Omens of a Doom Foretold
Monday, February 28, 2005

So while Tony Blair didn't go as far as to ask Women's Hour to play Armageddon Days (Are Here Again) by The The in his quest to shit the nation right up this morning, he definitely came a close second.

(Good to see the London Evening Standard going for it hook, line and sinker again like they did with the "45 Minutes From Doom" lark:

The full scale of the terrorist threat confronting Britain was laid bare by the Prime Minister today.

In a chilling warning, he said "several hundred" active terrorists were already inside Britain and plotting atrocities.

The separation of news and editorial like Charles and Camilla, it seems, is a distant memory. It'll be interesting to see how Blair backs away from this later - no doubt the intelligence services will have ballsed up again.)

It's fortunate he had the platform to warn us liberals that we're preventing him from saving our worthless lives, but then, it's been a day for strange coincidences.

First the launch of the Met's anti-terror campaign and then the arrival in court of Saajid Badat who miraculously/mysteriously changed his plea to not guilty at the last moment. This, of course, lifted all reporting restrictions on the case so all the frightening details could go out on the nightly news bulletins and make juicy headlines tomorrow.

All, again, while the Home Secretary tries to revoke Magna Carta in record time. (You have to admit, he moves with impressive speed for a man of his bulk.) Look out for the tomorrow's newspaper headlines - they're unlikely to be about tonight's debate or 100 dead in Iraq.

Just how the sorry tale of Badat, the suicide bomber who found the will to live, fits with the putative anti-terror legislation isn't clear. It was Badat getting cold feet that prevented the atrocity, not the security services - if he hadn't he might have blown a plane up and no amount of "control orders" would have prevented it. It was sheer luck that shoebomber and Badat associate Richard Reid failed, was arrested and evidence on him (phone cards) led to Badat.

What is clear though is that Badat was nicked, charged and prosecuted under the current system.

UPDATE: John B says much the same over at Shot By Both Sides. Conspiracy Theorists Anonymous, anybody?
Career Suicide or Two Can Play That Game
Monday, February 28, 2005

icNorthWales: Imagine Labour winning and Blair losing his seat
SENIOR Plaid Cymru figures last night backed an audacious bid to challenge Tony Blair at the general election.

Detailed plans were being kept under-wraps but the aim is to link up with disillusioned Labour supporters and a celebrity candidate to oust the prime minister from his own Sedge-field constituency.

One of the brains behind the plan is Carmarthen East and Dinefwr MP Adam Price.

...

Mr Eno is the only household name linked to the plan.

It's a nice warm fuzzy little dream. You've got to hope they've someone a bit more prominent than Brian Eno, though. While Eno made some lovely noodly ambient music a while back and was in Roxy Music for about five minutes, I doubt very much if he'll inspire Sedgefield voters to turn out and help him knock Tony off his perch.

Unless he killed himself during the campaign.

Just who would be popular enough to bring Blair down, I wonder? Nick Knowles for the lonely housewife of a certain age vote? The one that looks like a thumb from McFly for the just-come-of-voting-age knicker-wetter and the lonely housewife of a certain age vote, perhaps. Maybe they could tip Jack Straw a few quid and get him to rush through a passport for Martin Sheen.

In other news, New Labour to Adam Price: Bada-bing!
Charlie Clarke's Just Fancy That! #529
Monday, February 28, 2005

I'm probably trumping Tim Ireland here, whose bullshit detector is most likely over in the red right now, but isn't it strange that the Metropolitan Police are launching their latest anti-terror campaign just as South African Minister for Justice British Home Secretary, Charles Clarke tries to ram through the final stages of the anti-terrorism bill?

And don't forget that if the Safety Elephant doesn't get his way, voting at the forthcoming election will be like trying to vote in downtown Baghdad.

For those of you not gripped by fear, there's also this nice eye-catching announcement about maternity leave as well.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

UPDATE: The Times - Hundreds of potential terrorists in Britain, Blair warns
Tony Blair warned today that there are "several hundred" individuals in Britain who are planning terrorist attacks.

So there you go. We need the anti-terrorist legislation because the terrorists are already here and "will" cause chaos on an "unlimited" scale (with their Death Star, presumably).

But hang on, if Tony knows they're already here and that they're plotting to destroy our way of life (or what'll be left of it after the anti-terrorism bill passes), why do we need the legislation at all? If Tony's so sure of his facts, why can't he just send the Old Bill round, arrest them all and then prosecute them?

But look a bit closer. "Several hundred"? That's a bit vague, isn't it? Sounds like quite a lot doesn't it? Conjures up images of rank after rank of masked jihadis, doesn't it?

Surely he must have better information than that - couldn't he tell us exactly how many are here to destroy our way of life? I mean, he keeps telling us his intelligence is supposed be shit hot. Never been good at the specifics though has he, Tony? Particularly when he's trying to get his own way.

But aren't you feeling slightly uneasy? Those swarthy gentlemen with beards on the bus this morning, they were talking in a language you didn't understand. Could they be up to something? Do they want to kill you and your family? Won't someone do something?

(Brits 45 Minutes From Doom.)

Tony, you better round them up quick in case they get a chance to destroy our much treasured freedoms before you, Charlie and your careerist backbenchers do.
Have I got news for you
Saturday, February 26, 2005

Writing newspaper headlines is a skill. It's much harder than you think. They're not written by the journalist who wrote the piece but by sub-editors and others further up the foodchain.

The wit and wordplay sometimes used can be very clever. As much as some us decry the redtops, some of the best headlines and headline writers come from them.

So then, consider this headline from today's Daily Telegraph:

Mental patient allowed out to kill in park

Allowed out to klll. Like you'd allow a kid out to play, perhaps? "Daddy, can I go and and kill, please?"

Underneath the headline is a pretty well-written and balanced account of a terrible case that could probably been prevented. But the clumsy headline undermines that and reinforces both the public's and press's attitudes towards mental illness.

Many people picking up the Telegraph today will not even read the article but simply scan the headline, tut and move on, their ill-informed prejudices, that our streets are full of crazed maniacs ready to eviscerate passers-by, strengthened even further.

Five minutes here should reassure any headline writer that the chances of being killed by someone with a mental illness are slim indeed. And that, when these awful events do happen, a sensitive approach is much more helpful in preventing them happening elsewhere, giving comfort to the victims on both sides and not adding to yet another culture of fear.

UPDATE: Ahem. The front page splash - the main headline - on the Daily Mail today is about the same story. KNIFE MANIAC FREED TO KILL. Christ.
It's better to burn out than to fade away
Saturday, February 26, 2005

Brian Sedgemore, MP for Hackney, South and Shoreditch, makes his contribution to the debate on the Prevention of Terrorism Bill, Feb 23 2005:

As this will almost certainly be my last speech in Parliament, I shall try hard not to upset anyone. However, our debate here tonight is a grim reminder of how the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary are betraying some of Labour's most cherished beliefs. Not content with tossing aside the ideas and ideals that inspire and inform ideology, they seem to be giving up on values too. Liberty, without which democracy has no meaning, and the rule of law, without which state power cannot be contained, look to Parliament for their protection, but this Parliament, sad to say, is failing the nation badly. It is not just the Government but Back-Bench Members who are to blame. It seems that in situations such as this, politics become incompatible with conscience, principle, decency and self-respect. Regrettably, in such situations, the desire for power and position predominates.

As we move towards a system of justice that found favour with the South African Government at the time of apartheid and which parallels Burmese justice today, if hon. Members will pardon the oxymoron, I am reminded that our fathers fought and died for liberty—my own father literally—believing that these things should not happen here, and we would never allow them to happen here. But now we know better. The unthinkable, the unimaginable, is happening here.

In their defence, the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary say that they are behaving tyrannically and trying to make nonsense of the House of Lords' decision in A and Others as appellants v. the Home Secretary as respondent because they are frightened, and that the rest of us would be frightened too if only we knew what they will not tell us. They preach the politics of fear and ask us to support political incarceration on demand and punishment without trial.

Sad to say, I do not trust the judgment of either our thespian Prime Minister or our Home Secretary, especially given the latter's performance at the Dispatch Box yesterday. It did not take Home Office civil servants or the secret police long to put poison in his water, did it? Paper No. 1, entitled "International Terrorism: the Threat", which the Home Secretary produced yesterday and I have read, is a putrid document if it is intended to justify the measure. Indeed, the Home Secretary dripped out bits of it and it sounded no better as he spoke than it read. Why does he insult the House? Why cannot he produce a better argument than that?

How on earth did a Labour Government get to the point of creating what was described in the House of Lords hearing as a "gulag" at Belmarsh? I remind my hon. Friends that a gulag is a black hole into which people are forcibly directed without hope of ever getting out. Despite savage criticisms by nine Law Lords in 250 paragraphs, all of which I have read and understood, about the creation of the gulag, I have heard not one word of apology from the Prime Minister or the Home Secretary. Worse, I have heard no word of apology from those Back Benchers who voted to establish the gulag.

Have we all, individually and collectively, no shame? I suppose that once one has shown contempt for liberty by voting against it in the Lobby, it becomes easier to do it a second time and after that, a third time. Thus even Members of Parliament who claim to believe in human rights vote to destroy them.

Many Members have gone nap on the matter. They voted: first, to abolish trial by jury in less serious cases; secondly, to abolish trial by jury in more serious cases; thirdly, to approve an unlawful war; fourthly, to create a gulag at Belmarsh; and fifthly, to lock up innocent people in their homes. It is truly terrifying to imagine what those Members of Parliament will vote for next.I can describe all that only as new Labour's descent into hell, which is not a place where I want to be.

I hope that—but doubt whether—ethical principles and liberal thought will triumph tonight over the lazy minds and disengaged consciences that make Labour's Whips Office look so ridiculous and our Parliament so unprincipled.

It is a foul calumny that we do today. Not since the Act of Settlement 1701 has Parliament usurped the powers of the judiciary and allowed the Executive to lock up people without trial in times of peace. May the Government be damned for it.

(Via Bloggerheads, Nick Barlow and Jim Bliss)
The living double of a single fiction
Friday, February 25, 2005

"Tipping point" is a phrase used frequently in connection with this cynical, morally bankrupt government.

Hutton, Butler, Tuition Fees, Iraq. It seems Tony Blair reaches a "tipping point" every few months. By tipping point they mean: "Has he finally reached the point where he'll be tipped out on his arse?"

So, let's hope he's reached another one today. It seems the story about the Attorney General's lukewarm advice about the dubious legality of the war in Iraq might be finally snowballing - earlier in the week I feared it wasn't going to gain traction.

Blair's dealing with the issue at his monthly press conference showed a slippery evasion we've come to expect from someone Roy Jenkins described as having a "second class mind". But he also showed an intellectual degeneracy that was breathtaking even for him. The exchange between him and Gary Gibbons of Channel 4 news can be read here, although you really need to see the footage of Blair hissing his answers coldly through gritted teeth to get the full effect. Unlike other animals, Blair doesn't have the fibre to fight when cornered. Instead, to change metaphors, he instead dodges, weaves and tells half truths like the naughty boy with crumbs round his mouth who denies he's been at the biscuits. His lack of moral fibre and intellectual courage are two of his shortcomings that infuriate the most. You could at least respect a man who takes an argument head on.

This is, of course, yet another symptom of the hysteria that's surrounding the run-up to the election. New Labour, like the rest of us, must surely know they're going to romp the next election but they aren't prepared to budge an inch just in case. No wonder Labour voters and activists are deserting in droves.

(Blair even tried to toss us liberals a bone today by announcing a rise in the minimum wage. From £4.85 to £5.05. If you can find enough nourishment on that bone - where the minimum wage remains a poverty wage and which the CBI said was "a sensible reaction to business concerns" - to return to New Labour, then you must be very famished indeed.)

And yet surely by this stage, most of the MPs who voted for war must know they've been had. First the caveats were removed from the intelligence on WMD and now we find the caveats were removed from the advice on the war's legality. Like I said before, if they weren't, the advice would be out there already.

But, as we saw when Labour's backbenchers trotted through the division lobbies to vote for internment this week, Blair uses a culture of fear inside Parliament as well as out. He appeals not to MPs' consciences but makes them fearful for their jobs and pensions. How else would they ratify the deaths and maiming of tens of thousands of Iraqi men, women and children? Or PFI, tuition fees and a dozen other stakes through the heart of the Labour movement? In the final analysis, they put their jobs before people's lives. They put their careers before their humanity. And they find, at the end, that they've been fucked but never loved. But still they look at their majorities and think, "there's no way I'm rocking the boat". It's hard to respect a weathercock like Claire Short but she's been one of the few Labour bods to show any balls this week and call for the release of the advice.

Maybe, like the majority of Labour backbenchers, you live in a moral twilight zone - like the crew over at Hove Labour who have got out their nosegays to do away with the stench of the bodies and are voting Labour right or wrong with fingers crossed that Blair won't help Bush bomb Iran. "Domestic issues do not pale into insignificance," they say. Look to the good New Labour's done, others say.

But I'm sorry, no amount of sandalwood on the pyre ameloriates the fumes.

My eyes are still streaming.
My imaginary friend is wiser than your imaginary friend
Friday, February 25, 2005

There's a lot of fuss at the minute about many men of God, responsible for spreading His message of love and tolerance around the world, who say homosexuals are second class to those of us who like to pleasure the people we like by putting our penises in a different orifice.

In a world of war, poverty, disease and intolerance, it seems - to me - a fairly strange thing to get steamed up about.

My feelings on the subject are expressed by the only imaginary authority on Earth worth giving a damn about. Ladies and gentlemen, President Josiah "Jed" Bartlet.

Bartlet: I like how you call homosexuality an abombination.

Jenna Jacobs: I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President, the Bible does.

Bartlet: Yes, it does. Leviticus.

Jenna Jacobs: 18:22.

Bartlet: Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I have you here. I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophmore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it OK to call the police? Here's one that's really important because we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you?
...and telling you its raining
Thursday, February 24, 2005

Being a novice at Doublethink I'm struggling somewhat with these two statements from the Attorney General over whether he equivocated over his legal advice with regard to the Iraq war and whether his subsequent summary of that advice given in an answer to a parliamentary question was in fact written by Number 10:

To Newsnight:


"In my parliamentary answer on March 17 2003, I explained my genuinely held, independent view, that military action was lawful under the existing security council resolutions.

"It was certainly not a view that I expressed as a result of being leaned on in any way, nor as I have already made clear, was it written by or at Number 10."

To Lord Butler, during his inquiry into intelligence failures concerning WMD:

On May 5 2004, Lord Goldsmith told Lord Butler: "I conveyed [my] view ... in a meeting on March 13 with Baroness Morgan and Lord Falconer."

Lord Butler: Was that formally minuted?

Lord Goldsmith: I can't say. I do not know what minutes Number 10 may have of it. They shortly, of course, set out my view in a PQ [parliamentary question].


(My emphasis)

So which is it to be? Lord Goldsmith told Lord Butler that Baroness Morgan and Lord Falconer set out his answer. But in his statement to Newsnight he denies this.

This sounds very similar the the intelligence about WMD - it wasn't concrete enough to justify war and had to be hardened up by Number 10 who removed all the caveats. Was Lord Goldsmith's advice on the legality of the war treated in a similar fashion? Was it also not concrete enough so Baroness Morgan and Lord Falconer stiffened it up by writing the answer to the parliamentary question?

The only way to be sure would, of course, to see Lord Goldsmith's advice in full.

"Lord Falconer, the constitutional affairs secretary, has repeatedly said that the files will never willingly be disclosed."

Because, it puts the likes of Falconer and Goldsmith doubly up to their necks in it - to have lied about the legality of the war and then to have lied about lying about the legality of the war.
If you sleep with the devil, don't be surpised if you get fucked.
Thursday, February 24, 2005

Guardian: Minister's husband faces Berlusconi tax trial
In his testimony Mr Mills, who married Ms Jowell in 1979, admitted that he helped set up two offshore companies to funnel cash to Mr Berlusconi's children. Mr Mills also acknowledged that he drew up a document outlining the scheme in which the Italian prime minister figured merely as "X".

Which begs the question: what did Tessa Jowell know and when did she know it?
If any person here present knows of any lawful impediment
Thursday, February 24, 2005

Cross-referencing this with this, Charles and Camilla should probably get a second opinion.
GET CHAVEZ: US media image of "iron fist of Chavez" sits oddly with a country of outspoken people
Wednesday, February 23, 2005

"So much for incipient totalitarianism."
Jesus wants you to die in pain
Wednesday, February 23, 2005

"Christians" blackmail cancer charity.
Stuck Record
Tuesday, February 22, 2005

How did his introduction of imprisonment without trial and the acceptance of torture make Pinochet a monster but their embracing of the same make New Labour defenders of democracy?

And I still haven't had it explained to me how defeating those who would seek to destroy our way of life involves destroying our way of life.
Paradox
Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Tony Blair being desperate for your vote doesn't make him a democrat.

(Jim Bliss, if you could turn this into a haiku for me I'd be very grateful)
Never knowingly undersold
Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Guardian: Ministers stall inquiry on Iraq war advice
Ministers are using a procedural device to stall a referral under the Freedom of Information Act to Richard Thomas, the information commissioner. Mr Thomas, an independent watchdog responsible for policing the act, cannot step in until ministers announce the results of an "internal review" of their own decision. But they have failed to do so. An investigation could lead to a legally binding order that they must release the files.

You really do have to think that if it was in any way beneficial to Blair - like whether his youngest son Leo had his MMR jabs - this information would have seen the light of day months ago.

Precedent and procedure would have gone out of the window had Blair been able to say: "There you go, the Attorney General's advice vindicates me completely." It quite clearly doesn't hence all the smoke and mirrors.
Gary Younge: We cannot vote Labour
Monday, February 21, 2005

"There is a word that covers uncritical support, non-negotiable loyalty and blind faith. It is called fundamentalism."

Are you listening Roy Hattersley?
Goodbye Hunter
Monday, February 21, 2005

I really couldn't put it any better than this.

"What is there left to a generation that has been told that there is poison in the rain and sex is death? Nothing but TV and relentless masturbation."
Great Moments from Labour History #1
Friday, February 18, 2005

Being outflanked on the left by Michael Howard.

Well done, Tony. No really, well done. That hot-cheeked, breathless sensation you're feeling is pride. Or is it shame? Who knows? You live with the kind of mental dichotomy which would allow you to experience both emotions simultaneously.

Keir Hardie has been turning in his grave for a number of years now. Though he must be spinning so fast at the moment that it's a wonder he hasn't reached the Earth's core.

Now try selling internment to the activists Tony. You know, all those chumps who fill the envelopes and knock on doors? Those poor sods who get your vote out every election?

Come dungeons dark or gallows grim, this song shall be our parting hymn.
I wonder why we're fucked up as a race
Friday, February 18, 2005

You know, what is it in people that gets them all riled up about some poor ickle fox being killed by dogs but can turn a blind eye to this, this, this, this, this, this and this?

How can we have elected representatives whose moral compasses are so comprehensively fucked that they can debate fox hunting for 700 hours and the bombing of women and children for a mere seven?

There is something deeply twisted in the human make-up that allows them to relate to animals more than people being treated like animals. I suppose it's unimportant until it's you having the needles pushed under your fingernails.

Five Live wasted more time, money and energy this morning by giving a platform to morally-compromised yahoos shedding their righteous tears of fury over bears being made to dance in Eastern Europe and pigs being chained up so the evermore corpulent British public can have cheap pork on a Sunday.

The western world spends more on pet food than it spends on overseas aid.

A lot of people seem very happy about the fox-hunting ban - after all, it's not every day a crumb falls from the New Labour top table. And Labour's backbenchers have been so very, very hungry of late. Boy, did those who'd grabbed their ankles over Iraq savour their fox-hunting victory feast.

Quite clearly, stopping foxes being torn to pieces has made people feel a tiny bit better about brown people on the other side of the world being blasted and tortured to fuck.

We couldn't stop the war but Hey! at least we'll prevent a few foxes being ripped to bits - they can be legally shot, poisoned or trapped instead and have much more humane, lingering deaths. And while those pesky fox-hunters are in the news we don't have to worry about the broken bodies, the shattered lives, the orphans and the widows.

Does anybody have a time machine?
GET CHAVEZ!: Link Round-up
Friday, February 18, 2005

Vheadline.com - US Military: Post-Chavez Venezuela 2002 to pour oil on troubled waters
In an article published on a US military website significantly on April 12, 2002, the Pentagon analysts wrote: The oil markets -- reacting to OPEC's supply curtailments, threats of war, rising violence in the Middle East and political instability in Venezuela -- have been on a roller coaster ride over the last month.

In reality, only the Venezuelan situation truly threatened to undermine market stability. With former President Hugo Chavez now removed from power, increased Venezuelan production should bring more stability to oil prices.

Jamaica Observer: Zoellick says Chavez must be stopped
A senior US official said yesterday Latin American nations must join together to protect democracy against a "creeping authoritarianism" now taking root in the region.

Robert Zoellick, designated by President George W Bush for the State Department's No 2 position, cited in particular the actions of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, whom he accused of doing "terrible things".

Agentina Indymedia - Venezuela: Chavez como Allende?

Canadian Democratic Movement: Russian And Brazilian Arms Sales To Venezuela Could Prove Explosive
Among the most audacious, and perhaps the most ominous, moves made by Chávez in recent days has been his substantial and widely-publicized purchases of arms both from Russia, which has sold Caracas 40 helicopters and 100,000 Kalashnikovs, and from Brazil, whose President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva added a surprise twist to the long-awaited summit with Chavez by agreeing to sell Venezuela approximately two dozen Super Tucano light attack aircraft.

BBC News: Uribe and Chavez 'clear up row'
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe have "decided to turn the page" after weeks of tension over a diplomatic row.
It's not only the cream that floats
Thursday, February 17, 2005

BBC News: Bush names new intelligence head
President George W Bush has appointed John Negroponte as the first US director of national intelligence.

No surprise that this job has gone to a veteran headkicker/political appointee.

If you're like me and your worldview and political outlook was informed early on by reading about the CIA-sponsored atrocities in Central and South America during the 1970s and 80s, you'll be familiar with the name John Negroponte.

Google him for the choicer highlights of his auspicous career.
Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operation battle station!
Tuesday, February 15, 2005



How cool is this?






Keeping the home fires burning
Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Got to do some real work today so here's some links to keep you entertained while I endeavour to get my dander back into the "up" position.

BBC News: Iraq agency 'run like Wild West'
The Coalition Provisional Authority, the US-led agency that ran Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein, has been accused of wasting millions of dollars.

BBC News: Lula and Chavez sign trade deals
Brazil and Venezuela have signed a series of 26 bilateral agreements to strengthen what they call their strategic alliance.

Guardian: Saturn's moon is the double of Star Wars space station
That's no moon, it's a space station. Actually it's Saturn's satellite Mimas, which bears an uncanny resemblance to the Death Star - the planet-destroying space station in the film Star Wars.

Independent: Attorney General 'distanced himself from war advice'
The Government's most senior law officer distanced himself from the decision to invade Iraq by asking for an 11th-hour personal assurance from Tony Blair that Saddam Hussein was flouting the ban on developing weapons of mass destruction.

George Monbiot: Mocking our dreams
It is now mid-February, and already I have sown 11 species of vegetable. I know, though the seed packets tell me otherwise, that they will flourish. Everything in this country - daffodils, primroses, almond trees, bumblebees, nesting birds - is a month ahead of schedule. And it feels wonderful. Winter is no longer the great grey longing of my childhood. The freezes this country suffered in 1982 and 1963 are, unless the Gulf Stream stops, unlikely to recur. Our summers will be long and warm. Across most of the upper northern hemisphere, climate change, so far, has been kind to us.
More politics of fear
Sunday, February 13, 2005

Is there anyone out there who truly believes that the Tories can win the forthcoming election? The swing needed to create even a hung parliament is so massive as to be almost impossible.

Which is what makes this article in the Independent today such mendacious, transparent horseshit.

The journalists have quite clearly been hand-fed this stuff by Milburn and his oily crew and expected to regurgitate it verbatim for the bovine Sunday paper public.

And it's comtemptuously patronising. An unnamed "adviser" (there's a reason to trust the piece) says, "The country could be sleepwalking to a Tory government". Did you hear that? What we all really want is a New Labour government but we'll all be too busy scratching out collective nuts on polling day and might let the Tories in.

I could take this article to pieces line by line but it would take all day and I don't want to ruin my whole Sunday by dwelling on the obvious point about how morally vacuous and contemptuous of the electorate New Labour is and what willing idiots Andy McSmith and Francis Elliott are.

The New Labour rallying cry really does boil down to "Vote for us, we're not the Tories". But as Mark Steel said in the Independent on Thursday (and is echoed by the Backing Blair campaign):

It makes you realise the Tories don't want to win the election. They don't need to, as they run the country anyway, and don't have to bother with the paperwork. It's as if they've got a servant to do everything for them. In New Labour headquarters a bell goes, and a voice says: "Chuck out another batch of immigrants would you, old boy." Then Labour runs around doing it while the Tories are off to lunch.
This year's hottest destination
Saturday, February 12, 2005

The Foreign Office offers an email service that you can sign up to for travel advice and FCO news. Here's the latest travel advice sent out for Iraq, offered unedited and without comment:

This advice has been reviewed and reissued with an amendment to the Summary. The overall level of the advice has not changed.

We advise against all travel to Baghdad and the adjacent provinces of Al Anbar, Salah Ad Din, Diyala, Wasit and Babil. We advise against all but essential travel to all other parts of Iraq. We urge all British nationals in Iraq to consider whether their presence in Iraq is essential at this time. Even essential travel to Iraq should be delayed, if possible.

There may be an increase in the number of attacks in the period around the announcement of election results. Insurgents may also be planning attacks in the period leading up to festival of Ashura, due to take place on 19/20 February. The Government of Iraq has announced that borders will be closed between 17-22 February.

The security situation is dangerous. There continue to be widespread outbreaks of violence and kidnappings of foreign nationals, and targets have included hotels, civilian vehicles and aircraft. Any British nationals in Iraq should, as a matter of urgency, review their security arrangements and protection and seek professional advice on whether they are adequate.

The threat to British nationals remains high. Since the beginning of March 2004, at least 18 British civilians have been killed and several others seriously injured in terrorist incidents. There is a specific threat to the Baghdad and Sheraton Hotels. There is also a potential Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) threat against vehicles in the area. As of 8 February 2005, we have also received information that insurgents may currently be planning Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attacks in the Haifa Street area of Baghdad and mortar and rocket attacks on the Iraqi Army complex within the International Zone.

An IED was discovered on a commercial flight inside Iraq on 22 November 2004. The British Embassy currently advises its staff against travel by commercial airlines in Iraq. The road between Baghdad and Baghdad International Airport and the Abu Ghraib-Ramadi corridor are considered to be particularly dangerous. With effect from 28 November the British Embassy ceased all movements on the BIAP road.

The Iraqi Government declared a 60 day state of emergency on 7 November 2004, covering all areas of Iraq except those run by the Kurdistan Regional Governments. Curfews have been implemented in Baghdad, Fallujah and Ramadi. Curfew times in Baghdad are 2230-0400. There is an indefinite curfew in Fallujah and Ramadi.

There have been numerous kidnappings of foreign nationals across Iraq. Some of those kidnapped have been killed by their captors. There is a direct threat of kidnap to foreign nationals in northern Iraq and we believe that British nationals may be targeted. There is also a threat of kidnap against foreign nationals in Baghdad, including journalists.

The British Embassy in Baghdad will only be in position to offer limited consular assistance for the foreseeable future. There are also very limited consular facilities in Basra.
The Stations of the Card
Friday, February 11, 2005

Like the six new pledges he unveiled today, Tony's stops on his "whistle-top" tour were short and devoid of meaning to the point of abstraction. Are we supposed to believe that meaningful dialogue has taken place between Tony and the electorate as opposed to some dumb stunt like Phil Collins playing both Live Aids?

If he was going to do it right he should have announced his pledge card on an Ian Botham-style sponsored walk or, more becoming with his image, a touring passion play.

There's an idea. How about:

The First Station (Wandsworth): Tony falls the first time
Tony, the card you have been carrying is very heavy. You are becoming weak and almost ready to faint, and you fall down. Nobody seems to want to help you. The soldiers are interested in getting home, so they yell at you and try to get you up and moving again.

The Second Station (Kettering): Tony falls the second time
This is the second time you have fallen on the road. As the card grows heavier and heavier it becomes more difficult to get up. But you continue to struggle and try until you're up and walking again. You don't give up.

The Third Station (Warwick): Tony meets the women of Warwick
Tony, as you carry your card you see a group of women along the road. As you pass by you see they are sad. You stop to spend a moment with them, to offer them some encouragement. Although you are have been abandoned by your friends and are in pain, you stop and try to help them.

The Fourth Station (Leeds): Tony falls a third time
Tony, your journey has been long. You fall again, beneath your card. You know your journey is coming to an end. You struggle and struggle. You get up and keep going.

The Fifth Station (Shipley): Tony's clothes are taken away
The soldiers notice you have something of value. They remove your cloak and throw dice for it. Your wounds are torn open once again. Some of the people in the crowd make fun of you. They tease you and challenge you to perform a miracle for them to see. They're not aware that you'll perform the greatest miracle of all!

The Sixth Station (Gateshead): The Resurrection
We adore You O' Tony and we praise you ... Because by Your Holy Card You have redeemed the World.

***


And of course it doesn't take a genius tell you that these pledges are so broad as to mean nothing. The pledge card will have the six platitudes and the underlying factors that shore them up can then be bent, twisted and otherwise invented - much like the backtracking and wriggling over WMDs - until Tony can stand up and say he's fulfilled each pledge.

You could end up living in a ditch, waiting five years to see a doctor and he'd still tell you you're better off.

PS. This graphic is a photoshopper's dream. Tim?
While you were sleeping...
Friday, February 11, 2005

...and/or lapping up the coverage of our future king and wannabe feminine hygiene product inserting himself where he always wanted to be, here's what you might have missed:

- "In estimates, the Ministry of Defence drew down £1,000 million in 2002- 03 and £1,539 million in 2003–04 for the costs of military operations in Iraq."

- UK childhood vaccines contain formaldehyde, foetal calf serum and monkey kidney cells.

- The ID cards bill passed its third stage yesterday and has been passed to the House of Lords. We civil liberties fans now have the uncomfortable prospect of hoping that this undemocratic bill will be torpedoed by the undemocratic upper house.

- There was another very dull and not very important day of violence in Iraq. But you don't need to worry about that - since the elections we've drawn a line under the whole thing and moved on.
Well, you can't have everything
Friday, February 11, 2005

Media Guardian - McDonald's: 'we may not win obesity debate'
McDonald's may never win the debate on childhood obesity and advertising, one of its most senior executives said today.

Much, in the same way, as I may never be crowned Miss Guatamala, I suppose.
New Labour Pledge #1
Friday, February 11, 2005

"Your family better off"

Erm, could you be a bit more specific? If Gordon Brown came up to me and pressed a pound coin into my hand, my family would be, by definition, better off. You could make everybody in the country slightly better off for a relatively paltry £60 million.

"Under this Labour government, families are indeed better off."

Tick. Pledge One done.

As someone whose family's life has been made considerably more difficult under this Government (a story for another time), I'd like to see a few more details.
The People Who Hate People Party
Friday, February 11, 2005

You only have to spend half an hour driving on Britain's motorways or try and get on a crowded tube train to know that people are small-minded, mean-spirited and cavalier with other people's safety.

So it puzzles me why the IKEA riot has garnered such wide coverage.

If you're going to get over-excited about people who are so desperately unhappy they're willing to fight over cheap sofas in the middle of the night, why not go the whole hog do an exposes on queue-jumping across Britain and people hitting their kids in supermarkets.
I don't want the truth. I want something I can tell Parliament!
Friday, February 11, 2005

So anyway, I (among others on the undisclosed-recipients list) received this email from the Foreign Office's Iraq Policy Unit the other day:

Thank you for your e-mail calling for an independent inquiry into Iraqi civilian casualties. We agree that the civilian casualties that have occurred in Iraq, including under the previous regime, are of significant concern.

You asked about the possibility of an assessment by the UK of civilian casualties. As the Foreign Secretary explained in his written statement to Parliament on 17 November 2004, it would be impossible in many cases for non-Iraqi agencies to make a reliable assessment of either civilian casualties resulting from particular attacks, or of civilian casualties since March 2003.

We believe that the Iraqi authorities remain in the best position to record casualties in their country. The Iraqi Ministry of Health has collated statistics from hospital records since April 2004. On 28 January 2005 the Iraqi Ministry of Health stated that between July and December 2004, 3,274 Iraqi civilians were killed. The Ministry of Health does not give details about who or how they died, or attempt to determine responsibility. An independent inquiry is highly unlikely to be able to gain better access and provide more accurate information on civilian casualties than the Iraqi Government itself.

We regret that accurate civilian casualty figures are not available from the Iraqi Ministry of Health prior to April 2004 but this does not mean that we do not value Iraqi lives. Our armed forces, and those of other nations making up the Multi-National Force (MNF), are risking their lives on a daily basis to help the Iraqis bring much-deserved security, stability and democracy to their country.

As the Prime Minister noted in the House of Commons on 8 December 2004, the casualties that have occurred since major combat activities ended on 1 May 2003 have occurred as a result of actions by those determined to undermine the political process. Events of the last few weeks continue to reveal how terrorists are targeting the very Iraqis who are working hard to build a better future for their country. Terrorists and insurgents must lay down their weapons, and enable the vitally important reconstruction and humanitarian work to go ahead.

Yours sincerely,
Iraq Policy Unit

You have to smile wearily at the familiar patronising tone of it all. There's a number of points to address:

...it would be impossible in many cases for non-Iraqi agencies to make a reliable assessment of either civilian casualties resulting from particular attacks, or of civilian casualties since March 2003.
Why? In his written statement of November 17 2004 (which deserves a debunking in its own right), Jack Straw doesn't go into detail other than to say, "In many cases it would be impossible to make a reliably accurate assessment either of the civilian casualties resulting from any particular attacks or of the overall civilian casualties of a conflict. This is particularly true in the conditions that exist in Iraq". In other words, the security situation has been allowed to deteriorate so far that Jack couldn't count the corpses even if he wanted to.

We believe that the Iraqi authorities remain in the best position to record casualties in their country. The Iraqi Ministry of Health has collated statistics from hospital records since April 2004.
Despite the fact that some people aren't taken to hospital, particularly if they're already dead.

We regret that accurate civilian casualty figures are not available from the Iraqi Ministry of Health prior to April 2004 but this does not mean that we do not value Iraqi lives.
The soldiers that shot the family at a checkpoint on January 18 didn't look like they held Iraqi lives in much esteem. And what about these Iraqi lives? The following sentence after this is:

Our armed forces, and those of other nations making up the Multi-National Force (MNF), are risking their lives on a daily basis.
To which I'd reply, I'd rather be a squaddie with a machine gun than a father trying to get my wife and children through a checkpoint. And as gambits go to deflect an issue, this is a clumsy one. But you can get away with that in a mass-mailout fobbing-off, I suppose.

The casualties that have occurred since major combat activities ended on 1 May 2003 have occurred as a result of actions by those determined to undermine the political process.
Not true. Unless coalition forces are trying to "undermine the political process" as well.

Terrorists and insurgents must lay down their weapons, and enable the vitally important reconstruction and humanitarian work to go ahead.
Let's hope they're on the FCO mailing list then.
PFI: The gravy arrives
Friday, February 11, 2005

Independent: First PFI hospital makes £37m for investors
The first NHS hospital to be built under the Government's private finance initiative (PFI) has earned a return of up to 50 per cent a year for its investors, a report says today.
Ding dong the bells are going to chime
Thursday, February 10, 2005

Apparently some untalented, publicly-subsidised adulterer is getting married. Let's hope the reception is fancy dress.

But while the more bovine members of the British public are looking the other way, I'll be keeping an eye on what the government chooses to bury under the wall-to-wall coverage of two dim sloans attempting to legitimise their tawdry rutting.
Elect the Lords
Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Elect the Lords Campaign

And not calling them bloody lords might help as well.
MacArthur parks (eventually)
Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Media Guardian: MacArthur's return is plain sailing for B&Q
Ellen MacArthur's triumphant return to the UK after becoming the fastest person to sail solo around the world was delayed overnight by a clause in her contract with sponsor B&Q that stipulated maximum publicity for her arrival in Falmouth.

Classy. But wait, there's more:

Now MediaGuardian.co.uk has learned MacArthur has guaranteed a repeat performance on tonight's TV news and tomorrow's newspapers because her multimillion pound contract stipulated that must not return to Falmouth between the hours of 12midnight and 7am.

...

A spokeswoman for B&Q, speaking from Cornwall this morning, said the return times specified in the contract were not just about gaining massive daylight publicity for the Kingfisher-owned brands, but to allow the public to enjoy her return.

Aw, isn't that nice? They don't just want to shill you stuff but also for you to enjoy Ellen wasting a jeraboam of champagne to the maximum effect. They love us! They really love us.

UPDATE: Whining

UPDATE: Pointless

UPDATE: Moaning
GET CHAVEZ!: US Seeks Latin American Initiative on Venezuela
Wednesday, February 09, 2005

VOA: US Seeks Latin American Initiative on Venezuela
A top State Department official says the United States wants to mobilize Latin American countries to deal with what the Bush administration considers to be Venezuela's threat to regional stability.
New Labour: SLATTT Part 4
Wednesday, February 09, 2005

BBC News: Asylum children to face returns
The UK government is planning to return asylum seeker children without parents to Albania.

This policy is designed appeal to who exactly?
Another whiff of sulphur...
Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Revolution: Labour's controversial anti-Howard posters worth £300k
The Labour Party's controversial posters attacking Michael Howard racked up the equivalent of almost £300,000 in advertising spend as it took the top place in the first Ads that Make News survey of 2005.
IRANWATCH: His Master's Voice
Tuesday, February 08, 2005

Bush, State of the Union, Feb 2 2005: "Today, Iran remains the world's primary state sponsor of terror -- pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of the freedom they seek and deserve."

Blair, to the Commons liaison committee, Feb 8 2005: "It certainly does sponsor terrorism, there's no doubt about that at all."

And all buried under the Abbas/Sharon handshake for good measure.

He's not even trying to be subtle is he? A third term with a decent majority is really going to put lead in his pencil. He can see his historical legacy finally materialising: not the Euro, not narrowing the gap between rich and poor.

No. It'll be "democratising" Iraq and Iran.

"I think we should take Iraq and Iran and combine them into one country and call it Irate." - Denis Leary.






Where's Hicks when you need him #1
Tuesday, February 08, 2005

"They are demons set loose on the earth to lower the standards."






Race for the bottom
Monday, February 07, 2005

It's an extremely disconcerting feeling to find yourself glad to hear from Peter Mandelson, but listening to him on Radio 4's Today show this morning, I found myself nodding along.

Asked about the dirty tricks campaigns dominating the run up to the election, Mandelson brushed the question aside and launched into a customary oleaginous rant against the BBC:

"I think the BBC would be much better advised to leave all this stuff well alone, concentrate on the issues as I say, not resume their demonisation of Alastair Campbell - we all know where that led before - and instead help the electors understand the issues."

Obviously this is mendaciously disingenuous coming from the erstwhile Prince of Darkness who has torpedoed many a career with anonymous briefings to journalists.

(And you have to love that "we all know where that led before" crack. The reference being that people lost their jobs. Still at least in giving Alastair Campbell free-reign, Peter, nobody died. Oh wait a minute...)

But still, don't get me wrong, I love a good dirty tricks campaign: Seeing someone as venal and lacking in class as Cherie Booth/Blair getting a kicking, as she got from Liam Fox in the Mail yesterday, gives me a naughty little shiver. Utterly contemptible people, after all, should be held in utter contempt.

And of course, personalising the political isn't going to go away any time soon, at least not at the behest of a grubby little suit like Mandelson. But in goading the BBC for concentrating on what, at the end of the day, Alastair Campbell and Mandelson are paid to do, he might have started the media down the path of putting the pair, along with the rest of their nauseating ilk, out of business.

Take for example, the recent furore over the so-called anti-Semitic posters. This was extremely cheap publicity for New Labour - the posters didn't appear anywhere but the party's website. But at the end of the day, where did it get them? Nobody really gave a shit apart from journalists with columns and airtime to fill and politicians anxious to be featured in those spaces. It'll be almost entirely forgotten by the election and so both Labour and the Tories have wasted a valuable opportunity to get their messages across. And the media seem to have realised they've been duped into giving that cheap publicity.

But even if the poster campaign has been forgotten, all this crapping on about dirty tricks, Freedom of Information request, how the taxpayer is funding - via Alan Milburn - New Labour's election campaign is contributing further to the general background levels of contempt that the public feel for politicians. Which I feel can only be a good thing.

Sooner or later, politician's are going to be so comprehensively hated or ignored by the public that something radical will have to be done whether it be electoral reform, more direct democracy or whatever. An even lower turnout at the election than last time might be the catalyst.

Of course, this is bad for democracy in the short term but it would mean politicians having to crawl out of their pits, stop flinging their crap around like so many ill-tempered monkeys and start re-engaging. The media complicit, as always, in the knifings and counter-knifings of modern politics and faced with plummeting interest in politics translating into lower circulation and viewing figures will have to tag along. Mandelson exhorting the BBC to ignore the dirty politics is - accidentally as far as he's concerned - the beginning of this process.

So to Peter, Alastair, Liam Fox et al, I would say one thing: Congratulations, you're one step closer to hitting bottom.

In the meantime, let's enjoy the bare-knuckle boxing. More gut-churning stories of the Blairs' adoration of cash? Knuckle-whitening tales of a passport-speeding, drug dealer-releasing Michael Howard?

Bring 'em on.
MacArthur parks (at last)
Sunday, February 06, 2005

Ellen MacArthur has got to be just about the most pointless figure to pollute the collective British consciousness of late.

Scudding across the sea, publicly moaning/crying about being cold/hungry/ frightened - who's fault is that? What exactly is the point of yachting around the world alone? Why not take a plane and some friends?

If I was to do something equally as valid like taking a pleasure cruise down the Thames from Greenwich, seeing how many pints I could down at the bar before reaching Tower Bridge, I'd get no publicity at all.

You're probably thinking, "ah, leave her alone - think of the adventure and the romance: one lone woman's struggle against the elements".

To which I would reply with two points:

1) It's not just poor, plucky Ellen risking her life for glory. It's also the poor sods who'll have to risk theirs should anything go wrong. Much like that other famous maritime clot, Tony Bullimore, who had to be rescued by the Australian Navy a few years back. When he declared his intention to continue sailing, his rescuers must have had itchy trigger fingers.

2) Ellen MacArthur is a woman with so much romance in her soul that she called her boat B&Q. That's right. Plucky Ellen, one woman against the roaring scream of the elements, named her boat after a DIY store. It's like that line from Fight Club: "When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks." Fair enough that she needed sponsorship, I mean at least she's not that stupid where she was willing to risk her own money, but why name the boat after your sponsor? Wouldn't a big sticker down the side of the boat be enough? What next? Tim Henman changing his name to Preparation H?

If she wants to waste her time and energy doing something Magellan did nearly 500 years ago, she should do it without wasting mine.

And she should do it just like Magellan did: without publicity, support, corporate sponsorship or a whining running commentary.
VENEZUELAWATCH: Is Venezuela Next? FOX News Paves the Way!
Sunday, February 06, 2005

New Hounds: Is Venezuela Next? FOX News Paves the Way!
Not content with having invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and threatening Iran and Syria, Bush is now setting his sights on a new area to spread his own peculiar brand of democracy and freedom: Venezuela. If yesterday's FOXNews.com article is any guide, I think it's safe to say that FOX News will do its best to make his way a bit easier.
IRANWATCH: Condie takes a backseat...
Friday, February 04, 2005

BBC News - Rice: No US role in Iran talks
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says she sees no need to get involved in European efforts to persuade Iran to drop its nuclear programme.

Well, it's always best to have someone else to blame, the UN or Hans Blix for example, if or when the diplomacy goes wrong.

And never forget how horrible the Iranian leadership is:

Ms Rice also criticised Iran's human rights record.

"The Iranian regime's human rights behaviour and its behaviour toward its own population is something to be loathed," she said.

"I don't think anybody thinks that the unelected mullahs who run that regime are a good thing for the Iranian people and for the region," she added.

Just don't look over here.

Or here.

And certainly not here.
Chavez puts his head on the block
Friday, February 04, 2005

Bloomberg.com: Venezuela's Chavez Considers Sale of U.S. Refineries
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said his government may sell eight U.S. refineries as part of a strategy by the world's fifth-largest supplier of oil to reduce dependency on sales to the U.S.

Now you don't have to be as cynical as me to wince at that sentence.

Or be a student of US escapades in Latin America to wince at this one:
"We have serious concerns," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said yesterday at a press briefing when asked about Chavez's plan to reduce oil business with the U.S. "We have made our concerns known when it comes to President Chavez. We have talked about our concerns with other leaders in the Americas."

But all this rings bells. Here's what Greg Palast reported in May 2002:
The Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, had advance warning of last month's coup attempt against him from the secretary general of Opec, Ali Rodriguez, allowing him to prepare an extraordinary plan which saved both his government and his life, an investigation has revealed.

...

The Opec chief warned Mr Chavez that the US would prod a long-simmering coup into action to break any embargo threat. It was likely to act on April 11, the day a general strike was due to start.

...

Last month the Guardian reported a former US intelligence officer's claims that the US had been considering a coup to overthrow the Venezuelan president for nearly a year.

Chavez. Oil. Coup. The US.

But then again, Chavez is quite clearly mental and deserves to get the boot. Here's what the BBC Online's profile has to say about him:
This admirer of Fidel Castro's Cuba and avowed anti-globalist...

This populist leader, who never missed an opportunity to address the nation...

Mr Chavez's "revolution" had little real impact on the lives of ordinary Venezuelans, who still suffer from chronic poverty and widespread unemployment despite the country's oil wealth.

A contributing factor to that third point might have something to do with the way the country's oil wealth is dealt with. Take those refineries that Chavez would like to sell:

"Not one Venezuelan works at these refineries," Chavez said in Buenos Aires yesterday, according to Venezuela's Communication and Information Ministry. "They don't give us one cent of profit. They don't pay taxes in Venezuela. This is economic imperialism."

It seems to me the BBC profile was clearly written from cuttings from the right-wing, anti-Chavez American press. Here's Palast again in 2003 with a bit of balance:

I'd recently returned from Caracas and watched 100,000 march against President Chavez. I'd filmed them for BBC Television London.

But I also filmed this: a larger march, easily over 200,000 Venezuelans marching in support of their president, Chavez.

...

Look at the Chronicle/AP photo of the anti-Chavez marchers in Venezuela. Note their color. White.

And not just any white. A creamy rich white.

I interviewed them and recorded in this order: a banker in high heels and push-up bra; an oil industry executive (same outfit); and a plantation owner who rode to Caracas in a silver Jaguar.

And the color of the pro-Chavez marchers? Dark brown. Brown and round as cola nuts -- just like their hero, their President Chavez. They wore an unvarying uniform of jeans and T-shirts.

You'll notice the "O" word buried in there again.

So, another one to watch. If or when Bush decides it's finally time for Chavez to go, you can probably expect to see it done in the traditional way - coup, riots, possibly deaths squads - rather than cluster bombs and deleted uranium. And all done with the now customary twist of the right-wing US mass-media weighing in behind the slaughter and illegality. Look for the ratcheting up of what already is a pretty full-on smear campaign.

Salvador Allende, anybody?

Still, it'll all be in the name of freedom and democracy, of course.

Not oil, you cynic.

Postscript: You have to admire a man who responds to the recent remarks from Condoleeza Rice describing him as "a democratically elected leader who governs in an illiberal way" and "very deeply troubling", with:
"It seems that she dreams about me. I can invite her on a date with me to see what happens to her with me. She said that she was sad and depressed because of Chavez. Oh, daddy! She should forget me. What bad luck this lady has. I don't want to make that sacrifice for my nation"

Although how the writer of this piece, James Morrison, leapt to the conclusion that Chavez was suggesting that Rice had "sexual dreams" about him is probably best left to Morrison's analyst.
New Labour: Slightly less awful than the Tories Part 3
Thursday, February 03, 2005

This rancid little nugget comes courtesy of yesterday's Prime Minister's Questions:
Mr. Brazier: The world rightly admires the courage of the Iraqi people in the recent election. However, I wish to press the Prime Minister on his attitude to our armed forces, whose courage helped to make that result possible. What reply did he give to my constituent, the sister of a severely wounded soldier, when she wrote and asked him how he had found time in his busy week to drop a personal line to Ozzy Osbourne when he fell off his quad bike, when not one member of the Cabinet has written to or visited her brother or any of the other 600 British soldiers wounded under the Prime Minister's direction in Iraq?

The Prime Minister: I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman makes his point in that way. Everybody in the House believes that our armed forces are courageous people who have done an immensely worthwhile job in Iraq. We should be and are proud of them. We grieve for the families who have lost their loved ones and we will give every support that we possibly can to those who have been wounded in action. That is the case for me and I believe that it is true for the Government, but it is also true for every Member of this House.
I knew there was something...
Thursday, February 03, 2005

Kilroy: Emperor Emperor: Kilroy

Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational political party!




"Why was the Deputy Prime Minister excluded from the anti-Semitic smearing group?"
Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Simon Hoggart: Hard man of Labour toughs out the teasing
"Every month, we have questions to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster - or teasing Alan Milburn, as I think of the session."

For those of us who'd like to see the bouffanted stick-at-naught taken down a peg, the Hansard transcript of questions to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster makes for satisfying reading.

On a less cheery note however, this strutting buffoon is being paid by us taxpayer to write New Labour's new election manifesto. That said, if he makes as big a pig's ear of it as some suspect he might, it'll be money well spent.

Googlebomb: "An over-promoted bloody popped-up backbencher"






...lay a little egg for me
Wednesday, February 02, 2005

ABC News: Rumsfeld considers war crime prosecution risk
Concern that US leaders and military personnel risk prosecution in Germany for alleged war crimes has become a factor in deciding whether US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will attend an international security conference in Munich, a Pentagon spokesman said Tuesday.

Surely somebody as steadfast in their own righteousness as Rumsfeld has nothing to fear from a bunch of uppity krauts?

The thought that the scariest man on the planet is himself too frightened to get on a plane to Germany is cockle-warming indeed.

UPDATE: Maybe, when Donald says "I ain't getting on no plane foo'", someone could surrepticiously sedate him and then drag him aboard. Especially now he's revived his hankering for bunker-buster "burrowing" nuclear weapons. For Christ's sake, where does he get his ideas from? A queasy mix of reading to much Judge Dredd: The Apocalypse War and not enough Freud, methinks.
Pope in "Catholic" smear row
Wednesday, February 02, 2005

The Independent: Government attacked for 'hypocritical' attitude to Freedom of Information Act
Ministers' promises to usher in a new age of freedom of information have failed to materialise, with scores of requests to open the Government to public scrutiny being rejected.
Because he's worth it
Tuesday, February 01, 2005

A little googlejuice for everyone's favourite curious orange - kilroy veritas

(via Nick Barlow)
Sheer Bliss
Tuesday, February 01, 2005

I had a slight acquaintance with Jim Bliss a few years ago when we were both fighting crime under different aliases.

I thought so at the time, and still I think so now - he truly is one of the brightest stars in an ever-darkening sky.
What would it profit a man...?
Tuesday, February 01, 2005

So, "foreign terror suspect", "C", gets his Get Out Of Jail Free card with no conditions attached. He's out of prison with, hopefully, his sanity intact.

Expect smears in the tame press, by which I mean the Sun, that "C" is still a dangerous man it's just that he had good liberal bleeding-heart lawyers who played the system.

Just why it's taken three years to decide that this man is no danger to the public hasn't been explained. Maybe, just maybe, he should have been out earlier. Picture the scene of Charles Clarke going through his desk drawers after being promoted to the Home Office and finding an old, yellowing to-do list of David Blunkett's saying:

1. Undermine Civil Rights
2. Wind up liberals
3. Impregnate married woman
4. Fight for access to resulting "little lad"
5. Release "C"
Or maybe Charles just dug deep and found the last vestiges of his humanity, the last dregs that hadn't been hollowed out after years of sacrificing his principles in return for a bolstered ego and power without purpose.

I still don't get the argument that we must fight terrorism that wants to undermine our way of life by undermining our way of life. Flying in the face of logic, the argument is put that because some unspecified bogiemen want to take away our freedoms we must do away with our freedoms to stop them taking away our freedoms.

It's an argument you can consider for only so long before you feel giddy and vaguely nauseous. There are very few people, like the Prime Minister for instance, who are able to hold two contradictory concepts in their heads and argue them both valid without their brains beginning to leak out of their ears.

Do our civil liberties, much as Tony Blair, have an "irreducible core"? Like the layers of an onion, can you peel away our freedoms until we're left with the right to breathe, eat and procreate? The message is sent that civil rights can be sloughed away like so much dead flesh.

But who are the ones shedding their rights? Not Tony or Charles or Jack or Gordon. Not even David Blunkett who is still enjoying his chauffeur and grace-and-favour flat despite having resigned before Christmas. To paraphrase SNP leader Alex Salmond, New Labour are happiest when gambling with other people's chips

But then, it may be worse than you think. As V says to the cowed hordes surviving under a totalitarian government in V for Vendetta:

Since mankinds dawn, a handful of oppressors have accepted the responsibility over our lives that we should have accepted for ourselves.

By doing so, they took our power.

By doing nothing, we gave it away.

We've seen where their way leads, through camps and wars, towards the slaughterhouse.

How long will it be before New Labour, and then the press and then us, stops counting - like we've stopped counting (if some of us ever did) dead Iraqis - the number of "foreign terror suspect" slowly rotting, insane, in Belmarsh, Broadmoor, Woodhill or whichever fresh hell Charles Clarke can create?

This can't be allowed to stand. All the "tough on terrorism" headlines in the world aren't worth even one man's life. But we all know men and women have been sacrificed on more trivial altars than that by this government.

In losing their humanity, Blair, Clarke and their grisly crew would rob us of ours.
The Lessons of History
Tuesday, February 01, 2005

Tony Blair, BBC News, May 1999: "It is no exaggeration to say what is happening in Kosovo is racial genocide. No exaggeration to brand the behaviour of Milosevic's forces as evil."

New Statesman, October 2004: Why does Tony fear the G-word?
"The people of Darfur have been murdered, raped, forced to leave their land and abandon their livelihoods. Yet the British government says that claims of genocide are exaggerated."

70,000 dead in Darfur at last count. A Kosovo body count is difficult to come by but it seems it's considerably less than 70,000.