The case against troops in Afghanistan

Many people in those areas are indigenous people and tribes that mainly generate an income from Poppy cultivation and Afghanistan and Burma combined account to 95% of the world’s opium production.
At the same time one must consider that the times of the British Empire are well and truly over, that Britain has lost its standing as the world’s economic and political leader and former colonies are independent and the world production on manufacturing, raw materials, food and electronics have gone to former third world countries that now dominate the world.

Britain has been reduced to a service provider for education and has become dependant on imports from others.
Our technology allows us to monitor all the failings in respect of human rights and atrocities that hurt our mentalities and we always feel we have to do something to better the evils of the underdeveloped world. But we are only a small country with very few resources and in danger of splitting ourselves up into too many fragments that will be detrimental to us. I blame much of this on the labour movement and the Labour Party in particular.

Gone are the days where we could occupy countries and teach them as our colonies.
The British army makes one big mistake in Afghanistan in that it acts as a social stabiliser as well as an army and that is what leads to so many deaths. The shoot to kill has been changed to the capture if possible as we try to help those we fight and as a matter of principle one cannot fight and help at the same time, one can only do one or the other and it should be up to the United Nations, the Red Cross and similar organisations to provide the help but an army should be fighting and nothing else.

There are so many regions in the world that have a lot of issues and we cannot possible cure all ills of the world. We should concentrate on keeping the drugs out of Britain and look after our own as we suffer from serious social problems within our own country, that is weakened by internal fragmentation as well as being the drug capital of Europe. I feel our whole culture is in danger of collapse if we do not concentrate on saving our own values and society within our own borders. We cannot be a good example to others if we do not manage to civilise ourselves first of all.

My heart breaks from the injustice women suffer under the Taleban and in Islamic nations in general but I cannot make those women stand up to the repression they suffer, they have to stand up to it themselves, just as women did in Europe and America. In the photo above you see a member of the Taleban religious police beating a woman.

We cannot help those that do not want to be helped. I feel that Britain always thinks others want to be helped they just need a little assistance but if the local status of those we feel need help is so weak that they cannot build their own support networks then we cannot possibly lift those in need of help out of the danger zones.

In my view the Taleban promote humans as feral creatures, not allowing women medical help or education. They in fact only use weapons to support their own power and farm drug crops to destroy others. They work on very basic and animal instincts and we as sophisticated society fall under the spell of that, trying to save what human motions are in place but are in serious danger to be beaten by the brute animal strength of those Taleban fighters who draw strength out of economic misery they themselves produce.

We are better off concentrating on keeping those drugs out of our borders, our people’s veins and strengthen our own society rather than trying to save those who have no realistic will to be saved.
It must be a worldwide effort with much greater involvement of all nations to solve the problems in Afghanistan, we need an international conglomerate including China, India, Russia and the US to solve the problems of that region, that is geographically huge.
For example there is now a drought in Afghanistan and some regions have not had any water and all crops fail, but does the Afghan government have a contingency plan for food? No, the people depend on foreign food aid whilst the farmers use the land for continued poppy and drug production whilst the people depend on foreign aid.

We are fools to fall for that because those suffering should stand up to their own leaders but instead they continue to support the Taleban without much resistance.
We have to realise that the Taleban think like animals, they merciless will destroy us if we let them. The Taleban keep women for baby production, use the sons for fighters whilst we still try to give women human rights by allowing them some education but the economic instability will proof our efforts in vein unless there is a worldwide support from all nations and total destruction of the poppy fields.

The international institute for strategic studies should put on their thinking caps and produce some very fast results please.

The worst outcome of this for us woman would be that should Britain become too weak from this conflict, we woman would be forced to start producing sons just to fight a war that weakens us so much that we would lose our privileges we fought for so hard and revert back into the same bearing woman who produce soldiers that fight wars just to save our country from defeat. We'd be equally repressed just as those Taliban woman are now.

We cannot enter any war under Labour and Socialist rules as those rules see all peoples as equal even if they are not emancipated yet.

We need to rid the region of poppy fields first, regenerate economically and we require the help of all nations who need to provide fighting soldiers, otherwise we are better off just destroying the poppy fields from the air and monitor the region electronically and use terrrorist prevention by other means. I do not think that we can win in that region because it is similar to the Vietnam war. Considering how small our resources are, each and every fit fighting man costs so much effort to train and maintain, it is ridiculous that we train up those good men just for the Taleban to kill them. We should stop our humanitarian attitude in Afghanistan and kill all those who are a threat to us and not worry about getting them on our side, as it will never happen.

See also Afghan helicopter crash kills 16

The case of the captures US soldier shows clearly that this man is undergoing or has undergone a brain washing process and he had his head shaved and is forced to start growing the tell-tale goatie bird for Muslims. He should agree to all he is told and stay alive as long as possible. It is a great worry that he has been told to say that the American people have that power to bring the American soldiers home, that indicates that again the Taleban want to hold the American people to account for the soldiers in Afghanistan. The Taleban are savages who use any excuse and have no emotions whatsoever and no human feelings at all. If that soldier is lucky he will be brainwashed into becoming a Taleban fighter (when he could escape at a later date) or if he will be killed and shown as sample on TV, he will loose his life. Unfortunately the support network in that region is so great that is is extremely unlikely that he could be found or freed by our troops.

Petition to full Council meeting on 15 July 2009

The council chamber was packed with councillors and petitioners alike to seek various assistance. Before me the ESOL petition from Tower Hamlets College were funding had been cut.
The Glasshouse petition for funding was second on the agenda for petitions and I had to change the wording slightly in the last minute as I only got notified very shortly before the presentation that I had only 3 minutes to make a speech. So I cut out some sentences of my petition to get it all in because apparently the microphone gets turned off if one overdraws on the time allowed.

However the East London Advertiser was very quick to report about the petition on 16 July 2009, when it had taken place the evening before.

According to this article in the East London Advertiser titled "Families' fight centres on Town Hall", it states that the council said "other funding opportunities" were available for the 'staff' at the centre.

The basic truth is, that there is no staff at the centre, the Glasshouse is run by volunteers who do not get a penny for the work they do. It was in the hands of the treasurer Lil Warner to make the new application for funding in December 2008, when she died of a sudden heart attack in November 2008.
Of course it took a little while to sift through her belongings and sort out the paperwork for someone else to be able to make the new application and it is unbelievably harsh to refuse funding on those grounds. As the Advertiser rightly states the centre had been run since the 1950's when the estate was first built. Her family was also griefing so was much of our community as L
After the petition was delivered and questions answered I chatted up Rania Khan who promised to look into it further. Today, I got a phone call from her personal assistant at the Town Hall and made an appointment for Councillor Khan to come and visit the Glasshouse for a chat to see what can be done.
We are also in negotiation with Jack Dash House to get all the paperwork correct in respect of constitution of the Parkview TRA and to establish properly whose responsibility the Glasshouse Centre is going to be, either the Council's the Parkview TRA or whether other arrangements can be made. The next TRA meeting is on 1st September 2009 and I expect a member of the Resident's engagement team to come and give some good advice and guidance. Till then the holidays are upon us and this matter has to be put on hold till after the hols. Jackie works in a holiday play centre as she needs to earn some money, because the Glasshouse "job" does not pay her any wage.
Councillor Stephanie Eaton thought it would be quite expensive to allow the Glasshouse to stay empty and I think it is in urgent need of re-decoration and some plumbing repairs are also needed. The Glasshouse is in limbo and I do my utmost to unravel the mystery of how it can be run to the satisfaction to all it serves.

Compared to the amount of money the Council spends on East End Life, over £1,000,000 per year and the cuts in community services one can only assume that East End Life is an unaffordable luxury for this council. We only want £6,000 to £10,000 for the Glass House, that is a paltry sum.

Cllr Phil Briscoe: Abdal Puts Politics Above Education

Cllr Phil Briscoe: Abdal Puts Politics Above Education

Cllr Phil Briscoe: Cameron Speaks at Canary Wharf

Cllr Phil Briscoe: Cameron Speaks at Canary Wharf

I am moving my blog to wordpress

Dear readers,
I am now moving my blog to Wordpress. Please visit me there.
I like WordPress because I can stop other WordPress users linking to me and it is completely accountable of who clicks to where, where visitors come from and single stats and whole blog stats. Excellent system unsurpassed.

Please also note that my previous site whizz.uk.com is completely closed now as well as I do not have the time to maintain it. Thanks and sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

Consultation, consultation, consultation

 

would be my motto to bring to the political debate.

We've heard, education, education, education and behaviour, behaviour, behaviour but Consultation becomes more and more apparent to be THE MOST debated issue of all.

At the recent "Strategic Development Committee" meeting, consultation was the most dissatisfaction point argued.

Developments such as City Pride should be consulted much more intensely and widely, this should come before the "Police and Community and Safety Committee" and be discussed more with the Councillors actually representing the area.

I reckon City Pride will bring a lot more need for observation to the area and impact greatly on security measures needed.

Also in the Gladstone Place opposed development impact studies were demanded but refused.

We are always limping behind and become alarmed when it is too late or always try to make good what has gone wrong.

Why do we have a small panel of local councillors making decisions that can have such wide ranging impact not only on our immediate area but also set a precedence on others, especially if this local panel of councillors is party politically totally biased.

A very dense high-rise development

You thought the biblical tower of Babel story is just a lot of old toss but if you want to read it and compare it to the current developments in Tower Hamlets you can see the doom and gloom looming at us from the distance.

Yesterday's "Strategic Development Committee" meeting at the Town Hall of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets was extraordinary to say the least both in the result and the conduct of the Labour run council.

Three planning applications were dealt with in an extraordinary manner. When one application wasn't approved by democratic means the chair took it upon himself to allow them anyhow. But that is a chair one can hardly understand, he mumbles into the microphone and I don't accept excuses that English is not his first language, he should at least try and pronounce his words in such clarity that both the public and the other attendees can at least hear what he is saying.

The recommendation is that tower blocks should come in clusters this had been taken by Tower Hamlet's Labour council to mean where there is one there is going to be another and there are going to be more and more of them. I think it is down to the typical cynical attitude of New Labour that they don't even see its necessary that their members are understood as long as they make the decisions that are in the interest of Nu Labour. but in the past tower blocks were used mainly for business whilst Tower Hamlets council now wants to use it for housing.

All applications were vehemently opposed both by the Community and the Conservatives Especially the development of a huge tower block at 15 Westferry Road, caused high emotions against. And those emotions are certainly justified.

Even the Labour councillors had some valuable contributions to make to question this development, which comprises of a 62 storey high tower block that is planned mainly for residential use. But that is not all the units within it themselves are too small to comply with social housing guidelines and therefore unfit for housing permanently of persons in need of social housing.

Quite correctly a Conservative councillor assumed that this tower block is going to be higher than Canary Wharf because it got 20 more floors in it, but remarkably the City Pride development is actually lower than Canary Wharf despite 20 more floors. Councillor Peck, making sure everybody was aware that he is speaking as a tall person, said that the floors within the building must be very low and so voted against it. Councillor Omer also remarked that the water supplies must be a problem, we all had warnings of water shortages even without large high rise blocks in the area.

Councillor Archer brought up the argument of density and whether such density would be allowed in other areas of the world, to which the answer was no, but in Hong Kong there is a similar building and so Tower Hamlets will now progress from being the poorest borough in the UK to also being the densest borough in the UK and second place in the world after Hong Kong. What a proud moment for Labour, stack them high is their motto.

I am most concerned about the units not being fit for social housing and an argument brought that only the richest will be living in there among a community of poor is not what will actually happen. The Council now uses such properties to house homeless persons there for short term leases and this whole new tower block will be stuffed full of homeless people and will create a vertical ghetto. They just get around social housing and minimum housing standards for social housing by building private housing that they then let to people with social housing needs, simply because there is not enough good standard social housing available. The mind boggles.

Labour's answer to poverty is to create higher concentrations of poverty. I think this will end in a social disaster, and this tower block is going to be a huge security and safety risk for the people who live within it and a crime hot spot, I predict.

This development was proposed at a cost of £30.000.000 and when it was voted down by 4:3 the chair took it upon himself to allow the planning permission to go through despite the democratic vote going against it.

Remarkably developers were able to submit e-mails on the afternoon prior to the meeting to suggest higher grant funding when the opposition were kept to strict deadlines and some signature petitions and solicitors letters to the Gladstone Place developments were brushed under the carpet as not legally important, to which the Liberal Councillor remarked, that just because the Council's lawyer said they are legally not viable that it has happened in the past that in Judicial Review they were found to be legally very viable and voted against.

The Gladstone Place development was strongly opposed by local residents who submitted 2257 signatures and letters against whilst the council says they only received a fraction of those. Strong opposition was focused around reduced car parking, that would effect adversely visitors to the adjacent Roman Road market and over-density.

An environmental impact assessment is persistently refused by the council as unnecessary whilst opponents demand one and incidentally this is the 2nd application for the Gladstone place development because the first one, exactly the same is being opposed with an application for Judicial Review in the High court and the progress is halted whilst that is going on. this second planning permission application can now also again be opposed with an application for Judicial Review. Private Eye also ran a story about this called Tesco Towers.

The whole consultation process is put into question repeatedly whereby residents are presented with surveys, the results of which are then taken to excuse those developments. But what bothers me is that the people completing the surveys are not told what the real impact of their answers is going to be. The opposition also produced a solicitor's letter against the Tesco Tower developments, which the council solicitor recommended to be ignored.

There was a lot of booing from the gallery against all Labour decisions and especially the City Pride decision attracted some very strong reaction from one visitor who promised to take this on, probably meaning an application for judicial review about this as well.

Conservative councillor Archer shone with clear and concise contributions to the discussion, questioning the reasons, grounds and decision making for the new tower block developments and attracted large and loud applause each time he spoke the same as all other Conservative councillors and Claire Palmer who argued that the Gladstone Place development would simply cost a lot of tax payers money because of the legal challenges to it. Apparently the protesters are not against the supermarket but the high rise building that comes with it. Bow in this part is really just a little village made up of little houses and feels pretty rural in places. Looks like New Labour wants to turn Tower Hamlets into a type of Manhattan.

All together it was THE most controversial evening of decision making I have ever witnessed and it appeared that the Labour councillor were set from the start to accept all planning applications the developers proposed. We heard of Labour Party funding scandals to do with housing developers in the past and I wonder what the implications of this evening will be.

McBride and Prejudice

Alan Johnson is the front man that puts the media and the onlookers in their place after David Cameron demanded an apology from the Prime Minister.

David is absolutely correct in demanding this apology because Gordon Brown, as Party leader is responsible for what happens under his wings.

Incidentally the McBride story in the Sun gave me some incidental evidence in my case against Der Spiegel. See also this very important evidence in this BBC story.

According to the Sun McBride started to work as advisor for Gordon Brown in 2005. At that time, and previously to this I worked for Policy Network under Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair, did transcription work on a self-employed basis. In 2005 also Der Spiegel started to sell online the old 1975 libelous article about me on their web site.

My previous Policy Network contact Fran Sainsbury had been appointed as direct staff to Tony Blair and then in 2005, the work from Policy Network started to dry up completely.

When I realised the libelous article from Der Spiegel was for sale in 2007 and made a little notice about it on my personal web site, to the effect that the article was untrue and libelous, all hell started to break lose and the Labour bloggers immediately dug their fangs into it, starting with Dave Osler, then John Gray, that appeared on Alex Hilton's LabourHome and then Private Eye took it up too.

My own view is that Labour is not interested in allowing any opposition in Tower Hamlets that is their pothole stronghold in the middle of London, that is surrounded by Conservative constituencies. This fits in with the strategy of Labour to run smear campaigns about anyone who could be a thread to Nu Labour. Watch this space.

BBC NEWS Politics Brown e-mail apology 'not needed'

No Internet

 

On Saturday morning, 4 April 2009, I accessed the Internet as usual, checked my E-mails, published a few blurbs on Twitter and on the blog and then went out to enjoy the sunny day in my local park. But when I came back, nothing worked, no Internet, no E-mails, no electronic faxes, no Voip phone messages.

Still to this day, 9 April 2009 morning, I have no access to the web or its communications.

First we were told of upgrade work taking place on behalf of BT, but I was not warned that this would take place. Then BT told people that a third party damaged Internet installations and equipment in an underground vault, then BT told people that a major incident occurred in Ilford.

Yet my Internet Service Provider status message did not report such faults, that people in the East London Area can suffer problems with Internet access.

I just realised how much I really use the Internet. I am wondering though if the courts can uphold the status of E-mails being served the day they are sent because computers are more susceptible to faults more than houses are.

The presumed delivery rule is easy to keep if you look at a house that is made of brick and mortar, it is not so easily destroyed so that the letter cannot be put into its letterbox but E-mails are prone to all sorts of plights.

My opponents keep on writing, we reserve our right to contact you by E-mail and then no doubt prove to the court that they sent one, but how can they prove that it actually arrived in my inbox. How can it be proven that my computer was able at that time to download that E-mail so that I could read it?

The presumed delivery rule for mails assumes that all mailing systems always work, but in the case of houses, they are very unlikely to break down suddenly, which cannot be said for computers and the Internet.

I am just writing this and safe as a draft in the hope that I can publish it when my broadband is working again. I post this now because my access has been resumed.

The bible is always right

Just sat in the church for my promised our in the run-up to Easter and spent my time reading the bible.

I read Job, as this chapter was used in a famous film. I wondered what was Job all about and came across a quote the Master had said to me during the hearing of 20 March 2009, in the same context. Job 16 verse 4, "they could say the same about you".

I read about the riches Job lost and how his children perished and how his health deteriorated and yet he said, that he is not guilty of any worldly sin but that god had decided to test or punish him.

I felt rather hungry sitting there reading how Job had withered down to skin and bone and how he lamented how bad the Lord was.

Loving food for the sake of getting comfort and pleasure out of it, is not why we have food. Food is to sustain our bodies so that we can use our bodies to do good. We allow thistles to overgrow our pastures because we given ourselves too much to do and our bodies are not fit enough to do the work required.

Yet the bible distinguishes between man-made and godly laws but no law can never deny the truth. The truth are the laws made by god we have to live along with in order to enjoy our home, which is this planet. As soon as we err or sin, the environment behaves in a way that is detrimental to us. Even though human laws can be corrupted by powerful men who can stay powerful for a long time but if we humans allow them to be foolish for too long, we all will suffer the consequences.

I think humanity is trying to recreate paradise, so that no one suffers and we all live as long as possible in prosperity. Nothing much has changed since biblical times because according to Job even in those days the poor could not get any justice in human courts.

Strangely enough despite Job thinking that he was just and fed the poor and helped orphans and widows he talked about some humans as being very low and having to live on roots that grow in the desert and being too weak to work for him and that their children mocked him when he was hungry and close to death.

After all this starving down to bone and skin Job lived another 140 years and even now scientists confirm that if you are as slim as possible you live longer.

Our desire to recreate paradise on earth has led to overabundance and people enjoying the food just for the taste of it when it affects their ability to think, when their brains are surrounded and invaded by fatty tissues and their hearts stop, from being drowned in fat. Look at animals who use their foods to eat as much as they need and no more. They stay as healthy as we allow them to be, whereby it is our choice to select which animals prosper and which ones perish.

I recommend that more people read the bible as it is truth in its purest form and it may contain parables and not include the most scientific modern explanations of events, the question that god asked Job are still as true as ever, when god asks Job whether he knows why things are as they are. Indeed humanity to this day is still trying to find the answer. Some explanations have been found in the meantime but scientists still don't understand that this earth has a built in survival mechanism that is stronger than any human invention. Humanity's desire to be as clever as god so far only leads to the destruction of our planet or severe earth warming.

The equality in law principle must have been invented by someone like Job, a person who was rich, became poor experienced its perils and then powerful again. Just a shame that a free legal education for everyone is not being thrown in, in the Access to Justice and equality drive.

But Job would today represent the civilised producers of goods and employers in general whilst the poor who eat roots in the desert are the unemployed on benefits. Just wondering how they can have children if they are too weak to work for him and then mock him.

(PS: Non religious readers can substitute god for nature)