BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Friday 19 August 2011

Verity Murphy | 14:13 UK time, Friday, 19 August 2011

Tonight we will be looking at the attack on the British Council office in the Afghan capital, Kabul, in which armed insurgents seized control of the compound for a number of hours, killing at least 12 people.

Paul Mason will have more on the ongoing turmoil in the stock markets as concerns over the strength of the global economy and eurozone debt continue. And we will be speaking to author of The Black Swan Nassim Nicholas Taleb.

Plus, is Sally Bercow's appearance on Celebrity Big Brother a bad thing, or should what she does not have any bearing on her husband John Bercow's role as Speaker?

We will be joined by ex-I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here contestant Christine Hamilton and her husband Neil and Jacob Rees-Mogg to discuss.


  • Comment number 1.


    But the Terror unleashed on 9/11, documented in this video

    and a thousand more, DID NOT COME FROM AFGHANISTAN but from the minds of aberrant, megalomaniac, men of high position, some DOMICILED BUT A FEW MILES FROM THE EVENT.

    Small wonder the men of Afghanistan resent being used as a diversionary strategy.

  • Comment number 2.


    Worth repeating on this thread I think.


    Something happened to me which has not happened for some time at the end of that mini documentary in your link.

    I cried.

    Building 7 was demolished. I have no doubt in my mind now.

    As a chartered engineer myself, I could, just about, concieve of a case for the twin towers progressive collapse in part swayed in my mind by their being a limit to what evil can be perpetrated within a 'democratic' (even a pseudo democratic) country.

    I figured the risks were just too high of the truth being exposed for anyone to be both stupid enough, arrogant enough, ill advised enough and evil enough to try it.

    I was wrong.

    You are right.

    The following is a collection of facts which are a matter of record and no allegation is intended or implied by the poster.

    Larry Silverstein and the former Israeli commando Frank Lowy, the lease holders who gained control of the WTC property six weeks before 9/11, and Port Authority Chairman Lewis M. Eisenberg, authorised the transfer of the leases.

    Six weeks before the WTC towers were destroyed, the Port Authority completed the process of leasing them for 99 years to Larry Silverstein, the developer who had built 7 World Trade Center

    Silverstein and Westfield were given the right to rebuild the structures if they were destroyed, and Westfield has the right to expand the retail space by 30 percent.

    Silverstein is suing for some $7.2 billion in insurance money for the loss of the destroyed World Trade Center – and his expected earnings – for property he had leased with a down payment of $100 million – of borrowed funds.

  • Comment number 3.

    @1, @2. Such villainy is shocking, but nothing new. Nixon used his Vietnamese contacts to sabotage the Paris peace talks in 1968, and then betrayed his Vietnamese "friends".

    Hundreds of thousands died as a result of this. I remember a documentary on the matter several years later. Charles Wheeler had no doubts, and ex South-Vietnam president Thieu was very bitter until the end of his days.

    Another example: I personally have little doubt that FDR connived in some way at the Pearl Harbor attack in order to break his election promise to keep the US out of the war. Etc etc etc.

    Connecting this with the turmoil on global financial markets, the last part of Jercoa's post corroborates the old saying "It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good".

    Instability is good for brokers and traders because they make more in commissions. One must doubt the objectivity of any advice they give. Remember, the last week has seen sharp rallies as well as sharp falls. As I have posted before: "in 1951 .... about 2m shares were being traded every day. Now that figure has leapt to 8.5 billion, equivalent to the entire shares market traded three times over."

    A few months ago Pesto posted something similar about currency trades.

  • Comment number 4.

  • Comment number 5.

    Many politicians who say something on the lines of "we cannot build our future upon debt". They either do not understand the origin of money, or are wilfully ignoring it.

    Perhaps the future SHOULDN'T be built upon debt, but avoiding that needs an understanding of where money originates. Interest, charged upon money created as debt, is the main reason why our economic system can't function without growth.

  • Comment number 6.

    All the Celebrity Big Brother inmates are doing it for the charity, and Sally Bercow is raising £100,000 for the charity "Ambitious About Autism." She's doing it for a noble cause, and if anything, it's going to raise her husband's profile. Who knows, he might end up on Strictly Come Dancing like Ann Widdecombe one day :p

    Anyway, England is 345/2, so I'm happy :o)

  • Comment number 7.


    "The fraction of people, or even politicians, that are aware of this fact, is frighteningly small."

    Blair brought to a fine art the business of blunting minds - he called it 'Education', wherein any quality of thought was DRAWN OUT AND DISCARDED to be replaced by MAMMON STUDIES.

    AWARENESS is - de facto - a fundamental of maturity, in a Sapient Ape; Westminster (successive party charades) has seen fit to destroy the very individuals it purports to uplift and promote. Westminster's corruption, corrupts all it touches (as we have so recently seen).


  • Comment number 8.

  • Comment number 9.

  • Comment number 10.


    Qualifies you for Westminster.

    Who needs knowledge, expertise or competence, when crafted lies, spin and blagging serve just as well?

    Nuff sed

  • Comment number 11.

    #5 sasha

    Good link - It sholud be posted by one of us at least once a week by rota. It's that fundamental.

    I first learnt of this (your) link several years ago, mainly from links provided by posters over on Peston's blog and I was shocked. I think tI first dicovered this from the"Money as Debt" video on Youtube. I have subsequently asked this of teachers, accountants and yes even bankers, and none of them had any idea.

    Why do you think that this subject is NOT taught generally in schools?

    Who do you think might profit from it not being generally known?

    I believe you have previously said that you were/are a teacher. Can you confirm that the subject of general economics disappeared from the O-level syllabus approx. 35 years ago? (I'm probably giving away my age now).

    If so, do you have any idea why?

    Serious questions!

    btw, given the totally unique way that banks make profits (i.e simply by skimming money via no real wealth creation) did anyone else notice it was the elite classes that seemed to have all of their wealth invested universally in banking shares?

    (I'm now glad most of them were severly burnt in recent years/days)

  • Comment number 12.

  • Comment number 13.


    There is only one possible antidote to this 'Dave New World'.


  • Comment number 14.

    Many conspiracies are aired on this blog, some of an on-going nature, such as Carbon Credits and other financial scams allegedly aimed at enriching a few at the expense and pain of the many. Such conspiracy theories should be pursued vigorously to ‘stop the rot’ spreading. But I ask the question whether it is wise to pursue the '3 towers' theory at this time, rather than delay any admissions of complicity and guilt, as was the practice during the two World Wars and many lesser conflicts.

    What would be the result of unearthing such a huge self-inflicted injury on USA and UK at the present time?

    Would it not be better to delay a full-scale investigation and any disclosures until after the present world financial crisis and after our troops have been withdrawn from those countries against which USA, UK and other European powers unleashed warfare?

    Would we not be inviting massive retaliation (and disgrace) both at home and worldwide, even by supporting the possibility of such a guilty and heinous act against our own people, in addition to the death and destruction that we have reeked (mainly against a specific ethnic/religious group) supposedly on a justified cause?

    Surely there is ample evidence that there was an attack by known terrorists. Examining to what extent, if any, there was collusion in this act of ignominy, would not in any way help the bereaved masses. Best to focus on the known blame of individuals, such as Blair, for deceiving us into an illegal war.

  • Comment number 15.

    NO (#14)

    It is all of a piece IDG2, and "There is a tide in the affairs of men . . ."

    ALL weak spots must be assailed simultaneously by GOOD MEN DOING SOMETHING or 'they' will 'close up the gap' with our failed endeavour.

    PS: Check the web. Your bereaved masses are calling for this help.

  • Comment number 16.


    IDG2 - have you watched this? I see no evidence in your stance.

  • Comment number 17.

    #13 barrie, I agree your sentiments, but what is the something that the good men (and women) amongst us should DO?
    I stopped blogging because there seemed to be no reaction whatsoever from the BBC NN team, and no attempt to air any of our views on NN programmes.

    I still insist that your 'spoilpartygames' would stand more chance of reality if we could break the power of the rosettes and whips by voting for some more independent MPs. But that is seen as 'wasted' votes under FPTP ballots, so perhaps most of your 'good men' in the electorate abstained. My plea (on this and other blogs) for using the one small opening for 'more radical' voting through the AV referendum (on the way to PR later) was not heeded, so I turned to 'pestering' my MP out of frustration. A glance at 'They Work for You' website shows that all MPs follow their leader and are not heeding the elector's wishes. That just leaves the online petitions, 6 of which I have voted on so far.

    Any other ideas - before the 'examples' being set of over-the-top constraint against any form of protest become law? Perhaps even your 'Dismember Westminster' may become interpreted as incitement, then another 'good man' will become emasculated.

  • Comment number 18.


    Respect IDG2. I am only slowly realising, myself, just how HABITUATED to this Truman Show, even I am. I use 'even' not from ego - I hope - but because I was born resenting the 'intrusion of the light' and spent many formative years hating authority and refusing to 'go under'. (Harry Palmer resisted his IPCRESS programming with self-inflicted pain; I was rather similar!) I suspect I am somewhat less conditioned than most. But then, Winston Smith made a similar mistake.

    On that basis, I suspect Good Men, living within the lie, do not readily sense anything EXISTENTIAL is wrong. Any intrusion of reality, into the Truman Show arena, is registered as a transient aberrent thought or phenomenon. By that token I would say Good Men are called to BREAK THE ILLUSION. It is necessary to STAY FOCUSED.

    e.g. I am currently sending the 'Building 7' video to local newspapers, challenging them NOT to report the anniversary as if the Big American Lie of 9/11 were truth.

    As I say - I am learning as I go. I do have a 'nuclear option' but Blogdog might bite if I describe it.

  • Comment number 19.

  • Comment number 20.

    Emily Maitlis has just said: 'Of course, The British Council is a non-political (sic) organisation which occasionally makes it vulnerable'? What plante is she living on". A cursory examination of the blog of the British Council Director in Afghanistan shows that this Government-funded 'charity' was up to its neck in counter-inurgency work:

  • Comment number 21.

    This is what The British Council Director in Kabul was blogging at the end of 2010:

    " I can’t recall much from my induction day into the British Council in September 1983, apart from being issued with my official British Council briefcase (marker penned 13/1983/Smith) by a man in a brown overall and having sherry with the Director General at 6pm prompt.

    However, I do remember the strict rule, in the day’s first session, that British Council officers should be active in any area of social, education or cultural life except ‘the strictly no-go areas of religion, politics and defence’. And so we dilettante cultural attachés set off to skirt our way around so much that really matters in people’s lives.

    Well, the international crises of our new millennium have clearly proved that culture, in the broadest sense, is central to geopolitics. Surely we must be convinced now that, if we don’t do politics and we don’t do religion, then we don’t really do culture properly. We can be ideologically neutral and still facilitate the crucial talk and action about global issues amongst world faiths and power structures.

    So, religion – check, politics – check. But, hold on, defence? Militarism? Guns and bombs?

    It’s been an enlightening experience for me to find that programmes of military English are core to the work of the British Council in Afghanistan.

    We have already trained more than 30 Afghan English language teachers, with many more in the pipeline and have set up a centre where troops can come to practise their English using computers and other training materials. We’re planning to open two more in the coming months to offer this service to as many as possible.

    Through weekly classes, we’re helping these men learn sufficient English to be able to participate in military training courses run by the UK and USA and communicate better with the multinational forces here.

    I’m growing used to running the gauntlet of the machine-gun watchtowers, taking the deferential salutes of American majors and colonels (I quite like that bit) and, above all, sharing the stories of the Afghan lieutenants who are trying, with our constant support, to improve the English of the Afghan soldiers.

    It’s brought home to me that, of the various words that run through all British Council activity, ‘communications’ remains paramount. Everything we do enables people worldwide to communicate – and thus appreciate each other – better and to have the language (English –or sport – or sculpture – or climatology – whatever) to collaborate, contribute, help develop, join in.

    Being able to use English as, for good or ill, the must-have international means of communication, is not an academic nicety. All who share in the work of international engagement crave it, whether for business, knowledge sharing or political negotiation.

    Communicating and understanding well is a critical need for all who hold power, whether it be the power held by a Ministry official in Tokyo, the power held by a corporate CEO in Chicago, the power held by a blogger in Khartoum or the more metallic power held in the hands of an armed soldier in Kabul.

    The greatest reward I’ve had from joining English classes with Afghan soldiers is to see their pleasure when they realise that, by having English to understand better, they too can be part of the international negotiation, exchange and effort which is leading to reintegration, stability and reform in their country. That they’re not just the robotic troops primed to do other people’s – often foreigners’ – business. And that’s cultural relations too."

  • Comment number 22.

    Perhaps BBC Newsnight's Emily Maitlis should have asked a few more penetrating questions when she did that BBC radio programme about their work in Egypt where they tried to tell the world that the Mubarak regime was a liberal democracy ....!!!

  • Comment number 23.

  • Comment number 24.

    And why has Newsnight not investigated British Council's secret links with Gadaffi? I think that is perhaps a more important story than Sally Bercow and 'Big Brother' ...?

  • Comment number 25.


    Dave has described Johnnie Foreigner's attack on his invader as: "Particularly vicious and cowardly."

    Is it me?

  • Comment number 26.


    "About 'Remember Building 7' (from campaign website)
    Remember Building 7 is a non-partisan campaign led by 9/11 FAMILY MEMBERS to raise awareness of the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 through television and other forms of advertising, and to shift public opinion such that the New York City Council and Manhattan District Attorney will be compelled to open an investigation into Building 7′s destruction.

    'Remember Building 7' commissioned a Siena poll in May 2011 that found 48% of New Yorkers would be in favor of the NYC Council or Manhattan District Attorney opening a new Building 7 investigation.

    Building 7 is the unequivocal KEY to the 9/11 LIE on which the modern world pivots.


  • Comment number 27.

    #14 and #26

    Just thought of a great script for a movie.

    Mossad, detect a terrible terrorist attack in the planning in the US, this is not shared though because they figure it may end up being in their interests to let it happen to keep pro-israel / anti islamic terrorism and anti terrorist states sentiment on a high in the US. They feel more threatened than ever and need the US more than ever. This way they allow terrorist and anti Israel organisations to shoot themselves in the foot by awakening the wrath of the US.

    Through old and very powerful networks an ex Israeli operative.. now an influencial and v wealthy property developer and active supporter find out about it, agrees with the 'daring' (in his eyes) strategy and also figures out away to make a lot of money from it to further aid the cause by buying up the leases where the attack is going to happen and insuring them. For that to work as much of his holding has to be completely destroyed as possible so in the month preceeding he arranges through old networks for the buildings to be rigged to collapse completely.. he figures such a controlled collapse may save afew lives as well.. no need to do anything more than is stricktly necesarry to assist their (in his eyes) worth while cause.

    After the event the whole thing gets exposed by US authorities, but (and this was part of the original calculation) it is seen as being so damaging and dangerous that authorities become complicit in its cover up, trapped by the extent of the ruthless brinkmanship of the strategy, so despite it being pretty obvious some of the buildings must have been rigged to fall down weeks in advance they have to vigorously deny it for fear of the global upheaval and power shift such knowledge would cause. They deny it to keep the world safe (in their eyes).

    It is of course all utterly outrageous but it would make quite a story would it not to explore the deepest darkest parts of the human psychy through that fictional vehicle described above.

    I am not sure how the movie ends yet though, the execution was clumsy and questions started to get asked, there were too many witnessess and CCTV images of what happened, maybe it all blows up in a horrible way or maybe the mutual horror of it all witnessed by good men leads to not war, but a sense of genuine forgiveness and reconciliation to emerge from revealing the extent of government manipulation, thowing out all those systems and generations worth of pointless bitterness and hatred along with it in a remarkably peaceful way for everyone, including the main protagonists, finally laying to rest the ghost of the holocaust that has haunted a people so everyone can move on in a peaceful and reasonable way.

    Trouble is not worth writting such a thing unless you believe that in so doing the outcome would be more peaceful than not writting it and its just such a biblically contentious and sensitive subject. I guess that is what makes the storyline so potentially fascinating and edgy to explore in the domain of fictional writing and movie making.

  • Comment number 28.


    To my mind, a wisely configured society would not concern itself with punishment, forgiveness etc. It would function in full awareness that the needy strive for power - be it prime Minister of street-gang leader - and behave without scruple.

    I only know of ONE example of such wisdom in Britain, it relates to the last century, I have no idea if it pertains today. Company Tax Law, worked on the assumption that all Company Directors would be, BY THE VERY NATURE OF MAN, on the fiddle. Relevant measures were installed.

    The irony is that MPs, the 'Directors' of Great Britain PLC, applied no such fundamental assumption TO THEMSELVES, and the rest is infamy.

    If we are totally honest about the drives, failings and strategies of The Ape Confused by Language, the only hope is that the thin HomSap veneer might configure a viable, sustainable, quiescent state. But the Ape lunatics have taken over the asylum, and will not easily be dislodged.

  • Comment number 29.

    Why is Paul's Blog not taking ANY comments on his last post, which is VERY good I might add?

    His central thesis - that the economic policies that current world leaderships espouse can now be seen not to work - is a long overdue "king has no clothes" observation that may of us have long felt to be true.

    The free marketeers' "deregulate everything" approach is completely laughable after the credit and banking crisis that I thought it had died a death until I heard Mr Congdon wheel it out last week, like some sort of saelocanth dinosaur discovered not to be extinct after all -his so-called "free" enterprise is actually not free at all, we now know that it's underwritten by the taxpayer and he needs to realise that we have already stumped up £40,000 for every single man, woman & child in the UK - so too big to fail=firmly regulated from now on.

    Then there are the Keynesians - who think government should spend more to kick start the economy - but because the economy is completely powerless to compete with slave labour wages in polluting, repressive economies with rigged exchange rates, all pumping demand in achieves is bigger debts because it doesn't feed into domestic production anymore.

    Then there is the current madness of George Osborne in trying to portray the Uk as "goodie two shoes", cutting the deficit and achieving economic growth - neither of which are now likely to happen, as the recessionary pressures of steeply falling real living standards and taking £1 Tn of aggregate demand out of the economy will lead to falling tax take, risking welfare costs and therefore A BIGGER DEFICIT, as well as a shrinking economy.

    I'm in favour of ending the role of banks in gambling in casino capitalism - let's socialise banking and eject the bonus vampires and run plain old deposit/loan banking as a public service.

    Secondly we simply can't let laissez faire trade go on anymore- either the finanicial system will crack anyway and there will be catastrohpic failure of the whole system, or we act now and manage change.

    I'd argue for a "Sustainable UK" strategy of ramping up import taxes over 3-5 years with those countries which run large BoP surpluses with us, incentivising onshoring of manufacturing with the money raised and put in place major initiatives in manufacturing, food production and energy to kill 2 birds with one stone - cut the debt burden and create jobs. This should be on the basis of bilateral trade deals so that we can balance out imports & exports with our trading partners.

  • Comment number 30.


    Dave need not apply.

    Nuff sed.

  • Comment number 31.

    good on 'yer Sally...better than watching Widdicombe being dragged around a dance floor......

  • Comment number 32.

    I can't help speculating as to wether what Mr black swan guy was trying to say inbetween the lines was that interest rates need to go up to a realistic level say 5% in order to solve the problem of the current virtual welfare state for stock market. It would probably crash the gold market as well, and no doubt put the banks into a position where the politicians would be placed into a position where nationalisation was the only sane option, likewise defaulting on the national debt.

    Then we could get to a position where richard's deposit / loan scheme could come into invention using the cash savings deposits of all UK citizens as the basis. Then the stock market could get back to the honest business of selling shares, most of which would probably be worthless as the companies had been nationalised due to their debts to the banks anyway.

    I suspect that if the above happened there would be the problem of the exchange rate, no doubt the value of the pound on world markets would go into freefall, just in spite from Wall Street, we would just have to stop imorting junk in the future. The trouble is at the moment that we don't have any politicians of the caliber to sell such an idea to the general public, who more recently have been acting like a herd of wildebeaste, led by rubber wildebest politicians !

  • Comment number 33.


    Might much of the damage done to this country by senior politicians, over decades, be down to their false belief that we have appointed them LEADERS?
    We need stewards of a high order, not poseur leaders from the lowest orders.

    Tony thought himself a leader of Biblical Dimension, and look where that got us. Now we have Dave, who seems to have found 'Leadership for Dummies' in some second-hand bookshop, from which he draws claptrap of a banality to shrivel any sentient brain, other than of a politician.


  • Comment number 34.

    #19 ecolizzy’ link
    This is evidence of a Good Man and his untiring efforts, but his task is Herculean.

    His dismay at the pathetic Report of the Commission is echoed by many others, such as:-
    “The commission was created by the coalition government because of the clear difference of opinion between the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives on the future of the Human Rights Act. While the Tories pledged in their 2010 general election manifesto to replace the Human Rights Act with a UK bill of rights, the Lib Dems sought to protect the act from legislative interference.

    Meanwhile, issues such as prisoners' voting rights, the sexual offenders register and so-called "super-injunctions" have forced human rights back into the political consciousness. They have led to important questions about the nature of the relationship between parliament and the courts. Disappointingly, it seems the commission is already failing to live up to its own importance. In the four and a half months since its creation, its only output has been a 20-page discussion paper, which has some glaring errors and omissions.

    First, parliamentary sovereignty, an essential part of the UK's unwritten constitution, is reduced to a meagre three-line summary in paragraph 9. The doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, whereby parliament has the ultimate authority to declare what the law is, is the real battleground over the future of the Human Rights Act.
    Second, the Human Rights Act itself is not mentioned until paragraph 28 of the paper, on page 8, which is surprising, given the importance of this legislation to many of the current debates concerning human rights in the UK, and the reason for the creation of the commission in the first place.

    While the paper does set out the important provisions in the Act itself, none of the voluminous case law that has been handed down since the Act came into force in 2000 is even alluded to. In both these ways, the commission is failing in its educative function.
    If it is to receive meaningful and informed responses to its discussion paper, it must provide a basis to educate those from whom it wishes to invite responses.

    The low quality of the discussion paper leads one to question how seriously the work of the commission is being taken by its members, and whether the political divide in its make-up is hampering its long-term effectiveness. Human rights are always going to be surrounded by political controversy: inevitably, the commission will have to address contentious questions of constitutional importance on which the members may be divided. Nevertheless, if it cannot get the detail of basic constitutional ideas right, the commission may struggle to retain people's confidence in the quality and effectiveness of its work in the future.”………..

  • Comment number 35.

    #34 cont'd...
    Who are the UK Bill of Rights Commission ‘s ‘human rights experts?
    “Reform groups Justice and Liberty have already produced responses. The Guardian has suggested that the commission will be "deadlocked from the start" due to its members being evenly split between supporters and sceptics of the human rights act….the commission appears to have been set up as a trial for the human rights act, in that it looks almost like a court case….One interesting point to note is that the 'for' camp are the lawyers who practise in human rights, whereas the 'against' camp probably have little experience in the area. Perhaps it would have been prudent to include some non-lawyers without publicly expressed opinions in order to create balance…and
    the fact that withdrawing from the European Convention altogether is not an option for the group will mean they have to be more creative within the fairly tight constraints of their remit. So expect some creative compromises.
    The commission may make some more interesting points about the European Court of Human Rights, but a lot can happen in politics and law between now and the end of 2012.”

    The important thing is that the Commission is seeking your views:-
    “Our Discussion Paper’Do we need a UK Bill of Rights’ is the first step in our programme of public consultation. Please send your responses via email or to our address. The deadline for responses is 11 November 2011.”
    So, we can continue to use this NN blog to exchange our views and anger on this important issue with each other, or we can at least send them to the Commission.
    Another alternative is to attempt to influence government opinion by getting a minimum of 100,000 signatures for an issue to guarantee its debate in the House by MPs. Apart from the fact that the need for a British Bill of Rights has already been agreed by the coalition, the weakness can be seen from a glance at this site:-
    Punch in ‘British Bill of Rights’ (or any other contentious issue) and it becomes obvious that too many people are starting their own petitions, none of which seem likely to get anywhere near the required 100,000 signatures.

    IMHO this is all part of the design deviousness of Dave, who wishes to kick this issue (and many others) into the long grass, whilst claiming to be a champion for democracy and people power, which is the opposite approach to his destruction of any change in electoral reform, by spiking the AV referendum, which could have led to Proportional Representation with many more MPs who would not be subject to the FPTP power of the whips but responding to a representative voice of the people.
    What is needed is a truly independent body that can persuade would-be petitioners to withdraw their multiplicity of petitions and switch their collective votes into petitions that will achieve the 100,000 signatures and thus get debate and discussion, instead of the grapeshot of many ego petitions that will never make it.
    Perhaps we could persuade one of the tabloids to take up this challenge?

  • Comment number 36.

  • Comment number 37.

    A FINE POST IDG2 - THANK YOU (#34 - 35)

    First, I am sure the gov has spoken with forked tongue re petitions reaching 100,000. On one site I read that they would only BE CONSIDERED for debate. And anyway - debate is just that.

    As I read your comments on the Human Rights chicanery, I felt a similarity to the Wind Power issue. We know it is smoke and mirrors, but quite what the true agenda is (or even if they know - headless chickens rarely have one) who can say?

    Your analysis of Designer Dave, is spot on. More and more he fits the devious mould of the Manipulator of the Truman Show.


  • Comment number 38.

  • Comment number 39.


    We have an overflow of negative passion, and then Dave announces to the world a neon doodle by Tracy Emin - Queen of Gravitas.

    Rome's last days were rubbish compared to this.

  • Comment number 40.

  • Comment number 41.

  • Comment number 42.

    This piece from Blair personifies his MO of style (or PR perception) over substance.

    Blaming a moral decline for the riots makes good headlines but bad policy

    How touching of him to give his natural heir a guiding hand.

  • Comment number 43.

    UK ‘faces slump’ if banks are ring-fenced

    The phrases "gun to head" and "the tail wagging the dog" spring to mind.

    I think it was Hawkeye that said that the loan origination process, the preserve of retail banking, was the goose-that-lays-the-golden-eggs. I think it was described as the "originate and hold" banking method i.e. the retail bank retains the risks, and lends out loans in a responsible manner.

    However, the spivs at the casino investment banks realise which part of banking creates the gaming chips without which they cannot speculate i.e. the originate and distribute banking model (aka securitisation).

    The libertarian bankstas are going to get their way in the end. Remember, it is they who now control goverment policy (whether it is red, blue, yellow or any other combination of govt that does their bidding).

  • Comment number 44.


    It's the libertarians that promoted individual rights above personal responsibilities (aka human rights, gay rights etc) via subversive legislation. They were the ones that pushed the equality agenda knowing that discrimination is an inherent part of a healthy functioning country/society/economy. The gender equality legislation's success was in the breaking up of the family unit and thereby deliberately facilitating the atomisation of our society. It was done because it was good for business.
    Immigration policy is driven by the libertarians. The more immigrants = more consumers. It's good for business. And what's good for business?....growth, at the expense of sustainability.

    Libertarians take all opportunities to force their agenda on poor Johnnie Foreigner under the guise of liberal democracy (unless their leaders can be bought off - of course). It's why they are so keen to start wars. Wars are also good for business - for the industrial/military/political economy.

    libertarians = anarchists (without rules), they are Trotskyite, they impose rigged market economies onto peaceful statist nations under the guise of liberal democracy. The BBC is wholly complicit in this pursuit (ref the John Pilger piece above and their constant bigging up of foreign anti-statist subversives such as Ai Weiwei in China and Aung San Suu kyi in Myanmar).

    Do not think in terms of the old Left vs Right political dogmas. That's all just pantomime for the lumpen proles. It's about anti-statists vs statists. When you read the MSM news (aka propaganda) with that perspective in mind, EVERYTHING becomes clear.

    When you analyse all of the actions of Thatcher, Blair, Brown and now Cameron their anti-statist OUTCOMES of policy all start to make complete sense.

    THEY are all in it together.

  • Comment number 45.

    #41 link by Mistress76uk:

    Not sure that it is good news. This Daily Telegraph article on the same theme:- prompted the following blog:-

    “In the vote on Bill Cash's amendment to the European Union Bill to reaffirm the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament over Brussels, on January 11th this year:
    Dominic Raab voted against
    Priti Patel voted against
    Tracey Crouch voted against
    Chris Heaton-Harris voted against
    George Eustice voted against
    Andrea Leadsom voted against
    Kwasi Karteng voted against
    Matthew Hancock voted against
    Clare Perry voted against
    Chris Skidmore voted against
    And you're holding this worthless shower of traitorous wasters up as an example of Tory eurosceptics?”

    Are they just attention-seekers, or have they all finally decided that enough is enough and it is time to risk a break-up with the Libbers in the coalition and disobey the party whip?

    As a standard procedure, I have emailed my MP asking where he stands on this issue and I suggest that if a political topic is worth a post on NN blog, it’s worth raising with your MP as a standard procedure. Let them know that you use the website to keep an eye on all MPs discussions and how they vote on issues.

  • Comment number 46.


    "I think we are in danger of the wrong analysis leading to the wrong diagnosis, leading to the wrong prescription."


    "who got caught in a life-changing mistake from which they will have to rebuild."

    NO TONY. YOU MADE THE LIFE CHANGING MISTAKE AND WE ARE SITTING IN THE RUBBLE. We must all hope Chilcot has your number. You (and Dubya) have a world to rebuild.

  • Comment number 47.


    Blair of Jerusalem writes in the Guardian: "Second, these individuals did not simply have an individual problem. They had a family problem. This is a hard thing to say and I am of course aware that this, too, is a generalisation. But many of these people are from families that are profoundly dysfunctional, operating on completely different terms from the rest of society, middle class or poor.

    St Anthony seems unaware that he has instigated war on an abstract noun, killing hundreds of thousands, while presiding over the removal of mothering from our culture, and the elevation of Mammon to godhead. If his upbringing was not dysfunctional, then we must look to organic dysfunction, for he exhibits - within a privileged frame of reference - ALL THE MADNESS OF THE STREETS.

    Weep Britain.


  • Comment number 48.


    Blair of Jerusalem writes in the Guardian: "Second, these individuals did not simply have an individual problem. They had a family problem. This is a hard thing to say and I am of course aware that this, too, is a generalisation. But many of these people are from families that are profoundly dysfunctional, OPERATING ON COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TERMS from the rest of society, middle class or poor.

    St xxxxxxx seems unaware that he has instigated war on an abstract noun, killing xxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxx, while presiding over the removal of xxxxxxing from our culture, and the elevation of Mammon to godhead. If his upbringing was not xxxxxxxxxxxxx, then we must look to organic xxxxxxxxxxx, for he exhibits - within a privileged frame of reference - ALL THE XXXXXXX OF THE STREETS.

    Weep Britain.


  • Comment number 49.

    Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

  • Comment number 50.


    Next month, Bush and Obama will lead a charade at the pathetically 'dubbed' 'Ground Zero'. 'Behind the screens', a range of frustrated activists - many of whom suffered loss, and many more of whom witnessed the explosive demolitions of three towers FIRST HAND - will struggle against a conniving, complicit media, to have the truth exposed. They will be branded 'deniers', 'conspiracy theorists' and worse.

    Earlier this year we heard from BBC correspondents located in New York, they spoke to fire-fighters and to bereaved families BUT WE HEARD NO WORD OF DISSENT with regard to the State Lie. Will the BBC continue in this WILFUL BLINDNESS?

    Cui bono?

  • Comment number 51.

    #27 Jericoa

    I like your style Jeri, I like your style.

    Remember, in Tinsel Town, anything's possible!

    Have you read Lights, Camera, Democracy? (by Lewis H. Lapham)

  • Comment number 52.


    McNulty and Straw are on radio discussing Blair's Guardian piece, as if Blair was a statesman, rather than a delusional fantasist.

    THE EMPEROR IS NAKED! Surely there are enough little boys in the BBC to point this out?

  • Comment number 53.



  • Comment number 54.

    :o) Thank goodness Jeremy returns tonight!!!!!!!

  • Comment number 55.

  • Comment number 56.


    David Owen: Tony Blair and John F Kennedy may have been power crazy

    (If he'd stayed in medicine, and not strayed into politics, David Owen would probably be a retired professor of neurosurgery by now.)

  • Comment number 57.

    @53 A very good link Barrie, and here is a prescient quote from it:

    "...........the neuropsychologist Dr Paul Broks, usually a fan of the PM's, went further. "Suppose it turns out that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction," he wrote. "Suppose the Prime Minister was indeed party to the ramping-up of what flimsy evidence there might have been . . . in order to keep us on a pre-set course for war. . . Set this against his affiliative personal style and the profile that begins to emerge is that of the plausible psychopath - charming, intelligent, emotionally manipulative, ruthlessly ambitious and self-serving." "

    NB this was written in July 2003

  • Comment number 58.

    @57 Is being, or pretending to be, delusional a necessary qualification for being a cabinet minister?

    MPs on the back benches sometimes seem sane, but once in office, they seem to become possessed. As the (left) anarchists used to say: "Whoever you vote for, the Government gets in."

    It's time we had a Horizon programme on "The Psychology Of Political Success." Otherwise, as Bariie says, we shall always get ourselves another one!

  • Comment number 59.


    At the time, the VO plan was a currency in our family for being utterly out of touch with reality. It had us in fits of mirth. If I remember rightly, there were to have been Yellow Brick Roads (safe corridors) between enclaves. All I can say is: "No wonder Owen needed a daughter to tell him Blair was a blagger."


  • Comment number 60.

    As others have pointed out, Paul Mason's current article is excellent. Of course, in the was that direct spending on public works would have been, QE was never really a fiscal stimulus. It was a backdoor method of bailing out the banks, with a vain hope that this would "trickle down" to the rest of the economy. As always with trickle down, if it works at all, it works inefficiently, and those who advocate it are usually self serving.

    John Quiggin's article linked below is a useful contribution to the wider debate.

    Quiggin is the author of the acclaimed - and vilified - 'Zombie Economics'. I agree with Krugman: if the Murdoch empire goes after you, you must be doing something right!

  • Comment number 61.


    Shouting in my bucket again.

    It is so BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that MPs are PRE selected to suit the dark arts of Westminster Politics. Dozy voters get to choose from the chosen - and then only to choose a rosette; the 'rosette stand' is already a sold soul. (A few of the new intake seem to think they can beat the Monster - they should remember Urquhart.)

    Hi Sasha. One might think a few 'good men' could yet exist in the BBC. But look how quick and effective the purge was, fronted by Blair's Attack-Dog, and no doubt backed with some serious threats on the back channels, when the truth of the Dossier was aired. Our one hope is Chilcot. 'Good men'? We shall see.


  • Comment number 62.


    (A response to Tony Blair’s Guardian article 20 August 2011. Written on the naïve assumption that he is the author of the piece. (All Blair quotes from Guardian.)

    Blair: “I think we are in danger of the wrong analysis leading to the wrong diagnosis, leading to the wrong prescription.”
    A more perfect description of his ‘Great Speech’ to Parliament (2003) that had IDS falling in on parade with his whipped rank and file, to go to war in Iraq, cannot be imagined.

    Blair: “Then, some of the disorder was caused by rioters and looters who were otherwise ordinary young people who got caught in a life-changing mistake from which they will have to rebuild.” How close this comes to the Allowances Scandal; I recall one juvenile MP waving a cheque, having snapped instantly into ‘rebuild mode’. (Not available to Common Criminals).

    Blair: The key is to understand that they aren't symptomatic of society at large. Failure to get this leads to a completely muddle-headed analysis.” Might Guru Blair – ‘getter of getters’ – get this point from me: “MPs do not represent society at large” they are a needy, dysfunctional sub-set, cleverly selected under the self-serving Westminster Ethos.

    Blair: “I became an MP in 1983. Then, MPs were rarely full time, many didn't hold constituency surgeries and there were no rules of any bite governing expenses or political funding.”
    Sounds like just the job for a delusional blagger.

    Blair: “Second, these individuals did not simply have an individual problem. They had a family problem. This is a hard thing to say and I am of course aware that this, too, is a generalisation. But many of these people are from families that are profoundly dysfunctional, operating on completely different terms from the rest of society, middle class or poor.”
    Is Blair speaking of the typical MP here? He could well be. Public school can be very damaging. Family nurture replaced, 24/7, by institutional%2

  • Comment number 63.


    Blair: “Second, these individuals did not simply have an individual problem. They had a family problem. This is a hard thing to say and I am of course aware that this, too, is a generalisation. But many of these people are from families that are profoundly dysfunctional, operating on completely different terms from the rest of society, middle class or poor.”
    Is Blair speaking of the typical MP here? He could well be. Public school can be very damaging. Family nurture replaced, 24/7, by institutional battery rearing – father absent – mother a de facto ‘abandoner’.

    Blair: “This is a phenomenon of the late 20th century. You find it in virtually every developed nation.
    Did we not conquer the world and sow our pernicious seed before being driven out? Blair’s implication that modern troubles come from some ‘elsewhere’ is specious.

    Blair: “Elevate this into a high- faluting wail about a Britain that has lost its way morally and we will depress ourselves unnecessarily, trash our own reputation abroad"
    Tony is back to image again. Like the Catholic Church that he has espoused, he is more concerned with protecting a grand false image, than preventing gratuitous fatal damage, to minds and lives.
    * * * * * * *
    Are they the words of Tony Blair? Even if he assured us so, we would never know. But, taken as read: Freud has had a grand day out, and British politics and media will continue to ‘live within the lie’ (Havel).

    This too, shall fail to pass.

  • Comment number 64.

    OMG England are now the Number One Cricket Team in the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Comment number 65.


    Outside No 10, Dave lays down the terms of the peace. (Is he Dave of the UN now?)

    "I spoke to Chairman Jalil last week, and will be speaking to him again today TO AGREE WITH HIM the importance of respecting Human Rights, avoiding reprisals and making sure that all parts of Libya can share in the future of that country.
    (Pity he is not so good at this stuff at home.)

    Verily I say unto you, Blair of Jerusalem, in all his glory, was never so vacuous.


    (I once had a German boss who said to me: "Mr Singleton, you and I will agree that you are a terrible fellow.")

    Nuff sed.

  • Comment number 66.

    #64 Mistress76uk wrote:

    "OMG England are now the Number One Cricket Team in the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

    Societal England is falling apart at the seams (npi) and yet our cricket team miraculously become the World's No. 1 team.


    If this pityful country of England can have its governance seriouly questioned by conspricay theories, then why not its sport?

    It can make a great distraction or at least give a last feel good filip to the depressing daily news.

    Think about it.

    (it could be a great gambling strategy ;)

  • Comment number 67.


    Who would have thought that 1984 was a sub-plot in the Truman Show?

    Or is it the other way round. Or 'The Prisoner'.

    When Dave said that stuff outsideNo10 - why didn't they laugh?

    Are 'they' messing with our heads through incongruities?

    Now I have forgotten my damned number . . .

  • Comment number 68.


    Or perhaps we can persuade him he is some reincarnated prophet, whose utterances (like David Shayler's) can be safely discounted. Phew!


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.