tories – as Her Majesty’s Official Opposition – fail to tackle the government on these criticisms, they too are indictable in my mind.
Microsoft have released the full retail versions of Windows 7 and have limited the offerings to 3 main versions. Upgrading from XP (or Vista for the unlucky) will cost a minimum of £80, rising to £200 for the ‘Ultimate’ version. Seems the extra 20 quid between ‘Professional’ and ‘Ultimate’ buys you the Microsoft BitLocker (backup utility) and language variants (35 alternative install options).
Credit to the Redmond mob for reducing the choice but the cost is astronomical. Compare it to the £25 required to upgrade Apple’s Mac OS X operating system to the latest ‘Snow Leopard’ variant and you can see the muppets at Microsoft may have snatched commercial suicide from the jaws of necessity. Will individuals be prepared to spend £80 minimum to upgrade from the steady XP ? Those unfortunate enough to be stuck on Vista may well feel forced to do so. Seems unlikely without considerable coercion or benefits to be gained from Windows 7.
More on Windows 7 to follow, as I run the Microsoft Upgrade Advisor to see what it recommends in terms of versions and hardware on my Samsung N110 Netbook.
The appearance of Nick Griffin on Thursday’s Question Time has generated predictable criticism of the BBC. Amongst others, this includes politicians using indignation to deflect attention from the fact that they alone are responsible for the reported 22% support for the loathsome BNP in some parts of the UK. Griffin’s performance was suitably naive and nasty, albeit toned-down, all part of his masterplan to make the BNP acceptable and electable.
Race
Before analysing him and his party, it is worth getting annoyed about the smug way in which many politicians bask in the derision of the BNP without recognising the cause of the rise of this group of thugs. Politicians have let down the public in this country – and continue to do so – forcing people to seek an outlet or agent who can respond to their feelings of betrayal. This is not a racist issue, yet it is convenient for people like Jack Straw to allow that argument to obscure the underlying sense of disgust from ordinary voters towards their elected representatives. Take immigration: Baroness Warsi was at least coherent in defining the issue as one of resources – can Britain continue to support a major jump of 10 – 15% in its population ? Until the Tory peer said this, no party would have had the guts to say that immigration is ‘bad’, for fear of being labelled racist. Indeed, some incredible reports suggest that the high levels of immigration to the UK in recent years is actually considered and secret Labour policy. Whether true or not, such reports do nothing for establishing trust in one’s ‘leaders’.
Credibility
Consider next the House of Commons’ own attempts to clean up. Sir Nicholas Legg’s actions as part of an attempt to clean up the MP Expenses row are largely discredited. Whilst he has been described as applying rules ‘retrospectively’, there seems to be no coherent set of expenses rules actually published. What he did was to apply a set of ‘moral’ rules with little consistency. As a result, the expenses issue remains, whilst the main party leaders try to avoid the topic and wish it would just quietly go away. Failure to tackle this issue quickly means that – to us – MPs are a race apart from mere mortals. Being a politician is a jolly, not an obligation. All of which will be used by an otherwise corrupt and hungry BNP to distance themselves morally from the mainstream parties.
Fairness
Mark Byford, Director-General of the BBC, rightly defended Griffin’s inclusion on the programme. The fact that all attention now is put on analysing the BBC and not the BNP is a disgrace perpetuated by the newspapers, politicians and commentators. It is missing the point and works to the benefit of Griffin and his cohorts. There can be no doubt that the BNP actually stand for getting themselves into power – nothing more tangible than that. If hatred and group-manipulation are what it takes to achieve recognition, then those are the ‘policies’ that Griffin will espouse. All this criticism of others merely removes scrutiny of what this band of thugs says and what they do.
A Lesson From History
It is easy to compare the BNP to the Nazis, and it is a typical post-National Front epithet for a group such as this. Griffin is many things but not a complete imbecile. His game is power and his performance on Question Time a wonderful view into the mindset of – not only the man but – his group. Hitler and the German National Socialists had similar levels of support when he too adopted the tactic of reasonable, rational and reckoned heightening of the concerns of ordinary people. Hitler had his scapegoat – the Jews – so it will be interesting to see who the BNP actually fix upon as the real cause of Britain’s woes (that Griffin and the BNP can, of course, salve and save). The joke is that, with this type of politician, it will be a group that most effectively stoke up the worries of Griffin’s constituency. By this I mean that it could be white, middle class ‘ruling elite’ (i.e politicians) whom Griffin selects as the nigger-in-the-woodpile (and I use that dreadful term consciously). Whoever they select to vilify, it will obscure the fact that it is minorities, politics and ultimately freedom that will suffer should these cretins manage to convince an increasing number of us that they are the only choice. Is that likely ? I think not. My point is that it is career politicians of whatever party to whom we should turn to make these nutters fade away.
The Blame Game
It is the self-serving, egotistical and frankly arrogant inactions of the mainstream politicians that permits such Parties-of-Discontent to foster. Shame on them, as usual. As for the suggestion that the BBC is giving legitimacy to such thugs – not true. If a million people have voted for these bullies then it is the public who are giving them credibility and it is the fault of the politicians for being so odious as to force people to vote for the BNP.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=d326711d-207b-4c96-bbda-e4af9429ed7c)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=52e3e738-49f7-4dd6-85e7-44d7bd251c83)
