Alastair's Blog

Return to:  Blog | Articles | Videos RSS feed

After a period of silence, an omniblog on Dave-George-Vince omnishambles, Ed and TB, and Bank of Dave

Posted on 13 July 2012 | 8:07am

One of the nice things about writing your own blog, rather than a newspaper column, is that you can write what you want when you want, and not be driven by the agenda or deadlines of others.

So when you’re a bit overbusy, and a bit over-tired, as I have been in the last few days, you can just say ‘sod it, I won’t bother.’

It is modestly flattering to get messages, as I did yesterday, from a man on a train saying his journeys to work were boring without my blog appearing in the last few days. But it is a pressure too, in that feeling you ‘have to’ takes away one of the pleasures of blogging in the first place.

But it was a similar message from two of the people in the audience at the Arts theatre last night, when I did an event with Chris Mullin  before the latest staging of A Walk On Part, the terrific play based on his diaries, that jogged me into writing this now.

There is a lot to say. It has been a good week for Labour I think, on which more in a minute, and another not so good week for the Government and its constituent parties. Part of my over busy-ness has been too many speeches, some paid, some unpaid, some to a business audience, some to a political audience, but both giving me a sense that the Government is in a very different place to where it was even a few weeks ago.

At most business events, I try (a bit) not to be too party political, and to analyse things as I genuinely see them, rather than just say Labour good, Tory bad. But at the Direct Mail Association lunch, for example, it was the businessmen on my table who were advising me to ‘say what you really think about how useless this lot are.’ So I laid into them a bit, on my usual hobby horse of all tactics zero strategy, and I felt very little resistance from the room.

Then on the tube home after the theatre, sitting looking at Standard front pages spelling out the current Olympics security shambles, I thought that ‘posh and arrogant’ having pretty much settled into the political furniture for David Cameron and George Osborne in particular, ‘incompetent’ has most days now become their regular partner. So last week they announce the sacking of thousands of military personnel. This week they asked them to rescue them from the latest cock-up.

Seb Coe did a good job on the news – he always does – but something like security really is a matter for Government. And have you noticed how David Cameron has gone a little more low profile since the omnishambles label began to stick? Cricketers who only like easy wickets comes to mind.

The other thing I have noticed is how little time business has for Vince Cable. It was easy for him in Opposition, wandering around saying he had predicted everything that went wrong, and being lauded as that allegedly rare thing in politics, a man who says what he thinks.

But the business people I was with yesterday wanted to slap his face, remind him he is in government, and tell him to get fighting for business instead of moaning about the rest of the government the whole time. ‘Bring back Mandy’ was a fairly common theme.

As for Labour, the fundraising dinner at The Emirates was part of the busy-ness too. It went well and again, there was a sense growing that this really could be a one term government, and that though there is much to do, Labour are definitely back in the game.

Ed Miliband has his detractors, and for many members of the public, ‘the thing with his brother’ is still the first thing they mention. But it is to his enormous credit that the Labour Party, unlike after previous defeats, has held together, and it was good to see the old team and the new team working well together to raise good money for the fight ahead; and to hear TB talking up Ed and Ed talking up the TB record as a sign of what Labour can do in the future.

I took a couple of tables, and got business friends to take others, and I will be reporting back to Ed about some of the comments they have made. One is that whilst they support a lot of the criticisms of the government, they think we are now entering the phase of the Parliament where the ‘what would you do?’ questions need to begin to be answered more clearly. Ed is aware of that and the next Conference, and the next year, will be important.

The second point made to me is that the shadow cabinet need to develop a higher profile and to learn how to work a room. It is not just about networking. It is about energy and dynamism, and people having a sense that there is a strong team determined to get better known and to learn from the experience of others, whether in business, sport, science or whatever.

And – you didn’t think I would get through a longish blog without mentioning Burnley did you? – if you want to see energy and dynamism in action, catch up on ‘Bank of Dave’, which started on Channel 4 last night.

Dave is Dave Fishwick, a Burnley businessman who is sick to death of the banks screwing up the economy and failing to lend to small businesses and is trying to start up his own small bank. He is a huge character. He asked me for advice at one point – I think our meeting is in the next episode – and I said to him I felt he might be taking on more than he can chew. But what was apparent last night is that the more he gets that message, the more determined he becomes. If enthusiasm alone can deliver results, then the football team we support will be Champions League winners in three years.

The Guardian says today if there is any justice in the world, he is a star in the making. More importantly he is a symbol of that great human and political truth – change comes when people decide it should, and then just do it. Politics is harder than making a good TV programme. But the same principles apply.

Because they have shown they lack a coherent political strategy, and a real plan for the country, the Tories are in trouble. Labour now need to show they have both, and as they do, the next election could become one of the most interesting of our lifetime.

  • Anonymous

    completely agree, I watched Bank Of Dave and am willing him on to succeed, bring back and support local banks. 

    As for Miliband I think he will get his time as PM, I cant say I am a fan of his, I find him mildly irritating and weak to watch but come the next election I think this will be case of kicking out the Tories rather than voting in Miliband.

    In fact all the Tories need to do is keep putting Gove on TV – that on its own will see their demise

  • Nick

    I agree that that this is almost certainly a one term government.I would go a step further and say that there is a real possibility that the coalition will split long before and a vote of no confidence may be held.
    I say this because if they go full term the Lib Dems know they will be blown off the political landscape for a very long time.Labour will vacuum up all the disgruntled who they lost  at the next election .The option is  for Clegg and his crew to do disentangle from the Tories, grow some backbone and give the country the chance of electing the majority government it deserves

    As for Burnley in the Champions League in 3 years…dream on Alistair .A certain Mr Coyle is back next year to haunt you !!

  • Mark Wright

    The G4S fiasco highlights the fundamental flaw in the basic philosophy of this government; that being that it is possible to deligate core responsibilities without sufficient governmental oversight to ensure the task is carried out effectively.

    The warning signs were there when the Conservatives launched their ludicrous ‘An Invitation To Join The British Government’ manifesto in 2010.

    It should have read; ‘An Invitation To Do the Jobs In Government We Can’t Be Arsed to Do Ourselves’.  

    In other words ‘The Big Society’.

    Since then this government has attempted to shirk responsibility at every turn by delegating to the private sector. That’s fine in itself. Labour did it many times whilst in govt. But if responsibilities are to be delegated the public at the very least expect adequate supervision and oversight from their government. The realitity is that we see nothing of the sort. 

    When things are looking good and the country is feeling great then a little localised responsibility would be seen as a good thing. When the economy is stagnating and the core public structures are being systematically eroded, however, the public would expect, if not demand, proper leadership.

    Yet all we see is a government determined to absolve themselves of any responsibility for anything whatsoever.

    By bludgeoning the Lib Dems to an early political death (the Libs have assisted them in this task of course) the Conservatives have made a strategic mistake in that they no longer have their scapegoat. The focus is now firmly on the Tories and there performance is left severly wanting. 

    If in the aftermath of the Lib Dem carnage all that is exposed is a Tory-led government determined to abdicate themselves of core responsibilities then the public will stop asking themselves what it is this government is *doing* and start asking themselves what this government is *for*. 

  • Annie

    Taking you to the top of your blog Alastair, I was at the the play and your chat afterwards with Christ Mullin and it is indeed a brilliant and touchingly funny insight  into government as a junior minister.If only it were possible for politicians to be as endearingly candid, sharp and witty, and as thoughtful as the play and you two were afterwards taking questions, the electorate might be tempted to be plug in and give a bugger.
    It was a pleaseure to meet you.All the best,

  • Anonymous

    Well, I think it’s very cheering to read this.  And then I look at the country and think it’s already down the pan and heading out to Skegness.  It’s like we’ve had 17 years of Tory government in just two.   

    In our enthusiasm to see them gone we shouldn’t forget that the implosion of the Lib Dems will benefit the Conservatives more than it will Labour, and that if the boundary changes go through the Tories stand to get about 20 more seats than they had before.  And then there is the growing disenchantment of people with politics causing them not to vote at all (I can think of someone right now who has no time for the government but will not be voting for or against anybody, which is quite shocking). 

    Add to this the fact that Conservative Party is still buoyant with cash from the City, Ashcroft and lots of horrible people whose names we don’t even know, and somehow I don’t have too many reasons to be cheerful.  Newsnight did a piece last night on Macmillan’s ‘night of the long knives’ – and it made me realise that little has changed in fifty years, except that if the Chancellor had a dog called Sambo he wouldn’t let it be publicly known.

    So I would like to see Labour taking the initiative, shaping some policy we can all get behind, and the shadow cabinet members looking more confident as AC says.  And if we could also shuffle off Stephen Twigg as shadow education secretary that would be excellent, because he’s bloody useless.

  • reaguns

    Enjoying Bank of Dave, except for one thing – I agree that the banks are not doing their duty and all that, and I want to see new safe and competitve banks, I believe the market would reward such banks, its only regulation that prevents small banks rivalling our big banks.

    All the brainwashed say “economies of scale” mean that Balls and Miliband are wrong and we can’t have more small banks. Wrong. First of all, people who talk about economies of scale have obviously never worked in a large organisation, I mean a really large one, such as a bank. At that point, diseconomies of scale usually take over, ie waste and inefficiency that comes about from being too big, due to complacency, bureaucracy, regulation.

    Second of all – the government could simply legislate that our banks break up. Particularly our bailed out ones. No one can ask for a bailout one minute then talk about markets the next.

    One thing annoyed me about Dave though – we don’t want new banks so that they will lend to business. We want them so that they will store our money safely and never lose our money or burden the taxpayer.

    If they don’t lend, no biggie. Plenty of people have money to fund things, and they’ll find a way. Cash might win for a while. No problem there, why shouldn’t businesses who have cash pulverise those who have debt?

  • Olli Issakainen

    Next election will not change anything.
    Labour must cut its close ties to bankers.
    Ed Balls is a member of Bilderberg Group. Ed Miliband has attended a Bilderberg meeting.
    Tony Blair has been working for the Rothschilds since 2007.
    Every British PM since Wilson has been a Bilderberger.
    Peter Mandelson is close to the bankers.
    So unless something changes globalist bankers will win the next election.

  • Dave Simons

    The trouble is you keep talking about the Bilderberg Group in a way comparable to the Nazis talking about a Jewish Conspiracy in the 1930s. If a group of people decide to exchange ideas on global economics, that doesn’t make it a big conspiracy. I don’t doubt that conspiracies exist on this planet but I don’t think they’re round every corner and down every toilet bowl.

  • Gilliebc

    AC, ‘Bring back Mandy’ really!  I almost stopped reading at that point. 

    Both Labour and Tories have abandoned their core voters. e.g. I did not abandon the Labour party – they abandoned me and all other working class people too.  The banksters rule, hand in glove with the politicians.  The banksters being the more dominant ‘partner’.      

    Blue Labour, Red Tory, there is no difference.  As Olli rightly said the  ‘Next election will not change anything’  what we have in this country now is in effect a one party state.  The same applies in the US also. And yet they still have the cheek to say we live in a democracy!  No we don’t. No wonder many people don’t even bother to vote anymore.  They know it makes no difference.

  • Anonymous

    Well said that man.

    I think voodoo histories by David Aaronovitch should be essential reading for all conspiracy theorists. I know they think things are being hidden from them, but by refusing to read such works, such counters to conspiracy theories, it is then not the Bilderbergs, or the illuminati or whoever who are concealing information from conspiracy theorists, it is the conspiracy theorists themselves being deliberately ignorant.

    I also think there are attempts to hide things from the public, but the more far out theories hide people from the real things going on. I think inflation, the honours system, much of the banking and regulation system could be seen as a conspiracy of sorts, but we are unlikely to uncover it if people are worried about Elvis and little green men in silos in New Mexico.

  • Anonymous

    I really recommend everyone watches Bank of Dave. Hopefully it will show at least a bit of support for one of the things I am banging on about – contrary to the current popular opinion, big business loves regulation. We can see, far from banking being unregulated, it is regulated to hell and back, which is why poor Dave may make a good tv show but has no chance of opening a bank. And that is exactly how banks like it. As Adam Smith explained over 200 years ago.

    Regulation creates barriers to entry, limits competition, and allows existing players to put up prices and lower service. Balls and Milibands talk of breaking up banks and allowing people to move with their same account number easily, and enforcing this legally, would be great moves.

  • Anonymous

    Oh don’t get me wrong, Bank of Dave is just another gimmicky reality tv show. Dave has made a good programme. Its obviously the tv producers driving the entire project not him, hence the cringeworthy and inevitable reality-by-numbers of “Eek! Will the celebrity turn up on time? Will we get the renovations completed on time?” etc, the modern day equivalents of “He’s behind you! Oh no he isn’t! Oh yes he is!”

    Obviously the guy never had any serious intentions of opening a bank, or he would have got some people who could work out what deposits he needs to loan, what interest rates to loan at etc.

  • Richard

    You conveniently forget that LOCOG, (Chairman, Lord Smug), formed under Labour Govt, let the contract to G4S. Is the Government supposed to oversee all LOCOG contract delivery? Your pal Lord Smug and Locog have failed to get the 10,000 security staff needed. Home Office supervision was as always inadequate!

  • I am delighted to see the blog entry because I always come to this blog first for insights into the affairs of the day.

    Labour do need to fulfil the “what would you do?” question. I think that Ed M’s plan for the banking sector which I read about recently was a good idea.

    As well as fulfilling the “what would you do?” question I think that Labour also has to convince that they will bring deep and meaningful change. There is a widespread belief that the bankers and press giants “own” the three big parties and that a Labour government would not be any different.

    I think Labour need to clearly demonstrate that they are independent from the press and the banks. That they will change things in a way that suits all interests and not just those of the press and the banks.

    I think, in fact, it would be better for the press and the banks if we did have a government that was really independent from them.

    Being independent is not being against. Personally I am in favour of a flourishing financial sector and a free investigative press, so I would not wish Labour to in any way to appear against these things, rather it must be for them. However Labour must be independent from them and it must demonstrate them

  • Anonymous

    Whenever I think of private security firms, I think of rogue wheel clampers and dodgy property protection racketeers from downtown 1930’s Chicago. And this G4S nonsense just confims it – don’t believe a thing they are saying that they will lose money on this, they are conning LOCOG here. These civil servants are very naive, not very street smart, when they come across people like this. Security is a person intensive occupation, long hours for peanuts. And as that very very popular saying goes, you offer peanuts, you’ll get monkeys, and that includes the back offices and recruitment departments too, it seems.

    And as for bankers, it seems they have overtaken estate agents in being price fixing, backhander accepting, rip-off conners – they have become a right bunch of Arthur Daleys. Did think back in the day Captain Mainwaring(Mannering!) of Dad’s Army was ludicrous and pompous as a person, a typical bank manager of then, but we have gone to another extreme, still ludicrous, but corrupt. Mainwaring seems quite appealing these days.

  • Gilliebc

    No Dave ‘conspiracies’ are not round every corner etc.  They are right in front of us!  The problem is that  the majority of the populace are unable to see them.

    Thanks mainly to the MSM.  Television and the BBC in particular.  When you consider who owns and controls most of the MSM, it’s hardly surprising that the deliberately dumbed-down populace, in the main have no idea what’s going on and to be fair a lot of them don’t even care.  I think they will care one day when the super market shelves are empty and they can no longer get any cash out of the cash machines.       

    Don’t you find it a bit odd Dave that any prospective PM in the UK or President in the US has to be Bilderberg approved?  The Bilderbergers don’t want anyone in charge who is not going to follow their globalist agenda.  The so-called New World Order is not going to be some sort of socialist utopia.  It will be, if allowed to happen, a totalitarian dictatorship.  

    I think after the horrors of the holocaust people have been lulled into a false sense of security.  They have been told and therefore believe that nothing like that will ever happen again.  I believe they are wrong.  It can and it will.  But the Jewish people won’t be the victims this time around!  It’s very important here to clearly differentiate between the ordinary everyday Jews and what some call Rothschild zionists.  The so-called Rothschild zionists don’t care a jot about the ordinary Jewish people any more than they care about the rest of us.   

  • Trevorsmith

    It annoys me that Labour seems to be content to only field one MP/Spokeperson on programmes such as Any Questions,Newsnight Daily Politics, Bolton and Co etc  when the government view is put by one Tory MP/Spokesperson PLUS One Lib Dem 
    Broadcasters have to maintain political balance!
     As we approach the time for Labour to introduce its new policy ideas,  the need for political balance in political, news and discussion programmes will be even more acutely important

  • Anonymous

    Question Alastair – don’t know who has noticed this, but I have been wondering about it for a while now, but why do the minutes past an hour a blog article is posted always match up the number of the month? Is that done on purpose by yourself, or a quirk of disqus? Or is a sign of Monk the detective OCD type of thing from yourself? Or superstition maybe? : )

    Thought I’d ask, in passing. One way to reference an article to a month of a year, I suppose.

  • Anonymous

    OK. so Disqus do it – noticed the time this morning of latest.

    Strange bizarre life on the online world – seems we are in their pathetic control of information, they, constantly trying to control things, by invereted points, but never mind if anything slightly important is bein said, Terrance.

    And yes, call me Arthur Daley, why don’t you, oh my gawd….

    knees of muvver brawwwn

  • Dave Simons

     Can I seize this opportunity to belatedly reply to a couple of your previous posts in a column that doesn’t have the width of a mouse’s tail? You were asking about military sources for the early days of the Northern Ireland ‘Troubles’. My sources usually appear on a book stall at Buxton Book Fair. This stall is dedicated to Irish history, politics and culture, and it has recently included memoirs from army top brass figures who were in some level of command from 1968 on. Unfortunately the stall wasn’t present at last Sunday’s Book Fair so I was unable to get titles and authors, but as soon as it returns I’ll let you know. I’ve also been involved in Irish traditional music for many years and one of my fellow musicians, Protestant by background and a former marcher on Orange parades, has confirmed that the initial violent provocations in 1968 and 1969 came from his mates in the Orange Order. The old IRA was pretty moribund in 1968 and the ‘People’s Democracy’ marchers distanced themselves from it, though old IRA members did try to infiltrate the early marches. The IRA soon got revived, especially after internment in 1971 and Bloody Sunday in 1972.
    Your other post was about Arthur Scargill, referring to him as ‘fascist scum’. There have been fascist states in Germany and Italy and they shared one important characteristic – absolute hostility to organised labour. Arthur Scargill would have been at least incarcerated and more likely shot in either of those states. Of course there are and always have been bullies, bruisers, corrupt officers and crooks in the trades union movement, and there has been abuse of democracy. But it is a travesty to call Arthur ‘fascist scum’, especially when he did play some part in the anti-fascist movement in the 1970s.
    Arthur Scargill’s dad was a Communist Party member – one of my uncles was one of his drinking companions – but I was told by a member of Barnsley CP that Arthur himself was expelled from the Communist Party. I’m not sure what Arthur’s position was relative to the East European Stalinist states, but he had plenty of occasion during the 1984/5 miners’ strike to condemn them and the USSR for exporting cheap coal to the UK. I’ve often wondered why people who are against capitalism in the UK and USA find they need to support regimes elsewhere which are ten times worse – USSR and China for example – but maybe it’s to do with religious belief or family history. If I’d ever had to choose between living in capitalist America or the so-called ‘[communist’ Soviet Union I would have rocked with Chuck Berry anytime
    and said “I’m so glad I’m living in the USA”

  • Gilliebc

    Ah, David A, that highly respected ex-communist!  lol.  The fact that you mention Elvis every time so-called conspiracy theories are mentioned just goes to show you have no idea what a real conspiracy is!         

    It is you that is willfully ignorant Mr MSM man.

  • mightymark

    If you knew anything about the history of the Rothschilds and their repationship to the Jewish community you would know that they were actually very much concerned – as were philanthropic Christian business people in the18th and 19th Centuries (the Cadburys and Rowntree’s for instance) – with the lot of their ordinary co – religionists. Just one example was when in the 1840s the raised huge sums in support of a Jewish barber falsely accused under a “blood libel” type charge  in Ottoman Damascus. Such concern continued thereafter. You could say that socialism with no bankers or capitalists might be better that charity or philanthropy, but if you allow that captialist philanthropy is better than none then  the Rothschilds are right up there with the best. Sorry Gilli, but you are trying too hard to make the facts fit your your fantasy monster image of Zionism.

    “The trouble is you keep talking about the Bilderberg Group in a way comparable to the Nazis talking about a Jewish Conspiracy in the 1930s.”

    Are we sure that isn’t how he means it! – and well done Reaguns for mentioning the excelent “Voodoo Diaries” – compulsory reading indeed. 

    On to matters of more immediate importance. Am I really alone in recalling that it was G4S in what I take to be its original guise of “Group 4 Security” that lost a load of prisoners its van was taking to court the first day the transit of prisoners was privatised? Odd it doesn’t seem to be mentioned as it was big news then as its recent failure at the Olympics.

    Yes friends – The Cock Up theory of history – beats the conspiracy one every time!

  • mightymark

    Agreed though I get the impression the Beeb try to get the slightly more semi detached Lib Dems like Simon Hughes and Charles Kennedy or if its’ a Lib Dem Minister appearing, then a Right Wing “coalition sceptic” Tory. And bear in mind that when the inevitable happens and the coalition really starts to break up the sight of the two laying into each other on screen each week will be worth extra votes for Labour every time.

    Now, as for Boulton and Co – I wonder if our illustrious host would be volunteering for duty?

  • Anonymous

    My favotite clip of Mainwaring, oh yes.Yes Jones, a pond of sausages and you can be lanc corporal of the troop. What did you say Wilson? Ok Jones, give him a couple too, Jones, just to keep him quiet, the nazi on the quiet…..

    Hic! Walminktugun on sea home, hic, gward.

  • Pc

    I saw you getting into a cab with your asistant by the theatre in Soho! 

  • Gilliebc

    I am not unaware of the occasional acts of philanthropy of this family/dynasty Mark.  But that doesn’t change my overall view or opinion of them.      

    No you are not alone in recalling the incident of when the then Group 4 Security, lost a van load of prisoners.  I remember it well.  They weren’t up to the job then, anymore than they are now.

  • Anonymous

    “well done Reaguns for mentioning the excelent “Voodoo Diaries” – compulsory reading indeed.  ”

    I aim to please 🙂

  • Anonymous

    Perhaps I shouldn’t flippantly link all the theories with Elvis.
    But I would like you to expand on how you think I am wilfully ignorant? I have read Voodoo histories, but I have read a few of the monetary/financial conspiracy theories, such as the “debt is money” one. I don’t go along with it.

    But I do think fractional reserve banking, and the law/regulation supporting it, is a conspiracy theory of sorts, albeit not a very sexy one. Ie we give our money to a bank, and the bank legally owns it, and is allowed to lend it out, to whoever it wants. The bank can go down and take our money with it (apart from that part covered by deposit insurance.) We should at the very least have to sign a consent form before the bank can loan the money, otherwise it should merely be stored.

    Sorry I digressed. I have read the theories and I have read the counter arguments, so how am I being wilfully ignorant, I am allowing both the chance to persuade me. Whereas someone who reads only one side surely is being more wilfully ignorant of at least one side of the story, no?

  • Anonymous

    Well this is very disappointing as I can find very little to argue with!

    Re Scargill fascist or not, ok if we look at fascist as those who identify as “fascist” ie Nazis, Mussolini, Oswald Moseley, fascists side in the Spanish civil war, and the many smaller contemporary fascist groups in Britain and Europe – then of course they are all anti communist, and in general anti the likes of Scargill.

    But I was not talking about fascism vs communism, but rather fascism vs democracy. In those terms, most communist regimes have been totalitarian, and anti democratic and therefore they are fascist too. Arthur Scargill was an enemy of democracy. He refused to allow his members a vote. Its that simple. Why would he do that – because he thought they mightn’t vote to do what he wanted, so he gave them no choice and ordered them to do it – that is fascism.
    Also, he sought to overthrow the democratically elected government.

    So I’m afraid I cannot agree with you on Scargill, even though the rest of your post I found very reasonable.

    I would certainly be very interested to hear of those titles. I am particularly interested in your recommendations of works from former British soldiers and officers, or anyone from MI5 etc (I really must get round to reading spycatcher.) So far I have read loads of stuff from republican paramilitaries and loyalist paramilitaries, and some from RUC men. Some of the most gripping books I have ever read.

  • mightymark

    My point is precisely that they were not occasional.  As Philanthropic givers go they are up there with the best.

    Tell me you hate all capitalist charity, tell me you think its all a smoke screen for greed if you like but – sorry, why single out the Rothschilds for particular opprobrium?

  • Gilliebc

    Well first of all I’d like to thank you for that well reasoned and reasonable reply.  I wasn’t expecting that.      
    When I first came across these so-called conspiracy theories particularly about the fiat/ponzi monitory system I didn’t believe it either and naturally set about finding alternatives and counter arguments.  I could find only very few that addressed the real problem. i.e. the problem of our, or the peoples money  being handled or manipulated in such a way that we really can’t ‘win’ we are being ripped-off big time by the ruling oligarchy both here and in the US.  The way the federal reserve was set up in the US was in effect selling out the American people.  There is a good book on this by G. Edward Griffen entitled ‘The Creature from Jekyl Island’.  Max Keiser’s ‘Keiser Reports’ are always worth a watch on RT.  They usually find their way to YT.  This one is quite good (if I remember it correctly) ‘Keiser Report: Ponzi Overdose(E313)’ it needs to be watched in its entirety. In the second half of the prog. MK talks to someone named Ian Fraser, who is also very interesting. He,MK reckons the UK is being run by a bunch of crooks. I for one couldn’t argue with that!  I know you like ‘your economics’ reaguns and the fact that you have mentioned the oligarchy in a couple of your recent posts goes to show that you understand that things are not as they should be.  So I’m more than happy to withdraw my inaccurate remark of you being willfully ignorant. I think we’re basically on the same page so to speak.  One of the problems is that ‘conspiracy theories’ tend to put reasonable people off from seeking real truths. Finally, I assume you must be aware that the ‘Reuters’ news agency, who then went on to purchase ‘AP’ news agency is the only supplier of news to most if not all, of the MS TV news stations.  Or, in other words TV news channels repeat the ‘news’ they are ‘fed’ by Reuters.  No prizes for guessing who owns Reuters and most but not all of the TV news stations.  

  • Gilliebc

    You might be interested reaguns in ‘checking out’ a man named Gordon Logan on WikiSpooks, he is ex MI6.  That’s assuming the page is still up on the site.  I haven’t visited there lately.

  • Anonymous

    what goes on in Soho, stays in Soho….. oh yes… : )