Michael Meacher was Minister of State for the Environment for six years, though for some reason Tony Blair did not appoint him to the Cabinet. Meacher gained a fine reputation, well-respected as a skilled negotiator and a minister with full command of his complex brief. He helped John Prescott to clinch the Kyoto agreement to limit carbon emissions in 1997 and was one of the first in Government to come to grips with the issue of global warming.
Meacher notes in his recent Global Research article , that after hi-jacking the party down a route utterly alien to its founders, in order to ingratiate himself with corporate and financial leaders on their terms . . . Tony Blair appears not to understand why the Corbyn earthquake is happening or the passionate resentment which he and New Labour created:
- by laying the foundations for the financial crash of 2008-9 and making the squeezed middle and brutally punished poor pay for it,
- by aligning New Labour alongside the Tories in pursuit of austerity from 2010 onwards, though Osborne’s policy (to shrink the State) has been unsuccessful in reducing the deficit,
- by taking Britain without any constitutional approval into an illegal was with Iraq,
- by introducing into politics the hated regime of spin and manipulation,
- by indulging now his squalid lust for money-making
- and by clearly having no more overriding desire than to strut the world with Bush.
He then asked three searching questions about Blair’s conduct:
Why did he urge the Blairites to support the government’s welfare bill which opposed every tenet of the real Labour Party?
Why did he push for privatisation of the NHS and other public services?
Why did his ally Mandelson say “New Labour is “relaxed at people becoming filthy rich”, and proved it by letting inequality balloon to even higher heights than under Thatcher?
And concluded: “He has a lot to learn . . .”
Read the whole article here: http://www.globalresearch.ca/tony-blair-is-living-in-a-state-of-deluded-denial/5473462
Earlier this month Lesley Docksey wrote in Global Research about “the sneering, negative and arrogant campaigning by Westminster via the Better Together campaign”. She continued:
That didn’t go down too well so they brought in Gordon Brown to do his patriotic bit, which included talking about how many Scots had fought and died in the UK’s wars:
“We fought two world wars together. And there is not a cemetery in Europe that does not have Scots, English, Welsh, and Irish lying side-by-side. And when young men were injured in these wars, they didn’t look to each other and ask whether you were Scots or English, they came to each others aid because we were part of a common cause.”
Lesley comments: “Sorry Gordon, but many Canadians, Australians, Asians and Africans, all remnants of our Empire’s past, also fought in that common cause, since when they gained their independence. To use dead and injured young Scots for pro-Union campaigning is, as one person put it, “repugnant”, particularly considering the centenary of the outbreak of WWI, the war that was to end all wars; even more so now, as British MPs have just voted to start bombing Iraq – again”.
Lesley added that Scotland is and always has been a proud nation that has been used and abused for far too long by its greedy southern neighbour, aided by its own land-owning elite see Andy Wightman’s book The Poor Had No Lawyers.
But she also wanted the Yes vote to win for the sake of the rest of the United Kingdom, hoping that it would stir everyone in England, Wales and Northern Ireland into doing something about the Westminster bubble that runs and ruins our lives, unless of course we are corporate, rich or large land owners or, in many cases, all three:
“An independent Scotland could have given us a different and fairer vision for all our futures” . . . My hopes were high but there it was, this unbelievable vote to stay tied to Westminster, not England but Westminster. . .
“But it was not long before the accusations of electoral fraud surfaced.
“It started with grainy videos on YouTube, showing official counters doing odd things with the ballot papers. Stories emerged of people at polling stations being told that someone using their name had already voted. Children had been registered to vote.
The police “were investigating”, while Westminster pooh-poohed it all.
“A small and angry petition was launched by Change.org. First addressed to Alex Salmond it is now going to his Deputy Nicola Sturgeon, and is approaching 100,000 signatures. And yet more has emerged of the odd and dishonest practices that have appeared to capture the No result so wanted by Westminster. Among them are:
- Ballot papers with no identifying marks on the back (illegal)
- Ballot boxes from polling stations delivered to counting centres in private cars by only one person (illegal)
- Postal ballot papers apparently being sent to England first
- Pro-union people being allowed to open and inspect postal votes several days before the referendum (illegal)
- And there were no exit polls.
“Polls are not very accurate, particularly those published by pro-Union media . . .
Exit polls are. They are conducted outside the polling stations and researchers ask people coming out how they have voted. In the space between the polling stations closing and the counting of votes completed, exit polls give a fairly accurate picture of what the result will be.
“But the media, particularly the BBC and ITV, were asked not to conduct exit polls. That fact alone convinces me that the Scots have been robbed of their independence. And Westminster should hang its head in shame. More, it should be investigated by the police”.
“Not satisfied with stealing most of the Highlands for the shooting of deer and grouse, they’re now stealing the land from under the feet of 80% of the Scottish population. Of course Westminster had to have the No vote. For in the same month as the referendum they started selling fracking licences to energy firms that will cover most of central Scotland, including Edinburgh and Glasgow. And beyond, though I doubt it will touch the precious sporting estates. England did far too well out of Scotland’s North Sea oil. Now it wants their fracked gas.
“But then, where the British elite are concerned, Scotland has only ever been a source of shooting and money. And of course all those young men who join the military because life on the streets of Scotland’s cities under the current regime offers little else in opportunity”.
Later reports about fraud:
Felicity Arbuthnot in Global Research singles out just a few of the emotive clichés used: “red lines” are “crossed”, “sovereignty and territorial integrity” has been “violated”, as the “resolute” US, EU and Britain stand “shoulder to shoulder” with the interim Ukraine government.
“You just don’t, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext”. This despite disregarding international law in Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia (1999, bombed by NATO with no UN mandate).
US almost routinely threatens and invades sovereign nations
So, clearly referring to the threats and onslaughts of recent years, Russian President Vladimir Putin, on being accused of violating international law, replied: “Well, it’s good that they at least recalled that there is international law … Better late than never”.
American foreign policy
NBC News, an American network, reports that President Putin, in an interview about the Ukraine crisis Tuesday, described the U.S’ interference in world affairs as if it were conducting experiments on lab rats:
“I think they sit there across the pond in the U.S., sometimes it seems … like they’re in a lab and they’re running all sorts of experiments on the rats without understanding consequences of what they’re doing. Why would they do that? Nobody can explain it.”
Cameron meets EU ministers, hoping for a “robust response” to Russia, though of late it has fired not a shot and invaded no one
The Crimean government called a referendum and a fraction under 97% voted to cede to Russia, with a turnout of over 80% – an electoral enthusiasm of which Western governments could only dream. One hundred and thirty five international observers from twenty-three countries said, consistently, they saw no pressure of any sort, and they had “not registered any violations of voting rules.”
The good guys in Kiev?
The Kosovo parallels are explored by Arbuthnot, who also reports on the mnidset of many supporting the Kiev government. As the Jewish Press reports, incidents have led to Ukrainian Rabbi Moshe Reuven Azman asking Kiev Jews to leave the city and, if possible, the country. The Israel National News has reported that some Jewish shops have been vandalized and other threats to the Jewish community have been received.
Svoboda, the ultranationalist Ukrainian political party marches and demonstrates.
It is reported that last year at an appointed moment, the marchers removed their windbreakers to reveal T-shirts emblazoned with the words “Beat the kikes.”
With NATO encroaching ever closer and NATO countries, the US and UK planning military exercises with Ukraine, Russia has arguably fulfilled this responsibility in protection of those threatened and at risk – as requested by its former State and neighbour and as laid out by the UN.
Arbuthnot concludes pithily: “David Cameron has grand plans to “celebrate” the centenary of the start of World War 1 this year.He seems hell bent on celebrating it by starting World War 111 . . .
Someone please chuck that Obama Nobel Peace Prize into the Potomac”.
UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage has recommended action consistent with the ‘humanitarian impulse of many well-intended people’: “There is a responsibility on all of us in the free West to try and help some of those people fleeing Syria, literally in fear of their lives . . . I think this country should honour the 1951 declaration on refugee status that was agreed”.
Andrew Mersman: “Around the world, every minute, another eight people are displaced from their homes, families, villages, cities, nations…no one chooses to be displaced … “
Personal experience, combined with anecdotal evidence volunteered by a doctor and a psychiatrist in Birmingham UK, leads the writer to believe that only the most emotionally stable people can successfully adapt to the change of language, customs and culture on another continent. A search reveals further support for this belief:
Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, Special Envoy with the United Nations, writing on the WHO website, says that more than 50% of refugees present mental health problems:
“Present day conflicts intentionally involve civilian populations. Massive human rights violations impose serious risks on millions of people. The cognitive, emotional and socio-economic burden imposed on individuals, the family and the community are enormous. It is established that an average of more than 50% of refugees present mental health problems ranging from chronic mental disorders to trauma, distress and great deal of suffering”. She reports findings that ‘disruption of community and social support networks leads to psychosocial dysfunctioning’ and – through its normative and field activities, and that the WHO in cooperation with concerned ministries of health, other agencies, collaborating centres, academic and research institutions – is trying to address the problem.
“The reasons for and the duration of these migrations put extraordinary stress on individuals and their families”:
When Professor James Nazroo was a reader in sociology at University College London, he was commissioned by the Department of Health to produce a survey. Though it was not named in the source – a BBC report – similar work may be found online. Findings were that immigrant populations in the UK are at higher risk from mental and physical illness. Problems with access to facilities, an inability to speak the language, and racism within the adopted country all contribute to the relatively poor health of minority groups, researchers say.
“Out of six ethnic minority groups, there was only one which had a health equivalent to the general population, which was the Irish group”.
Iman Safi: we are failing to address the reasons that create refugees and to adopt a global approach to solving the problem
In Global Research he concludes: “If the rich world (aka the “Free World”) continues to exploit poorer nations, to ravage their homelands with needless wars, exploit their resources, pollute their land and water, build factories that are best described as slave labour camps, it cannot continue to wipe its hands of, and pretend to be a part of the solution when in fact it is the main cause, instigator and major contributor to the problem.
“If this neo-colonialist “contribution” can be stopped, the world can then turn to face dealing with “real refugees”, environmental refugees, drought, earthquake and other natural disasters refugees. Aid organizations can then be better able to focus on nation-building programs rather than refugee-camp building programs. Thus, the intake of refugee migrants can then be dealt with realistically and effectively”.
In a nutshell, Andrew Brigden Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire – who has consistently advocated rational policies throughout the Syrian conflict – told The World this Weekend:
“These are Syrian people who want to live in Syria. The solution is not taking a few hundred people to make us feel happier. What we need is a politically-negotiated solution to this problem.”
COMMENT BY EMAIL:
From humanitarian aid worker with ten years experience:
“Also with numbers of affected people involved, this is not a viable option for the vast majority of affected people (putting aside the mental issues) … £100 will go much further supporting people where they are/resolving conflict rather than ‘high PR level’ gesture of inviting a few over …
In Global Research, Lesley Docksey dissects the forthcoming WW1 celebration:
“It is, despite our financial situation, spending millions to help fund local and national ‘commemorative events’.”
A few of the points made are summarised here.
The government website says: “The IWM London was founded in 1917 to record the then still-continuing conflict”.
No: “The Imperial War Museum was founded in 1917 to demonstrate “the futility of war and that heroism is bought at too great a price”.
The Ministry of Culture was approached by a national peace organisation wishing to be involved, highlighting the essence of the message ‘Never Again’ – that WWI was ‘the war to end all wars’.
The ministry (understandably) replied that this “did not fit within the Government’s own centenary programme.” The Government wishes to “encourage a greater understanding of all aspects of the war”
Culture Secretary Maria Miller says “On 4 August 1914 we entered the war – a war like no other the world had seen. It is right we remember . . .the price that was paid by all involved.”
And that price was predominantly paid by the common man. There was scarcely a family that went untouched by the death or disablement of someone. To the whole generation of men lost is added the generation of widows and fatherless children, of women who never married.
The author points out that ‘The politicians, generals, armaments manufacturers did not pay the price’ adding: “Nor have they in more recent conflicts, which shows how little we’ve learnt in the last hundred years”.
Many councillors urged that funding for a ‘Folkestone Arch’ be given because of its commercial potential
At the Shepway District Council meeting to decide on funding of £200,000 for Folkestone’s planned Memorial Arch many councillors urged that funding be given because of the arch’s commercial potential. One resident’s response to this:
“I can’t help feeling some disgust …. This anniversary should be an occasion to honour the dead, but also to reflect soberly on their sacrifice and the leaders who sent them to their pointless deaths – but turning the anniversary into a tawdry competition for tourist revenue dishonours them on just about every level.”
The author adds that peace organisations are planning events more in keeping with the gravity of WWI, ending with a topical reference:
“The four years of commemoration planned by the government should have at its heart a programme of education around the utter failure of the politicians and leaders that led to the outbreak of war, the desire of some to go to war for monetary reasons, and the appalling incompetence of the military leadership that led to such a waste of lives. Talking about the ‘sacrifice’ of that waste only sanitises the slaughter.
“But to focus on the folly of WWI and the folly of the government’s plans for commemorating the war rather than looking at the lessons we haven’t learned, would only point a finger at the current failure over Syria. And we couldn’t have that, could we?”