Conservative Government Scumbags Under-fund Essex Police

UK Under Conservatives Public Safety At Risk & 1 Million Using Food Banks ESSEX POLICE 2015 - Essex Chronicle Summary / Comment Police finances under pressure last 5 years pressure on Essex Police more acute funding per head on policing in Essex county is below average (compared other police England & Wales)   Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) 2014 Aprill - 2015 March:  ASB = 56,506 incidents of those:  only 1,500 assessed as 'high risk' Coalition govt reign Essex Police CUT:   £72.5 million in 'savings' but UNDERFUNDED ESSEX POLICE & must find further:   £60 million over next 5 years 97% of ASB incidents ('medium' & 'low' risk) = unsustainable demand on resources = jeopardise response to high risk cases & emergencies Essex Chronicle further reports: recent legislation gave local authorities more powers in dealing with anti-social behaviour local council appointed Community Safety Officer to lead ASB responsibilities Essex Police underfunded & forced to cut back even more must prioritise the 1,500 calls priorities: - repeated ASB incidents - vulnerable persons - persons targeted via harassment or serious nuisance - offender is identified - offender behaviour requires police intervention to manage Response reported ASB by police in uniform REDUCED to most serious incidents 'local authorities' now share policing responsibilities police handball civil second-bananas referred to as 'partner organisations' ONLY 3% of the calls relating to antisocial behaviour (ASB) received by Essex Police were designated 'high risk' “Bobbies on the beat” patrolling the streets described as old fashioned notion not suited to limited resources; cyber crime cited BUT CYBER CRIME IS NOT ISSUE U.K. CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT SCUMBAG UNDERFUNDING OF ESSEX POLICE = PUBLIC SAFETY RISK ISSUE   COMMENT: Chelmsford City Council has been transformed to the 'anti-social behaviour' civil police BUT THEY ARE NOT THE POLICE & NOT BOUND BY THE SAME CONDITIONS / RULES etc  nor would the council command the same respect etc meanwhile, the UNDERFUNDED ESSEX POLICE FORCE would likely be FORCED: to flip all but MOST SERIOUS incidents to the city council to designate more and more incidents in the lower risk categories, to give priority to what is REDUCED TO BARE ESSENTIAL POLICING THAT gives the offenders the edge & reduces conditions conductive to maintaining public safety, if not already putting public safety AT RISK Aug 2015 http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/cuts-mean-essex-police-unable-attend-97-anti/story-27709145-detail/story.html http://archive.is/CYTs2

The Day in Politics

SOUTH CHINA SEA China target of Western capitalist aggression is in the spotlight Philippines re:  South China Sea Permanent Court of Arbitration (at The Hague) set to hand down decision joke decision probably more about PR & building public consent to war with China than anything else: Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) "body, based in the neo-Gothic extravagance of the Peace Palace in The Hague, has no enforcement powers" "Winning parties typically pursue their claims in domestic courts - often a fruitless exercise." LOL ... so the ENTIRE EXERCISE is bullsh*t, Philippines. Australia's SBS notes it is the first legal challenge re South China Sea territorial dispute. This is key regional dispute:  WORLD DICTATOR, USA versus China, rising power POLITICAL & MILITARY rivalry intensified, according to SBS   But, really:  it is AMERICAN CAPITALIST & ALLIED CAPITALIST rivalry with rising power China that is at issue http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/07/12/why-philippines-south-china-sea-legal-case-matters IRON LADY Being prime minister must be a puppet position. Looks like it doesn't matter who is the head puppet: Theresa May to become Britain's new PM on Wednesday after Andrea Leadsom ends campaign ABC Australia: Theresa May will become Britain's new prime minister on Wednesday, with the task of steering its withdrawal from the European Union, after her last rival in the bid to succeed David Cameron abruptly abandoned her short-lived campaign. Ms May became the only contender when Andrea Leadsom — who had stirred a storm for suggesting she was more qualified to be the leader because she had children — quit the race on Monday. "I am honoured and humbled to have been chosen by the Conservative Party to become its leader," Ms May told reporters outside Parliament. "Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a success of it. "We need a strong, new positive vision for the future of our country. A vision of a country that works not for the privileged few, but that works for every one of us."  [comment:  May's lying already.  She's there to secure the interests of the privileged ... LOL ] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-11/andrea-leadsom-withdraws-from-tory-leadership-contest/7588006 I'm with the 'right-wingers' on women in politics:  they shouldn't even get the vote.  LOL (Half) kidding aside, I get the feeling this is some symbolic PR appointment by the Conservatives, whose last woman PM, Margaret Thatcher, is probably one of the most detested women in British, if not world, politics. Uh-oh, this is no empty symbolic appointment.  The Conservatives are set to give the working class a kick in the nuts, using Brexit and a woman PM as cover for their nasty agenda head.  That's my best guess. 11th February 1975 Tories appoint Margaret Thatcher as leader of Conservatives - BBC: "Mrs Thatcher - a mother of twins married to Denis, an oil executive - put in a brief appearance at a party in Pimlico  ..." BBC Sh*t, that doesn't bode well. LOL  ... they always put a woman in, as a cover for their nasty agenda. Why the hate on Maggie? List below sounds like it's drawn by a Culturally Marxist liberal leftie. LOL ... I've gone to have a proper read of below list, and it's one of those Yeah-NAH-list moves. So ignore fascist Thatcherite that wrote that list. LOL  [ummmm ... I don't know that he actually is; I just said that for effect.] But, yeah, I can see how the Maggie Thatcher led Conservatives were crap when you take a look at the overall charges. Thatcherism the conservative policies, political philosophy, and leadership style of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, characterized especially by monetarism, privatization, and labor union reform. EXTRACT 10 Reasons why Margaret Thatcher is Britain's most hated politician 2013-07-19 destroyed Britain’s manufacturing industry and her policies led to mass unemployment presided over interest rates of 15% [raising VAT from 8% to 15%] voted against the relaxation of divorce laws abolished free milk for School Children precipitated a Social Housing crisis still being felt today Poll Tax [head tax, ancient to 1800s, not on income based] sowed the seeds of NHS Privatisation Section 28 – Thatchers quiet homophobia? The Irish Hunger Strikes SOURCE | more http://josharcher.uk/blog/why-margaret-thatcher-is-hated/ Good Old Days Under Conservative WOMAN PM  [CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]   [CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]  [CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]   [CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]   [CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]  [CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE] Conservative Government Scumbags Under-fund Essex Police LINK | post

George Soros & Hedge Fund Wolves: 1992 Black September Mugging of British Taxpayers

George Soros & Hedge Fund Wolves 1992 Black September Mugging of British Taxpayers  SOURCE Price Economics Rohin Dhar - May 15, 2014 http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george-soros-broke/ SUMMARY TITLE:  'The Trade of the Century: When George Soros Broke the British Pound' May 15, 2014 ""I've learned many things from [George Soros], but perhaps the most significant is that it's not whether you're right or wrong, but how much money you make when you're right and how much you lose when you're wrong.”Stanley Druckenmiller, 1994" -- 1992 George Soros brings BANK OF ENGLAND to its knees -- Soros nets OVER 1 BILLION DOLLARS -- by DEMOLISHING THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF GREAT BRITAIN -- nation-shaking BET -- hedge funds -- RESTRICTIONS ON CAPITAL FLOWING ABROAD LIFTED -- 24-hour news cycle only in infancy -- SOROS MADE FORTUNE BETTING AGAINST BRITISH POUND -- exchange rates between countries -- equals macroeconomic tools of govt to stimulate economies -- Soros led GROUP OF TRADERS to -- BREAK ENTIRE FOREIGN CURRENCY SYSTEM OF BRITAIN -- to profit at BRITISH TAXPAYER expense Post WWII -- European countries to INTEGRATE ECONOMIES more tightly -- tighter economic relations aim reportedly:     -- to prevent wars every few decades     -- to create large pan-European market to compete with USA     -- culminated in EUROPEAN UNION (EU)     -- EU assumed single currency:  1999         -- 1979 precursor to single EU currency:         -- European Exchange Rate mechanism (ERM)     -- countries agree to FIX EXCHANGE RATES     -- versus FLOATING CURRENCY & letting CAPITAL MARKETS set rates         -- Germany had strongest economy in Europe     -- *comment: OCCUPIED GERMANY     -- so each European country set their currency's value in DEUTSCHMARKS     -- agreement to maintain exchange rate between NATIONAL CURRENCY     -- & Deutschmark (within acceptable margin of 6% plus or minus agreed rate)         -- however, fixed rates cannot just be set & 'forgotten'     -- currency is traded EVERY DAY     -- currency is exchanged to:         -- buy imports         -- sell exports     -- market 'applies pressure' based on what 'actual' rate 'ought to be'     -- based on SUPPLY & DEMAND for currency     -- to keep exchange rate FIXED     -- government must PARTICIPATE in MARKET & NUDGE currency in DIRECTION             1.  take reserves of foreign currency & BUY OWN CURRENCY on open market             -- causing CURRENCY TO APPRECIATE                 2.  set INTEREST RATES             -- ie raise rates to entice buyers of own currency             -- lend that money at higher rates of interest                         -- cut interest rates so capital shifts elsewhere in search of profit                 -- however, INTEREST RATES affect ENTIRE ECONOMY     -- plus affect govt spending         -- INTEREST RATES are main lever govt uses to adjust economy     -- eg. if economic recession, govt may cut interest rates to spur:         - investment         - spending      -- eg. if high inflation, govt may raise interest rates to shrink supply of money         -- there are consequences to maintaining FIXED EXCHANGE RATE     -- described as external forcing function, tying govt hands on monetary policy     -- which limits govt doing what it needs to do to keep domestic economy on track *comment:  isn't it only 'external' if it is done in agreement with others, eg the ERM?  Otherwise, couldn't a fixed exchange rate be done solo?    Britain -- 1990:     -- inflation high     -- productivity low     -- exports uncompetitive     -- prime minister:  Margaret Thatcher     -- Thatcher long opposed entering ERM, insisting price of pound be set by markets     -- Conservative party members, however, wanted to FIX exchange rates with Europe     -- John Major, Chancellor of the Exchequer (ie British head of treasury)     -- Major championed joining ERM     -- 1990 Britain enters ERM at rate:         -- 2.95 Deutschmark (DM) per British pound (GBP)                 *British limited to keeping rate b/w 2.78 DM to 3.13 DM         *by provisos of the ERM agreement     -- Major replaces Thatcher as PM shortly thereafter     -- ERM seen as British monetary policy on 'autopilot'     -- given hands tied by exchange rate agreement     -- 1990 - 1992:  inflation decreased, interest rates eased, unemployment low (by historical standards)         -- BUT 1992:  MASSIVE GLOBAL RECESSION     -- British unemployment spiked:  to 12.7%  (from 7.7% 2 years prior)     -- were Britain not subject to the ERM agreement     -- Britain could stimulate investment & spending by cutting interest rates in unemployment crisis     -- but was UNABLE to do so pursuant to ERM     -- as it would have PUSHED THE VALUE OF THE POUND BEYOND AGREED AMOUNT     -- Britain had to ride out recession with hands tied     New York City -- 1992:  George Soros 62 years old -- head of QUANTUM FUND, hedge fund he founded 1970 -- to BET on macroeconomic trends -- at time he was wealthy, but not as wealthy as today or as public -- in 1992, hedge funds weren't part of public consciousness Hedge Fund -- 'hedge' - investing capital to make a specific bet that something will happen -- use of market instruments to 'hedge' against other risks -- to isolate bet that hedge funds want to make eg.  AT&T mobile phone network -- say you consider it a poor performer -- opportunity to then 'short' the stock -- making money when the stock goes down -- but if the mobile phone market is booming -- AT&T may still be attracting customers & stock could go up -- in that case:  money could be lost shorting -- to 'hedge' against this risk:  buy some Verizon stock also -- if you think AT&T is crappy relative to Verizon -- if mobile phone stocks increase:     -- money made if Verizon goes up more than AT&T -- if mobile phone sector decrease:     -- money made if AT&T stock goes down faster than Verizon -- creation of this position = 'hedge' of general risks, making specific bet -- in this case AT&T poor prospect compared to Verizon -- if hedge funds are very sure of their bet -- they BORROW funds to put even more money behind bet -- using mostly borrowed monies they can buy a LOT OF SHARES -- without fronting much capital -- hedge fund managers typically invest other wealthy people's money -- hedge fund managers receive MANAGEMENT FEES to cover expenses, incl. salary -- standard is 2% of funds under management -- regardless of how fund performs, if you manage a large fund, you stand to make big bucks -- but not billionaire level -- hedge fund managers become billionaires placing successful bets -- hedge fund managers earn about 20% of returns created by fund -- summarising:  hedge funds make isolated bets using financial instruments -- & borrowing money to make potential rewards greater Britain 1992 -- Jonathan Portes, economist says: -- problem obvious -- interest rate in relation to weak demand = much lower than needed -- to maintain GBP position in ERM -- GBP overvalued -- large current account deficit (even in deep recession) -- Britain joined ERM at wrong rate / sterling overvalued & stuck with -- structural current account deficit -- market also knew pound overvalued -- pound trading at lower end of agreed band w. Deutschmark -- British govt guarantee to keep pound propped up, prevented pound from plummeting -- as long as Britain indefintely committed to buying pounds for 2.95 Deutschmarks -- status quo maintained “Markets can influence the events that they anticipate.” - George Soros         -- 1992 pound held its position -- until Germany throws Britain under bus -- German central bank officials made on & off-record comments     Reimut Jochimsen     Bundesbank Council member     -- issues statement saying:  potential for realignment within the ERM     -- GBP then weakened         Unnamed Bundesbank official official, quoted:     -- devaluation of serling inevitable & pound to fall     Prof Helmut Schlesinger     President     German Bundesbank     -- interviewed by:  WALL STREET JOURNAL interview + German newspaper     -- terms:  permission to quote involved first obtaining review by him of direct quote     -- BUT indirect quote / paraphrase, NO PERMISSION REQUIRED         -- newswire Sept. 1992 reports re Schlesinger indicating     -- not ruled out that even after realignment & cut in German interest rates     -- one or two currencies could 'come under pressure' ahead of referendum in France     -- Soros & entire financial markets see:  GBP could 'come under pressure' -- ie. could be devalued -- one paraphrased quote result:  market ceased to believe Britain could maintain currency exchange rate -- the belief in the pound was all that kept it from plummeting -- results:  brought devastation to Bank of England -- netted George Soros over billion dollars in profit “There is no point in being confident and having a small position.” - George Soros -- a month prior, Soros & Quantum Fund were building $1.5 billion betting position -- that pound would fall -- Stanley Druckenmiller saw importance of German Bundesbank president report -- Druckenmiller figured the Quantum gang should add to position (ie bet more) -- Soros strategy:  “Go for the jugular” -- plan was to use the Schlesigner quote as opportunity to devalue pound -- by short-selling sterling on unprecedented scale, to hasten plummet of pound -- to increase Quantum gang's profit LONG EXPLANATION OF SHORTING - in article *I find it hard to focus on this, so I am going to skip -- money is made if pound devalues -- by buying and selling or exchanging money, or something -- Soros was on a winner because everyone knew (b/c of Bundesbank statement) -- that British pound was going to tank -- so if pound to devalue, Soros & Quantum gang win -- were pound increase they would have lost, but they knew it was IMPOSSIBLE -- as the British pound was OVER-PRICED or overvalued re Deutschmark -- biggest risk Soros was taking was that pound could maintain value -- but, in that case, he & the Quantum gang wouldn't lose much money -- so there was not a massive risk factor, but there was a massive potential gain factor -- that morning, Soros & the Quantum gang -- increase their short position against pound -- from $1.5 billion to $10 billion -- the perfect bet:  mitigated down side & limitless up side -- described as like betting on coin flip:     -- heads:  pound devalues / make lots of money     -- tails:  pound rate remains fixed / lose small amount of money on LOAN INTEREST "... In fact, when Norman Lamont [the British finance minister] said just before the devaluation that he would borrow nearly $15 billion to defend sterling, we were amused because that was about how much we wanted to sell." - George Soros, 1992 Black September 1992 -- as EUROPE SLEPT -- Soros borrowed pounds from anywhere he could -- Quantum gang position exceeded $10 billion shorting the pound -- other hedge funds:     -- got wind of brisk trade     -- got wind of report from Bundesbank     -- started to follow Quantum gang strategy, borrowing & selling British pounds -- by time British treasury began their day, BILLIONS of British pounds sold -- pound dangerously close to trading below levels mandated by ERM -- British treasury begins buying pounds in the billions at 8:40am -- but no effect on price of pound -- WHOLE WORLD WAS SELLING -- British govt did not have BUYING POWER to fight off worldwide sale -- British govt spent est.  £27 billion of RESERVES buying up pounds:  to no effect -- 9am:  Norman Lamont, finance minister under Major -- advises Major impossible to buy up enough pounds to keep currency propped -- only option for British govt to keep currency trading at 'right level' -- equals:  DRAMATIC INCREASE of INTEREST RATES to attract buyers of pound -- MAJOR REFUSED -- Britain in recession & INCREASE OF RATES would FURTHER SHRINK ECONOMY -- POLITICAL SUICIDE -- blood in the water -- GLOBAL CAPITAL kept betting against pound -- hour later, Norman Lamont pleads with John Major -- John Major relents -- 11am - British govt announces:  INCREASE interest rate from 10% to 12% -- nothing happened -- pound continues to plummet -- Norman Lamont consults to John Major:  rates increase - 12% to 15% -- no effect -- Soros, Druckenmiller & other currency speculators know victory is at hand -- market expected Britain to devalue currency -- no amount of interest rate or currency buying could change that -- market expectation that Britain would exit ERM & devalue currency -- described as 'self-fulfilling prophesy' -- comment:  how so?  isn't it currency speculator manifested? Black Wednesday - 16 Sept 1992 -- 7:30pm Norman Lamont announes Britain exiting ERM & floating currency on market -- Soros, the Quantum hedge fund gang & currency speculators won -- Britain floated its currency -- pound fell 15% against Deutschmark -- pound fell 25% against US dollar -- when pound floated, Soros Quantum gang hedge fund -- value increased instantly from $15 billion to $19 billion -- months later, same fund worth almost $22 billion -- Soros & partners in hedge fund made at least 20% - ie $1.4 billion -- nature of Wall Street trading -- to win big, someone else must lose big -- in case of Black Wednesday: ENORMOUS WEALTH TRANSFER FROM BRITISH TAXPAYERS TO GEORGE SOROS & OTHER HEDGE FUND MANAGERS -- In the lead up to devaluation, -- British taxpayer lost out again: -- treasury kept spending its foreign currency buying British pounds -- which pounds became LESS VALUABLE after treasury floated the exchange rate COST TO BRITISH TAXPAYERS ESTIMATED AT £3.3 billion *comment:  bet that doesn't factor in the cost of having shrunk the British economy (through interest rate raising), when the economy had to be stimulated, during an existing money-lender & speculator created 'financial crisis'. -- John Major, Conservatives -- centrepiece of monetary policy:     -- entering ERM     -- plan to bring austerity to Britain -- Black Wednesday destroyed his credibility -- party lost next election -- Thatcher was right, article concludes:  Britain had no business propping up currency artificially *comment:  I don't think that was the issue - the issue is that they were locked into agreement  in which the pound was OVER-VALUED to begin with & their hands tied re interest rates BLACK WEDNESDAY REAL PROBLEM *era when handful of private hedge fund speculators can assemble MORE CAPITAL IN FEW HOURS THAN BANK OF ENGLAND HAD AT DISPOSAL -- amount of money in 'GLOBAL MARKETS' so enormous it can bring British govt to knees in one day -- article concludes regulations are a problem, as they create unexpected loopholes *comment:  LACK OF REGULATION *IS* THE PROBLEM HERE - regulate better -- article says, event shows the power of the one-sided bet -- 1992 bet described:  "well-designed macroeconomic trade against fixed exchange rates" -- if Soros & his Quantum gang were wrong, down side was almost zero -- up-side was enormous -- article concludes: "Bets like that almost never come along, but when they do, enormous transfers of wealth take place from the sheep to the wolves." SOURCE Price Economics Rohin Dhar - May 15, 2014 http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george-soros-broke/ ---------------------- ---------------------- COMMENT That was a good article. I don't really understand how money works and reading even this small explanation of how it works isn't my thing (had to skip some of the boring detail, because I don't readily understand even simple explanations, and I sort of don't care to torture myself trying to understand).   But I guess if you're going to gamble, why not gamble like this?  Surprised all those addicted gamblers don't put their money in currency buying and selling.  A casino system that rips off millions of taxpayers by clubbing together large enough funds to make bets at an opportune time sounds insane.

Dave Cameron's Bullsh*t Letter to NATO - Propagada & Censorship

ꕤ Media Selling Unicorns❄ Corporate-Serving Media In Service of Aggressive Neoliberal Foreign Policy |  Manufacturing Consent Bias.  Compliance.  Censorship. Disinformation.  Distraction.  Diversion.  Suppression.  Smear. censorship & disinformation is denial of informed consent article ORIGINAL SOURCE New York Daily propaganda http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/britain-prime-minister-warns-nato-allies-prepare-conflict-russia-article-1.1890088 Check out Dave Cameron's absolute bullsh*t 'letter to NATO' Original Post "PROPAGANDA 101 - DAVID CAMERON - WRITE A LETTER TO NATO ..." Link |  here . Re Photo The original post referred to this NYDN source article and to a photograph -- among those used in the article -- which was included in my original post, and has since been censored from this blog. Whoever has had Google remove this image has done so contrary to Copyright fair use provisions (see Universal Music - 9th Circuit Court decision Sept. 2015). Particulars Subject:  Ukraine Photographer:  SERGEI KARPUKHIN Agency:  REUTERS Google censorship of image, contrary to copyright fair use provisions (see decision USA 9th Circuit ruling Sept. 2015) New York Daily propaganda photo caption:  "Armed pro-Russian separatists walk near the site where the downed Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 crashed." Re Article NYDN US-British propaganda article is 100% bullsh*t ...  It was obvious when it was published and it's clear as day, today. Article's dated August 2014 and Russia hasn't attacked, but the US and its NATO allies have been busy encroaching on Russia's borders. New York Daily propaganda associated article title: "Britain's prime minister warns NATO allies to prepare for conflict with Russia" Anti-Russia & pro-NATO spending scare: Courtesy of:   Dave Cameron Ummm, this is the same Dave Cameron ...   who is conducting drone assassinations of British subjects in Syria, and has conducted drone attacks in Syria, in secret, despite Parliamentary veto ...  psychopath. Britain's slick, used car salesman psychopath quoted in New York Daily propaganda 3 August, 2014: "Britain's prime minister is warning NATO allies to prepare for conflict because he says Russia sees the alliance as an enemy." ""Russia has ripped up the rulebook ..." David Cameron wrote in a letter to NATO Saturday." Published:  Sunday, August 3, 2014, 12:23 AM COMMENT I'm doubly pissed off here. First of all that the photograph has been censored unfairly in an earlier post. Even though my original post wasn't earth shattering political commentary, that's not the point ... and it's in violation of the copyright fair use provisions, as well as the spirit of a free internet. ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. I'm also pissed off seeing Dave Cameron's Russian scare garbage is influencing millions around the world ...  while Dave's droning away and engaged in oil/gas wars that are causing the displacement of millions in the Middle East, and consequently straining both social fabric and budgets of a number of European nations that are inundated by immigration unprecedented since WWII ... ...  while Dave Cameron visits Lebanon for a photo op with refugees, pretending it has nothing to do with his government's aggressive policies (and support of sectarian violence) in the region. "Ripped up the rule book" -- Dave Cameron ... from a country that invaded Iraq illegally. Staged.  Photo op.  Exploiting refugees.  Exploiting women.  Exploiting children. Psychopath. ꕤ

David Cameron - Hypocite

ꕤ i ❤ twitter ❤ David Cameron aka   'Dishface' ...  'Plateface' Prime Minister Britain Conservatives #Hypocrisy #DavidCameron West FUND & SUPPORT Middle East WAR for OIL & promote Sectarian TERRORIST Violence source  |  here ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- ꕤ

UK - Human Rights Under Attack

UNITED KINGDOM #UK - labour party conference - some guy vows: human rights at heart of general election campaign / Tories to scrap Human Rights Act [Ind] -- Therese May, Goddess of Human Rights & ors., question whether 2 walk from European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). [ind] >> Liberal Democrats have refused to countenance changes re human rights laws - http://goo.gl/izztAu COMMENT An interesting development.

UK - DAVID CAMERON'S MASSIVE HEDGE FUND DONATIONS & THEIR MASSIVE TAX CUTS

David Cameron’s election bankrolled by a small pool of big money donors     August 13, 2014 (2:56 pm) - Latest figures from the Electoral Commission reveal that hedge funds have given to the Tories a total of £45.7 million in donations, and have received a £145 million tax cut - Analysis of Conservative Party donations shows that almost £2m of donations in the last quarter came from donors who attended private dinners with David Cameron and other senior Ministers, taking the total to £5m from dinner donors in 2014 Jonathan Ashworth MP, Labour’s Shadow Cabinet Office Minister, said: "Families are struggling with their finances but Tory Party coffers are booming. "The Prime Minister wants to buy the next election with a small pool of big-money donors bankrolling his campaign. In contrast Labour has thousands of activists across the country working in communities. "When millions are flowing in from hedge funds and exclusive groups of donors, is it any wonder David Cameron stands up for the privileged few? "Millionaires and hedge funds have been given a tax cut while hardworking families suffer from a cost-of-living crisis. David Cameron is leading an out-of-touch, hollowed-out party which has no answers to the major challenges our country faces." Ends http://press.labour.org.uk/post/94629826764/david-camerons-election-bankrolled-by-a-small-pool-of

So who do you think Cameron answers to: the voter or the finance sector? LOL

Also, note the massive tax cuts these hedge fund pirates are getting.

UK - DAVID CAMERON'S CASH PEERAGES IS 'LOBBY FODDER'

‘King of Bling’ who gave the Tories £300k is made a Lord: ‘Cash for peerages’ row flares again By Daniel Martin Published: 02:04 AEST, 8 August 2014 The row over ‘cash for peerages’ was reignited last night after it emerged a jewellery tycoon who has handed the Tories more than £300,000 is to be made a Lord. Ranbir Singh Suri – last night nicknamed the ‘King of Bling’ by Labour sources – was nominated by David Cameron. The Prime Minister has already handed out 161 peerages in this parliament. The announcement that another political crony is to be handed a peerage will lead to further calls for the controversial system of patronage which persists in this country to be scrapped. About 20 new peers are expected to be announced today, swelling the total to 850, making the House of Lords bigger than at any time since most of the hereditaries were removed in 1999. And it emerged that the expenses bill for the House of Lords has risen by more than £4million since 2010. According to Lords figures, the cost of peers’ allowances has risen from to £21.6million from £17.2million before the 2010 election. The new peers will increase the bill even further. Based on an average expense claim of £28,000, they could add £600,000 to the bill. Constitutional experts warn that the handing of peerages to dozens of political allies and donors is ‘unsustainable’. Paul Flynn, Labour member of the public administration select committee, said: ‘Our legislature is being prostituted; jobs are being given out to the highest donors. ‘The Lords is overcrowded as it is, only two thirds of them can get in.’ ... Last night Alistair Graham, former chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said: ‘It is absurd to keep adding to our overblown second chamber through nominations from the PM – particularly as many of the nominees seem to be big donors to the Conservatives. ‘No other second chamber in the Western World is so large. Every democrat should be pressing for a reform of the House of Lords as a matter of urgency.’ While the very idea of parties cramming the Upper House with political appointees is controversial, the idea that donors should be given seats is even more so. EXTRACTS ONLY - FULL @ SOURCE http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2719114/Cameron-make-jewellery-tycoon-gave-Tories-312-000-peer-alongside-Karren-Brady-ex-M-S-boss-Stuart-Rose.html

Lords Reform - 1997–2010

The Labour Party included in its 1997 general election Manifesto a commitment to remove the hereditary peerage from the House of Lords. Their subsequent election victory in 1997 under Tony Blair finally heralded the demise of the traditional House of Lords. The Labour Government introduced legislation to expel all hereditary peers from the Upper House ... House of Lords Act 1999 (see below for its provisions), making the House of Lords predominantly an appointed house.

Since 1999 however, no further reform has taken place.

Overcrowding

The size of the House of Lords has varied greatly throughout its history. From about 50 members in the early 1700s, it increased to a record size of 1,330 in October 1999, before Lords reform reduced it to 669 by March 2000.

In April 2011, a cross-party group of former leading politicians, including many senior members of the House of Lords, called on the Prime Minister David Cameron to stop creating new peers. He had created 117 new peers since becoming prime minister in May 2010, a faster rate of elevation than any PM in British history. The expansion occurred while his government had tried (in vain) to reduce the size of the House of Commons by 50 members, from 650 to 600.

In August 2014, despite there being a seating capacity of only approximately 400 seats in the Lords chamber, the House had 828 members (although of these 54 were not entitled to attend or vote, having been suspended or granted leave of absence). This made the House of Lords the largest parliamentary chamber in any democracy and surpassed in size only by China’s National People’s Congress ...  Baroness Boothroyd  ... criticised successive prime ministers for filling the second chamber with “lobby fodder” in an attempt to help their policies become law. She made her remarks days before a new batch of peers were due to be appointed..

Legislative functions

Legislation, with the exception of money bills, may be introduced in either House.

The House of Lords debates legislation, and has power to amend or reject bills. However, the power of the Lords to reject a bill passed by the House of Commons is severely restricted by the Parliament Acts. Under those Acts, certain types of bills may be presented for the Royal Assent without the consent of the House of Lords (i.e. the Commons can override the Lords' veto). The House of Lords cannot delay a money bill (a bill that, in the view of the Speaker of the House of Commons, solely concerns national taxation or public funds) for more than one month.

Other public bills cannot be delayed by the House of Lords for more than two parliamentary sessions, or one calendar year. These provisions, however, only apply to public bills that originate in the House of Commons, and cannot have the effect of extending a parliamentary term beyond five years. A further restriction is a constitutional convention known as the Salisbury Convention, which means that the House of Lords does not oppose legislation promised in the Government's election manifesto.

By a custom that prevailed even before the Parliament Acts, the House of Lords is further restrained insofar as financial bills are concerned. The House of Lords may neither originate a bill concerning taxation or Supply (supply of treasury or exchequer funds), nor amend a bill so as to insert a taxation or Supply-related provision. (The House of Commons, however, often waives its privileges and allows the Upper House to make amendments with financial implications.) Moreover, the Upper House may not amend any Supply Bill. The House of Lords formerly maintained the absolute power to reject a bill relating to revenue or Supply, but this power was curtailed by the Parliament Acts, as aforementioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords

Democracy at work in feudal UK.

So David Cameron's aim is probably:

1. thanking his political party's benefactors for their support; and
2. getting them on-board as House of Lords lobbyists, when it comes to the Conservatives proposed legislation getting passed.

Sounds like the entire system should be scrapped.

Another point against Cameron.

Need to get my list up and running somewhere prominent.  LOL