Indo-UK News and Discussion - April 2013

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 14 Mar 2014 22:19

guys take it easy for the BENIS lingo on other threads... Keep it to BENIS thread please. There's increasing spillover...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Mar 2014 02:53

RIP Tony Benn and Bob Crow,the two most important and colourful figures of British Socialism and the Labour Party.

The deaths within a few days of the UK's most prominent Labour leaders,TU Boss Crow and highly respected MP for decades, Tony Benn,will be massively felt by the Labour party for a very long time to come. While Crow was the spearhead and battering ram of the TU movement,erudite,sophisticated Benn was the conscience keeper of the House for 5 decades,who reminded his fellow MPs and the nation whenever British policies went off the rails,most splendidly demonstrated in the "Anti-War" movement against the warmongering of B.Liar and co. over Britain's shameful poodle-like support for America's illegal wars.In fact Tony Benn's demise will be felt all across the globe ,a pure soul who gave up a privileged background to fight for the rights of ordinary working class people and the man in the street relentlessly all his life.Benn was a giant of his time,one whose kind we may never see again in our lifetime.

Tony Benn while at Oxford,fought against Apartheid,while David Cameron fought to "hang Mandela"! "Crocodile" Cameron now sheds copious crocodile tears over Benn's death.

http://rt.com/op-edge/uk-media-socialis ... death-874/

With the death this week of left-wing leaders Bob Crow and Tony Benn, the UK has lost two of its most principled fighters for socialist ideas.

The right-wing media, which never tired of attacking them when they were alive, now hypocritically praises them in obituaries.

In a poignant twist, it so happened that Crow, 52, and Benn, 88, died within three days of each other. Crow, a no-nonsense working-class Londoner, was widely regarded as the UK’s most effective trade union leader, leading numerous campaigns and strikes to defend the jobs and conditions of transport workers, particularly London Tube drivers. Benn, one of the major intellectual figures on the left, was a rare bird in UK politics – someone who started out as a moderate reformer and Cabinet minister, and became progressively more radical and socialist as he grew older.

Both were passionate in their belief in ordinary working people, the 99 percent, to change society and wrest power from the richest elite, the 1 percent, and both were staunch opponents of the UK establishment. Yet that same elite, be it government officials, mainstream political leaders or big business, hypocritically praised both men in nauseous obituaries, tweets and sound bites within hours of their deaths – after attacking them mercilessly when they were alive.
Boris’s U-turn

London’s Conservative mayor, Boris Johnson, who clashed repeatedly with Bob Crow over the city’s plans to cut jobs and services on the Tube, typified the sheer brass nerve of that elite. Doing a complete U-turn to heap praise on Crow as a “fighter and a man of character” after news broke of his death Tuesday, Johnson said: "Bob fought tirelessly for his beliefs and for his members. There can be absolutely no doubt that he played a big part in the success of the Tube, and he shared my goal to make transport in London an even greater success. It's a sad day."

Yet just a few weeks earlier in a confrontation on LBC radio, Johnson accused Crow of "talking complete nonsense" and “holding a gun to Londoners' heads.”

"The blame for this strike lies squarely with union leaders,” Johnson said in another interview, “who have resorted to myths and stunts in a pathetic attempt to justify a strike that is utterly pointless.”
Fighting for workers’ jobs and public services

Crow, a militant trade unionist ever since starting work for London Underground at the age of 16, will be sorely missed among the UK’s 7 million trade union members, for whom he was one of the few workers’ leaders who was prepared to stand up to the establishment and fight against austerity, job cuts and brutal capitalism at a time of deep economic crisis.

His death Tuesday morning, at the age of 52, came after he suffered a sudden aneurysm and massive heart attack at home in the East End of London. It came at a time when his union had just won a victory over Johnson’s plans to cut 1,000 Tube workers’ jobs, forcing the politician to back down after successful strikes in February.

Crow’s passing was met with a wave of tributes from ordinary trade union activists, workers and Londoners from all walks of life, as well as the wider socialist and left movement in the UK.

That Crow attracted such widespread affection among workers was no surprise to members of his RMT union, as he was highly successful in defending their living standards. At a time of recession, when wages and jobs have been under brutal assault since the crisis of 2008, drivers on the London Underground represented by RMT have received pay rises each year, and their current starting salary is over 48,000 pounds a year – far in advance of the 22,000 pounds for a Metropolitan Police officer or 27,000 for a teacher in the UK capital.

Many workers said they wished that their union leaders fought as hard for their members as Crow did for his.

Sadly, most union leaders in Britain, like the Labour Party leaders, have accepted big business’s mantra of austerity – effectively siding with the fat cat millionaires in the Conservative-Liberal government and the City of London, who constantly call for workers and the poor to pay for the capitalists’ crisis. Instead, Bob fought for his members’ rights – not just on pay, but also for higher pensions and for better health and safety on the Tube.

One London newspaper, on the news of Bob’s death, went so far as to run a cartoon of him in angels’ wings being met at Heaven’s pearly gates, with Bob immediately telling St. Peter: “Now, about these terms and conditions…”

The extent of the media’s hypocrisy can be seen from how they treated Crow when he was a threat to their wealth and privilege. Then, the London Evening Standard and the Express, for example, derided Crow as “the most hated man in Britain,” while the Conservative-supporting Daily Mail constantly jeered at him for continuing to live in a council house while on a comfortable salary as a union leader, and for his unashamed pride in his working-class roots.

On Tuesday, it was as if the “boss class,” as Crow would have referred to them, were taking a day off from attacking him to praise his personal qualities as a “fighter” – while glossing over the socialist ideas and the movement he fought for.

As Suzanne Moore commented on the Guardian’s website: “It is as though a truce can be brokered for a few hours during which the ruling class pretends to admire the guts of those it lives off, before it goes back to selling off bits of the NHS to people who run inadequate gyms, directing jobseekers to food banks and insisting zero-hours contracts are the future. Bob Crow understood the fight was never fair, but it was necessary. He never wanted to be ‘them,’ and that is why ‘they’ finally doff their caps to the man.”
‘Media hate… may have been a factor’ in Crow’s death – Livingstone

A former Labour London Mayor and council leader, Ken Livingstone, himself often vilified as “Red Ken” when he was the left-leaning leader of the Greater London Council in the 1980s, told the BBC in an interview that the constant media vilification of Bob, the "endless strain of being a media hate figure" had taken its toll and "may have been a factor" in his death.

Livingstone said Bob had "put on a very brave front" in response to constant media criticism, but that he knew that it "takes its toll," the Huffington Post UK reported.

"I also expect just the endless strain of being a media hate figure, you know, the following on holiday, people intruding into every aspect of your life, I've been through that, it does take a toll, that might have been a factor," he said. "It's that constant unremitting intrusion. People outside the door. People chasing up old girlfriends. It's got worse and worse with the passage of time because there are more media outfits doing that."
Labour – no longer a workers’ party

The vast gulf between Crow and the Labour Party, which expelled Crow’s union a decade ago for being too left-wing, was papered over this week by the party’s leader, Ed Miliband, in his own “tribute” to Crow.

In a statement, Miliband, whose party had just voted to cut historic ties to the trade unions days before Crow’s death, had the gall to say: ‘Bob Crow was a major figure in the labour movement and was loved and deeply respected by his members.'

‘I didn’t always agree with him politically but I always respected his tireless commitment to fighting for the men and women in his union. He did what he was elected to do, was not afraid of controversy and was always out supporting his members across the country.'

But in an interview given to Afshan Rattansi, for RT’s Going Underground program, just weeks before his death, Crow pointed out that it was Miliband and the Labour Party leaders who had refused to support workers.

“When it comes to a strike, you have to decide whose side you’re on,” Crow told Rattansi, standing in the very RMT meeting room where the RMT’s predecessor transport union had helped to found the Labour Party 100 years ago. “You can’t sit on the fence. You’re either supporting the workers in struggle, or the employer.”

Crow added that the Labour Party’s policies today are “totally against what our union stands for.”

In May’s European elections, Crow had planned to stand along with other RMT members and the Socialist Party under the banner, “No to EU – Yes to workers’ rights.”
Benn another target of right-wing media

In this media hypocrisy – hounding left-wing leaders when they were alive, and lionizing them when they’re dead – Crow was not alone.

Tony Benn, another thorn in the side of the British establishment for decades, also received glowing media tributes from his enemies and opponents after his death Friday morning. The BBC even described David Cameron as “leading” tributes to Benn, whom he described as “magnificent.”

The idea that Cameron could have anything in common with Benn is bizarre, whichever way you look at it.

Benn, a Labour MP from 1950 to 2001, moved progressively to the left in his parliamentary career. From a Cabinet minister in the 1960s and ‘70s, Benn became the standard-bearer of the Labour left in the 1980s, standing unsuccessfully for Deputy Leader in 1981, offering full support for the epic miners’ strike in 1984-85 and innumerable other struggles against Margaret Thatcher’s government, including the Liverpool City Council fight to improve funding for local jobs and services, the magnificent anti-poll tax campaign – which brought Thatcher’s downfall in 1990 – and GCHQ workers’ protests against their trade union rights being taken away from them. In recent years, Benn was chair of the “Stop the War” coalition and a vocal opponent of austerity policies practiced by Conservatives, Liberals and Labour in successive governments.

Cameron, meanwhile, has presided over the biggest increase in poverty and unemployment in the UK for decades – rivaling even that perpetrated by Thatcher, his political hero.

Back in the 1980s, Cameron even called for Nelson Mandela to be hung while a member of the Tory Bullingdon club at Oxford – while Benn was a leading member of the Anti-Apartheid movement in the UK.
‘Dirty tricks’ campaign

The so-called “tributes” to Benn and Crow in the right-wing UK media also have to be seen in the light of their constant campaign of vilification against not just them, but any left-wing leaders.

Benn in the 1980s was described by Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper as “the most dangerous man in Britain,” and the whole of Fleet Street routinely called Benn and his fellow socialists “the Loony Left.”

And the “black PR” did not stop there – it included “dirty tricks” campaigns by the media, the security services and big business to discredit left-wing leaders by digging up falsified allegations of wrongdoing and corruption, or just dredge through their private lives.

Over the last 30 years, left-wing trade unionists and workers’ leaders have been accused by the right-wing media of all kinds of crimes and misdemeanors – but the allegations turned out to be completely false and trumped-up.

Arthur Scargill, the leader of the National Union of Mineworkers during its strike against Thatcher’s government, was falsely accused throughout the UK media of using strikers’ hardship payments to pay off his mortgage, and equally falsely accused of taking money from Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. Both accusations were proved nearly 10 years later to be complete fictions, dreamed up by an MI5 mole planted inside the NUM as chief executive, Roger Windsor, and plugged ceaselessly by the Daily Mirror newspaper and its billionaire proprietor, Robert Maxwell. Maxwell committed suicide shortly afterward, when he himself was found to have defrauded Mirror employees of hundreds of millions of pounds in stolen pension funds.

Another left-wing leader, Derek Hatton, a leader of the Militant-led Liverpool Labour Council that created jobs and built 5,000 council houses at a time of recession and great poverty in the city under Thatcher, was on the receiving end of a character assassination by the media for years, and the police falsely brought charges against him of fraud. Several years later the charges were quietly dropped due to lack of any evidence.

In yet another case, Tommy Sheridan, a prominent Scottish socialist and anti-poll tax leader in the 1980s and ‘90s, was sent to jail a few years ago for perjury after taking the News of the World to court over allegations about his private life. The sentence was later quashed and Sheridan freed after it was revealed that Murdoch’s newspaper had illegally hacked Sheridan’s phone.

The other tack that the UK media has taken in recent times is to condemn leaders such as Crow and Benn as out of date and their ideas as irrelevant.

The BBC’s uber-establishment, right-wing interviewer, Jeremy Paxman, just a month ago tried to portray Crow as a “dinosaur” for his stubborn insistence on fighting for the working class.

Crow’s reply summed up his common-sense approach to trade unions, and showed how absolutely necessary fighters like him and Benn are for the 21st century: ‘They were around for a long while,” Crow said of dinosaurs. “People join a trade union for job security, being safe, best possible pay, best possible conditions, decent pensions and a world that lives in peace. That’s what we strive for. And we’re not going to put that on the agenda, who else is going to? Is the Labour Party? Who’s going to be the people on the street holding the banner if the trade union doesn’t?”

Here is another tribute,but also a right wing viewpoint of why Socialism failed .It is also noteworthy ,not noted in this analysis,why capitalism failed because of the rapacious greed of western bankers who swindled trillions of dollars of the money of ordinary folk,leading to the global financial collapse from which we are still deep in the woods.Britain's collapse of the RBS (Royal bank of Scotland) despite emergency funding,shows how under crony capitalism,the situation is equal to even worse than the worst period of a Labour govt.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timst ... socialism/
Tony Benn, Bob Crow and the sad death of British socialism
Tim Stanley
Dr Tim Stanley is a historian of the United States. His new book about Hollywood politics is out in May.

Socialism died this week, not once but twice. First with the passing of Bob Crow, the working-class union man. Second, with the passing of Tony Benn, the aristocratic firebrand. And how beautiful their dreams were. That the economy should be run on the basis of need, not profit; that power should be in the hands of the many, not the few; that privilege should whither and equality thrive; that men should live in peace with each other. Sadly, it was only a dream – and the lives of these two dreamers explains why it came to an end.

There was a basic contradiction in the postwar British Left between the desire to construct socialism and the desire to improve the material wealth of the workers. Benn represented the ideologues in government, the Sixties generation who though that paradise could be built from Whitehall. Oh, it was going to be so easy. Nationalise the top companies, tax the rich, allocate resources and plan, plan, plan. Everything was to be planned, from house production to the dinner ladies' weekly pay. It was mathematical, precise. Problem was that it didn't work. The state didn't prove to be a competent manager of things produced far cheaper and to a far higher quality in the free market. The one thing the government did create effectively was inflation, so much inflation that it gobbled up profits and – to the surprise of the socialist mangers – actually increased unemployment. By the late 1970s, they called it stagflation.

And that's where Bob Crow came in. Although active many years later, he still embodied the spirit of the Seventies militant trades-unions that were philosophically committed to socialism but who did it so much harm by constantly demanding higher wages. The problem was twofold. First, as Barbara Castle famously noted, a public sector strike hits the working class hardest – without buses, trains or tubes how could they get to work to put food on the table? Second, the constant demand for wage increases fuelled inflation, reduced the value of social benefits and made it impossible to manage the economy from Whitehall. Many Labour people eventually grasped this and embraced the idea of curbing union action (Castle first, with her white paper "In Place of Strife"). But the far Left, like Benn, were too much in love with a romantic ideal of an organised working class, so they blocked reform. The result was the Winter of Discontent: rubbish piled up high; corpses went unburied. Labour was thrown out of office for 18 years. And throughout that time, Tony Benn became shorthand for everything Britain risked if it voted Labour in again. It is no surprise that Conservatives are writing flattering obituaries. It was the Labour Right that despised Bennism, not the Right in general.

Tony Benn graduated to the status of a cultural icon because – sorry to say it – his politics became irrelevant. By the 1990s, his ideas were so anachronistic (nationalise businesses! ban the bomb! squeeze the rich till the pips squeak!) that even Tories could discover him as a genial diarist and chat show guest and come to admire his comforting love of pipes and tea. He was indeed a dear, charismatic, kindly man. The Right felt differently about Bob Crow, of course, because he was a leader of one of the few militant unions that survived Thatcherism.

This is not to denigrate Benn's career; its failures were tragic rather than to be celebrated. And there is still much to admire. Remember that he was a patriot who fought for his country, a democrat, and a man who thought Britons should control their lives from London rather than Brussels. Most of all, he yearned for a world without war. He once said: "If you can plan for war, why can't you plan for peace?" That's socialism in a nutshell: planning for things that will, sadly, probably never come.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Mar 2014 03:08

Some vignettes from the life and times of Tony benn.

His father was a Labour MP and Secretary of State for India. What other child in the land could claim to have been given a chocolate biscuit in 10 Downing Street by Ramsay MacDonald, to have had conversations with Lloyd George at the age of 12, to have knelt next to Mahatma Gandhi, and to have played with the children of Oswald Mosley, when he was still a Labour MP? Benn's political memory went back not for a quarter of a century, not for half a century, but for three-quarters of a century.

Tony Benn’s political career was extraordinary for many reasons, not least for how long it lasted. He entered the Commons in 1950 as its youngest MP, aged 25, and bowed out in 2001, a span of more than 50 years, making him the longest-serving MP in the history of the Labour Party and one of the longest in British history. Yet he professed to find parliamentary democracy restricting, and gave the eighth volume of his diaries, covering the years after he ceased to be an MP, the title "More Time for Politics" as he made himself available to be a platform speaker at protest meetings across the land.

It seemed that Benn's career as an MP would end abruptly in November 1960 with the death of his father, who had been made Viscount Stansgate in 1942. A centuries-old constitutional convention required the son and heir to give up his seat and spend the rest of his life in the House of Lords, but he fought with great stubbornness to stay where he was. When his seat was declared vacant, he stood as the Labour candidate and easily won the resulting by-election, but the result was declared invalid and his Conservative runner up, Malcolm St Clair was declared the winner. In 1963, Benn finally secured a change in the law, and St Clair honourably resigned, forcing another by-election, which Benn easily won. His success enabled Alec Douglas-Home, the 14th Earl of Home, to become Prime Minister later that year.

"My mother, when she read me bible stories," said Tony Benn, "always distinguished between the kings of Israel who exercised power and the prophets of Israel who preached righteousness, and I was brought up to believe in the prophets rather than the kings."

Benn had a huge strength - he had the most exquisite parliamentary good manners of any MP in the House of Commons, in the second half of the 20th century. He recalled to me, "My dad told me, 'Never wrestle with a chimney sweep,' which was a curious piece of advice to give an eight-year-old, but now I understand exactly what he meant: If someone plays dirty with you, don't play dirty with him, or you will get dirty, too." Benn said that his attempt to keep personal abuse out of political controversy had been shaped by that simple phrase.

In 1943, he joined the RAF. Flying training took place at Bulawayo in what was then Southern Rhodesia. Ever curious about his surroundings, Benn became friendly with an old Matabele warrior who had fought against Cecil Rhodes. He went to the local hospital for Africans, and found the conditions appalling. He was amazed to find 60,000 white people in total control, living off the land that had been stolen by Rhodes from the Matabele and the Mashona. It was this experience which ignited Benn's interest in the anti-colonial movements, leading to friendship with Fenner Brockway and others in the Movement for Colonial Freedom, which became one of Benn's central interests after he was elected to Parliament for Bristol South-East.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Mar 2014 23:04

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-26526574
Nuclear submarine HMS Tireless refused United Arab Emirates entry

A nuclear submarine had to be diverted to India after it was refused entry to the United Arab Emirates (UAE).It is understood Plymouth-based HMS Tireless sat in international waters for more than a week while a replacement crew waited in the port.Families of those on board who travelled to meet the crew had to return to the UK without seeing them.The Royal Navy said it was only a "delay" and "not a safety issue". UAE authorities have not commented.
In 2003, the vessel - which has a top speed of 32 knots or 36.8 mph - collided with an object at sea prompting a Ministry of Defence inquiryIn 2007, two mechanics died on board when a self-contained oxygen generator exploded while the vessel was at the North PoleIn 2012, HMS Tireless returned to Plymouth after a leak in its nuclear reactorA week after the vessel was not given clearance, a decision was taken to dock in Goa.Some families are understood to be seeking compensation for the cost of flights and a week of accommodation while in the UAE.The Royal Navy said: "We do not discuss submarine movements for reasons of security."However, I can confirm that HMS Tireless's visit programme in the Gulf of Oman was delayed. We do not routinely comment on submarine operations so we are unable to discuss the detail, although we can confirm it was not a safety issue."A small number of families did travel to the region at their own expense in anticipation of the visit. They were kept informed of the situation by local Royal Navy personnel ashore."The Foreign and Commonwealth Office denied there were any diplomatic issues between the UK and the UAE.It said: "The UK has a long history of co-operation and friendship with the UAE."We maintain regular contact at the most senior levels and work together on shared interests and security challenges across the region."

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 18 Mar 2014 00:55

Britain has lost America’s respect

Dean Acheson remarked in the 1950s that Britain lost an empire and had not yet found a role. For the next half-century, it found a niche as America’s global lieutenant — harnessing its influence in Washington to punch above its weight elsewhere. Events in Crimea over the past three weeks have underlined how fast even that is fading. Once America’s “go-to” ally, the United Kingdom is not even third on today’s priority list. When it comes to handling Vladimir Putin, Germany, France and even Poland rank ahead of David Cameron’s government in Washington.

The most visible change is in the shrinking size of UK defence spending. The US may be cutting the size of its army, but it still has almost 600,000 in uniform. At 102,000, the British army is far smaller than the US marine corps. And it is set to fall to just 82,000 next year, which is barely larger than America’s Special Forces. Following the principle of having three personnel at home to one in the field, this means Britain can only sustain 20,000 soldiers on the battlefront for a short period of time. For longer deployments, such as Afghanistan, 10,000 will be the limit. If the best the UK can do is to police Helmand province in Afghanistan or Basra in Iraq — and even then, not very well — its influence in Washington is unlikely to recover.

The same applies to the UK’s depleting military hardware. For the first time since inventing the aircraft carrier, the UK now deploys a grand total of zero. That is supposed to jump back up to two by 2019, but no one in the Pentagon is counting on it. Next year, the UK’s strategic defence review coincides with its general election.

The British have nothing like the attachment to their military as Americans. The days of outsized UK military clout in the US look numbered. “In terms of the UK-US defence relationship we are at the tail-end of a comet,” says General Jim Mattis, the former head of US central command.

Defence budgets can rise again. And the UK remains a great power in terms of its intelligence capabilities, but boasting about the close relationship between Washington’s National Security Agency and the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters is hardly a good idea nowadays. Countries such as Germany view the UK as an extension of America’s surveillance state. To the extent this further alienates continental Europe from the UK, it also undercuts the latter’s clout in Washington. Under Margaret Thatcher, Britain helped shape — and even drive — the European Union’s (EU) economic integration. Under Cameron, it prefers to carp from the sidelines. Last year, Phil Gordon, President Barack Obama’s adviser on Europe, caused a fracas in the UK by saying it was in America’s interest to see Britain strongly participating in the EU. He was right then and would be even more so today. Alas, Cameron pushed ahead with plans to hold an in/out referendum in 2017, if his Conservative party was elected.

Until recently, Americans have paid little attention to September’s Scottish referendum on independence from the UK. Those who have believed the Scots will probably decide against it. That remains to be seen: Scottish nationalists still have five months to change the poll numbers. However, America’s sense of a timeless Britain anchored firmly in its own identity is no longer taken for granted. From a distance, the UK’s destiny is starting to look wobbly. Can you depend on a “special relationship” with an ally that is no longer sure of who it is?

All this may be irrelevant to most British people — and even welcome. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were always unpopular. And cutting defence budgets is far more in tune with British sensibility than, say, taking the axe to the National Health Service. Moreover, the UK’s diplomatic service still punches above its weight. The embassy in Washington is among the most respected in town.
Yet, the UK is suffering from a growing reputational problem that threatens to undercut its still considerable soft power. In a recent piece in the New York Times, the author Ben Judah described London as the centre of Russian money laundering. “Any moralising remnant of the British empire is gone,” he wrote. “It has turned back to the pirate England of Sir Walter Raleigh.”

The argument would have sat comfortably in any British tabloid. But it drew on a strong underlying truth. Britain’s reluctance to impose tough sanctions on Russia is probably as much to do with BP’s large joint venture in Siberia — and the dividends it pays out — as from diplomatic calculation. Cameron’s disastrous recent visit to China was also noticed in the US. It reinforced the view that Britain’s worldview — like its defence budget — now resembles most of continental Europe. “Who would have thought that a British prime minister would go to China with no agenda other than selling things?” said one US official.

Then there is Tony Blair. The UK’s former prime minister used to be revered in the US for his lofty moralisms. People were also seduced by his charisma. Now he is better known for tawdry salesmanship. Former US presidents tend to fade from view, such as George W. Bush, or promote good causes, such as Jimmy Carter. Blair is out to make money — and lots of it. There would be an outcry if Bush took millions of dollars from Kuwait to advise it on “democracy”. When Blair does it, people just shrug. Alas, where Blair goes, the flag now seems to follow.

— Financial Times

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 18 Mar 2014 03:03

British Army is not an army anymore. It's just a defence force. I heard on the radio that not only are regiments being disbanded, but they are sometimes converting existing ones into joint regiments as they cannot afford to run the regiments like in the past.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Mar 2014 09:37

If Scotland votes for Independence in Sept.,"poof" goes Britain's Trident bases in Scotland,as Salmond and co. ared ead against an N-base on their territory.The military have warned the govt. about this,which is why a "full court press" is being applied to the referendum,to prevent Scotland's secession at any cost,using any means.Unfortunately for HMG,007 has defected and is fighting for the other side in this vote!!!

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 19 Mar 2014 00:04

Islamic teacher who sexually abused girl, 11, spared jail in YuK

An Islamic teacher who sexually abused a young girl as he taught her the Koran has been spared prison after a court was told he is on benefits and his wife speaks ‘very little English’.

Maknojioa was said to have ‘favoured’ the girl and believed the touching was ‘appropriate’ and given to reassure her.

The court heard that the sexual activity spanned over a period of around nine months

But he was let go. Why?

Frida Hussain, mitigating, said: ‘This is a man who doesn’t pose any risk of harm to his children. He has problems with his kidneys and is due to go back into hospital for a further follow-up operation. He is married with six children, that family unit depends on him. His wife doesn’t work and speaks very little English, they are dependent on him to lead their lives and with the running of the household. One of the children has learning difficulties. Because he doesn’t teach now he is reliant on benefits and he has never claimed benefits before.

Here's what the dhimmi judge had to say:

‘I bear in mind your own family circumstances. I accept you are a very good father to your six children, your wife speaks little English and administration falls upon you.

'I bear in mind that social services conducted their own assessment and found that you do not pose a risk. You are now unemployed living on state benefits.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 19 Mar 2014 02:53

^^Thanks Philip. I had always heard of Tony Benn, and with respect in Indian circles when I was in UK for some time. Gives a good background.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2014 03:33

Philip wrote:If Scotland votes for Independence in Sept.,"poof" goes Britain's Trident bases in Scotland,as Salmond and co. are dead against an N-base on their territory. The military have warned the govt. about this,which is why a "full court press" is being applied to the referendum,to prevent Scotland's secession at any cost,using any means.Unfortunately for HMG, 007 has defected and is fighting for the other side in this vote!!!

Philip, Isn't this UK's Crimea problem?

You mean Sean Connery, the actor?

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 19 Mar 2014 07:16

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-sean-connery-backs-yes-vote-and-says-its-an-opportunity-not-to-be-missed-9163489.html

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Mar 2014 12:03

Abhi_G wrote:Lalmohan babu - let me tell an isshstory that I wrote a few times before in brf.

Big massa univ on the east coast published distorted map of desh (no northeast, no j&k) in their maggajine to announce "India did not lose much due to 2G scam" fame sibbal's vijjit. Not a pipsqueak from sibbal or deshi embassy.

Two loyal afsaars of brf shot email artillery to the magajjine editor in retaliation to the provocation. Magajjine editor turned out to be "oh yes not surprised" brit.

Enemy artillery was heavy yet our afsaars held their ground.

brit editor leaked that distorted map wajj from an Indian gentleman only.

One of the two afsaars promised to publish brittany naksha without scotland in anger.

The guns went silent there.

There was no point to check the enemy's claim. But the enemy's psyche was revealed. They have used this argument that "Indians have done it actually" to absolve and transfer their complicity in the crime and genocide. Of course, we have our share of argumentative birathers with a high sense of fairness too.

+1

Any and every atrocity on Indians is dismissed as ah, caste system, ah dowreee, ah brutal hindoos. How long will we fall for these tricks?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Mar 2014 13:22

Karan,the racist mentality of the Anglo-Saxons ,esp. the "5 eye nations"s",US,UK,Canada<Oz and New Zealand (the least racist) ,and imperial belief that "God is an Englishman,American,whatever",has not left them despite losing their colonies.I know of two cases in India where NGOs of one of these 5 have displayed their racism and bigotry and contempt for Indians.The condescending and patronising manner in which we are treated and referred to,always the "right wing Hindu BJP",with never a thought about the "right-wing Christian Tory party" in the UK or the "neo-con fundamentalist Republican party" in the US! The "Klan",NRA and its Wild West gunslinger attitude has permeated the soul of the US establishment.I commented just a day ago about the deliberate labelling of the "White House".It is not accidental.

To the establishment of these nations,we are "turd class",fit only to serve at their will and pleasure.Colonialism was replaced by neo-colonialism.The manner in which Devyani has been treated in the US is astonishing for its arrogance and racism.It is why they and the Euro-Peons whose monarchist and imperial roots run deep,cannot stomach another "white" nation,Russia,which ushered in the Russian revolution sounding the death-knell of the monarchies of Europe,exercising its legitimate interests in the Ukraine/Crimea.Even before the Ukranian crisis hit the streets,the manner in which the Sochi Winter games was decried and sneered at beggared belief.The worst examples of western hypocrisy is on display as it conveniently forgets its war crimes where millions have died in recent years thanks to its military adventurism across the globe. The resurgence of fascism and anti-Semitism in Europe is a pointer to worse things to come.

We have to stand firm as a sovereign,independent nation,whose interests come first and not shamefully kowtow to the white man as Surrender Singh has done. One sincerely hopes that the nation elects a new govt. which outs Indian interests first.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 19 Mar 2014 22:25

George Osborne during today's budget said they want to kick Russia out of G8.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Mar 2014 23:15

Times of India article from London

1 in 4 Indians believe India was fighting the UK in WWI

1 in 4 Indians believe India was fighting UK in WWI
Mar 27, 2014, 08.32PM IST TNN[ Kounteya Sinha ]

More than 1.4 million Indians fought as part of the British forces making the contingent Britain’s biggest volunteer army.
LONDON: Indians are in dire need of a crash course in history, as far as World War One (WW1) is concerned.

Over 1 in 4 Indians have revealed that they believe India was fighting the British and against the UK in the WW1. In reality, India was actually part of Britain when the war started in 1914 (2014 being the centenary of the great war).

More than 1.4 million Indians fought as part of the British forces making the contingent Britain's biggest volunteer army. During the course of the war, over 100,000 Indians were killed or wounded by the war's end.

As part of its commemoration to mark 100 years of the war, the British Council commissioned YouGov to carry out a survey among the adult populations of Egypt, France, Germany, India, Russia, Turkey and the UK to gauge their knowledge surrounding the war.

The report says "When asked which country India was fighting for, 27% assumed that the country was fighting against the UK. The largest contribution to Britain's war effort came from India. The total number of Indian troops amounted to some 1.4-1.5 million men, serving in France, East Africa, Mesopotamia and Egypt".

Another interesting myth that emerged was that 78% of French respondents assumed India was neutral, when, in fact, India provided over 1.4 million soldiers - many of them to defend French soil.

Majority of Indians also weren't aware that Mahatma Gandhi's first civil disobedience campaign against British authority in 1919 stemmed from the unrealised hope that India's contribution to WW1 of around 1.5 million men would be honored with a transition to self-government.

The report says "Mahatma Gandhi and Muhammad Ali Jinnah assumed that Britain would honour India's contribution to the war with a transition to self-government. Their expectations were dashed in November 1918 with the extension of martial law".

"In February 1919, Gandhi launched his first India-wide campaign of civil disobedience against British authority. By the outbreak of the Second World War, resistance efforts redoubled. Indian nationalists, under the auspices of the 'Quit India' movement, were not going to risk their lives in a British war effort twice with little tangible return".

This perhaps, the report says, explains the way in which the First World War gives rise to negative perceptions of the UK for some in India.

For the survey, there were 7,488 responses - Egypt (1,052), France (1,029), Germany (1,070), India (1,215), Russia (1,019), Turkey (1,022) and the UK (1,081).

The research revealed a widespread lack of understanding of the global scale.

The report "Remember The World As Well As The War" shows that knowledge of the conflict is limited.

In the UK, less than 22% of the 1081 people questioned were aware that Asia was involved.

The report also revealed the extent to which it still influences overseas views of the UK.

Around 45% of people questioned in India said the UK's role in the war has a positive effect on how they view the UK today.
Almost three quarters of people (72%) across the seven countries surveyed believe their country is still affected by the consequences of the war.

Only 1 in 3 Indians (34%) knew that the location of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie, which sparked the war, was Sarajevo.

A large majority of Indians (75%) feel broadly positive towards the UK. In contrast, when asked about their attitudes with reference to the UK's role in WW1, over one in 10 state that these have a negative (11%) effect on their views of the country today.

The war certainly started in Europe. On 28 June 1914 in Sarajevo, Gavrilo Princip,a Bosnian Serb student, assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Habsburg throne, and his wife Sophie, hoping to end Austria-Hungary's rule over Bosnia-Herzegovina. Exactly one month later, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia.

A series of alliances rapidly brought Germany, France, Belgium, Russia and the UK into the conflict, which, within a week, became what we now know as the WW1.

Economically, the contributions from different parts of empires were crucial for Britain during the war.

By 1917, Canada provided Britain with half its shrapnel, 42% of its 4.5-inch shells and 25% of its 6-inch shells; 97% of Australia's meat was consumed in Britain during the war while India's jute supply was turned into sandbags.

This distorted view is due to two main factors: UK reluctance to acknowledge Indian contributions to saving he Empire in both world wars and post Independence Indian elite repugnance to take credit for the Indian contributions to the world wars and take credit for the Freedom Struggle for political benefits. Hence Indian history books do not highlight the Indian contributions in aiding Anglo-Saxon West. For example Tata Steel in Jamshedpur was the mos modern and largest steel plant in Britsh Empire during World War I. Ref "A Man of Steel" by US steelmaker of his experience leading that plant during WWI.
And the third factor it happened so long ago.

Growing up I had the benefit of a General Knowledge book published in 1942 from Lahore called Mohan's Encyclopedia which had awesome facts of Indian contributions.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2014 23:48

ramana wrote:
1 in 4 Indians believe India was fighting UK in WWI
This distorted view is due to two main factors: UK reluctance to acknowledge Indian contributions to saving he Empire in both world wars and post Independence Indian elite repugnance to take credit for the Indian contributions to the world wars and take credit for the Freedom Struggle for political benefits. Hence Indian history books do not highlight the Indian contributions in aiding Anglo-Saxon West. For example Tata Steel in Jamshedpur was the mos modern and largest steel plant in Britsh Empire during World War I. Ref "A Man of Steel" by US steelmaker of his experience leading that plant during WWI.
And the third factor it happened so long ago.

Growing up I had the benefit of a General Knowledge book published in 1942 from Lahore called Mohan's Encyclopedia which had awesome facts of Indian contributions.

Britain was taking the money from the Empire - India to fund the WWI.
They got the money as well as the troops for the War. Most of it from the princely states and the princely states were told about the war effort and european situation. Indian elite believed that they were part of the European elite. They were helping to save Britain in Europe.

In the Book - Paris 1919 during the 6 months of negotiation for peace conference.
The Versailles Conference, the partitioning of Europe , through the assignment of unilateral war reparations was attended by the Princely states and their emissaries. They had no clue that the boundaries of Europe and the monarchies were going to be destroyed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peac ... ence,_1919

The British cabinet never decided whether to support a united or dismembered Russia. The United States was sympathetic to a strong, united Russia as a counterpoise to Japan, but Britain feared a threat to India.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 29 Mar 2014 02:05

They were helping to save Britain in Europe.

Compare this with successor i.e. Indian democracy where people now believe that the British were here to save unsaved savages, heathens and pagans. In a democracy on the other hand, it is assumed that people are more aware than during colonial times of the past.

Post independence only tables have been turned..

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 29 Mar 2014 05:00

A large majority of Indians (75%) feel broadly positive towards the UK.

Some thing of concern and which is a direct result of Nehruvian Neocolonial worship foisted on us employing assorted Sikular Historians.

Hope fully internet and the access it provides , helps the true (often personal) historical narratives reach into the macauyalized masses and enlighten their opinion on the hitherto "benign" Briturds.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Mar 2014 05:28

Majority of Indians also weren't aware that Mahatma Gandhi's first civil disobedience campaign against British authority in 1919 stemmed from the unrealised hope that India's contribution to WW1 of around 1.5 million men would be honored with a transition to self-government.

The report says "Mahatma Gandhi and Muhammad Ali Jinnah assumed that Britain would honour India's contribution to the war with a transition to self-government. Their expectations were dashed in November 1918 with the extension of martial law".

"In February 1919, Gandhi launched his first India-wide campaign of civil disobedience against British authority. By the outbreak of the Second World War, resistance efforts redoubled. Indian nationalists, under the auspices of the 'Quit India' movement, were not going to risk their lives in a British war effort twice with little tangible return".

During the War, the Viceroy indicated India would get Dominion status for supporting the Empire's war effort. However they reneged and led Gandhi to start Civil Disobedience movement. The perfidy had double whammy for it diminished the legitimacy of British rule both among Indians and liberal British. Add to that the cream of British society perished in the European battlefields and ended what was begun with Magna Carta, Watt Tyler's rebellion and Cromwell's revolution.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Apr 2014 08:38

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 26159.html
Steve Richards

Monday 31 March 2014
Regardless of the result, pro-Unionists need to accept that Scotland has already left the UK behind

Tony Blair’s devolution settlement, intended to be cautious, was the trigger

The date of the referendum on Scottish independence moves closer and tensions rise. For now it is the “Better Together” campaign that is in trouble. There are briefings against its leader, Alistair Darling. Separately, an anonymous minister from Westminster undermines the pivotal argument that an independent Scotland could not keep the pound. Yes it could, suggests the minister, echoing Alex Salmond. The polls narrow a little, giving momentum to the campaign for independence. Momentum, even a perception of momentum, is what matters in a campaign.

The anxieties whirling around the Better Together campaign are wholly understandable and yet irrational. They are understandable because the stakes are so high. If voters were to back independence there would be a volcanic eruption in British politics without precedent since 1945. In the short term it is possible that David Cameron would be forced to resign as the Prime Minister who oversaw the break-up of the UK against his wishes. This places Cameron in the weirdly contorted position of aching for a national opinion poll lead for his party while knowing that such a development could boost the independence campaign in anti-Tory Scotland more than any other factor. That is Darling’s view – that a Tory poll lead would be the best possible gift to Salmond. What an irony that what Cameron most wants could destroy him.

The Labour Party would also be plunged into crisis as it faced the prospect of losing an army of MPs at Westminster elected from Scotland. Assuming the 2015 election went ahead, the subsequent Westminster parliament would have no legitimacy, at least until it was purged of the MPs from a country that was soon to be separate from the rest of the UK. No wonder when opinion polls shift even a millimetre in the direction of independence there are shudders at the top of British politics.

But the small shifts are no reflection on the Better Together campaign. Darling is the ideal head of such a multi-party organisation. He is easy to get on with, not burdened by an oversized ego, and yet is passionate about the issue. On the Today programme yesterday he convincingly conveyed quite how much he cared about the campaign and its outcome. Others are happy to work with him and he is keen to bring them in.

Last week he had a meeting with Charles Kennedy to discuss a prominent role for the former Lib Dem leader and formidable campaigner. It was Darling who co-ordinated the rare outbreak of unity when Osborne, Alexander and Balls issued their warning about the currency. The move was criticised unfairly. Should they not have advanced the most powerful argument of the lot – that currency union works only under political union? They might as well do so in the most forceful way possible, which is what happened.

There are some tensions within the campaign, but they were inevitable and unavoidable. Gordon Brown makes his moves separately, but better he makes them than remains silent. The polling guru John Curtice tells me that Brown has framed some of the most effective arguments in targeting the “don’t knows” – the decisive battleground in the campaign. Brown was never going to work closely with Darling.

The reason Better Together stumbles a little has nothing to do with the campaign, but the context in which it is fought. This should be of little comfort to those at the heart of the pro-union camp. They can change a campaign. They can do nothing about the context.

Scotland is already a different political country from England. Tony Blair’s devolution settlement, intended to be cautious and minimalist, was the trigger. The Edinburgh parliament acquired powers over key public services including health and education. The next trigger was the election in 2010 of a coalition of the radical right at Westminster, which was gripped above all by a hunger for further market-based reforms of the public services. As a result, England moved further away from Scotland as much as the other way around.

The reforms that transform England do not apply in Scotland. Contentious figures like Michael Gove, though Scottish, are irrelevant in Scotland. The NHS reforms that dominated the early phase of the Westminster parliament are not implemented in Scotland. When England thinks of a referendum, it is the one on Europe that may or may not happen. For Scotland it is the one on independence. Scotland wants to remain part of the EU. When Nigel Farage appears he is jeered rather than treated like the champion of the non-political class as he is in parts of England. England and Scotland are moving apart in front of our eyes. It is challenging in these circumstances for a campaign to argue about the benefits of the union. It is swimming against a tide.

I believe opinion polls. All of them still suggest that Darling and co will prevail. But the main party leaders at Westminster have promised to give Scotland greater powers once the referendum is out of the way. Whatever the result, the tide will continue to flow one way.
Better trains will benefit everyone

Network Rail has announced plans for £38bn of investment over the next five years. The additional cash – and the proposals – appear to be real and substantial. There will be bigger and more user-friendly stations, additional tracks, longer platforms, electric-powered trains, reopened railway lines and fewer level crossings. Separately, the plans for high-speed rail are still going ahead, at least they are in theory.

In an era when public investment is regarded on the whole as a waste of money and when even moderate Tory commentators argue (preposterously) that it is possible to return to pre-1997 spending levels while improving services, let us pause to celebrate the genuine and substantial improvements being planned.

The structure of our railways is bonkers and costly, with more agencies involved, it can seem, than it took to fight the Second World War. The fares are ludicrously expensive. It can take time-consuming negotiations just to get a bike on some trains. Services are unreliable to such an extent that Network Rail is being fined for poor punctuality just as it announces its investment plans.

Even so, people are turning to the joys of the train – where it is possible to work, read or watch a film – rather than be stuck in a traffic jam. Passenger numbers are soaring. Trains are becoming fashionable, and cars are starting to seem anachronistic. Almost by accident, austerity Britain is accompanied by a new age of the train. Hurrah!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Apr 2014 07:36

Flavour of the time in the UK (apart from Scotland) is Nigel Farrage,leader of the UKIP party that wants to boot the backside of the EU and babus of Brussels goodbye.Farrage recently convincingly won a debate on TV with Clegg,leader of the Liberals,coalition partners to the Tories.His scathing comments on the future of the Euro-Peons are prophetic.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... fear-sting

Nigel Farage – a natural Tory on course to drive the Tories from power
The Ukip leader is a gadfly who will one day go to ground. But before then it is Cameron, not Miliband, who has most to fear from his sting

Link to video: Debate for Europe: Nick Clegg takes on Nigel Farage in second debate

There is nothing new about Nigel Farage. He is just another politician adept at exploiting the gap that so easily opens between public opinion and a ruling class grown detached and introverted. Polls show his Ukip appealing not just to disgruntled Tories but a range of the politically dispossessed, particularly those who did badly from recession and expect little from recovery. Across Europe, most recently in France, rightwing parties are drawing on such a well of nationalist revanchism. Farage has proved an articulate exponent of the genre. He will not last and does not care about lasting. That is what makes him so dangerous to the established parties.

Wednesday night's second debating triumph of Farage over Nick Clegg pitted wild exaggeration (about Europe) against wild generalisation (about Europe). It could be mind-numbingly dull, but exaggeration proved the winner. What was mildly encouraging was that such gladiatorial exposure seems able actually to move opinion, a rare occurrence in politics.

Clegg's tactic was odd. He may have thought it smart to accuse his foe of wanting a return to the days of WG Grace and the gold standard. The audience knew this was untrue and yet might have welcomed such a prospect. For his part, Farage's style was direct, jargon-free and sardonic, a talent shared with Scotland's Alex Salmond and London's Boris Johnson. Britain's three most effective modern politicians seem a million miles from the cliches and robotic phraseology of Westminster. There is a fortune awaiting anyone who can teach British MPs how to speak.

Farage is in a long line of political eccentrics, from Enoch Powell, the SDP's "gang of four", and even early Clegg. They dazzle, fizzle and eventually fall, crushed by the potency of the two-party system. But they can have remarkable short-term impact. In 1968 Powellism won Lambeth council for the Tories by 62 seats to eight. In the 1980s the gang of four's SDP split Labour and kept the Tories in power for a decade. Clegg's Liberal Democrats denied the Tories a majority in 2010.

Predictions hold that Ukip's hour is at hand. In May's European elections it might emerge with the biggest vote, the first time a maverick party has done that in any nationwide election. The vote will be a referendum on Europe in all but name. Yet Europe does not lie at the core of Farage's appeal: in polls just a third even mention the issue.

As Robert Ford and Matthew Goodwin point out in their new study, Revolt on the Right, Ukip appeals not so much to Eurosceptics as to the Victor Meldrew persuasion, the "pessimistariat" of mostly former Tories, many working class, who were Thatcher's urban bedrock. To them Europe is merely code for a miasma of menaces to themselves and their way of life, from immigration to bureaucracy and central planning.
Toby Morison illustration 'Farage’s party is a classic political corrective. He has seized on the nation’s present discontents and is riding them for all they are worth.' Illustration by Toby Morison

Farage has given this appeal a shrewdly rebellious overlay reminiscent of Wilkes, Cobbett and even Tony Benn. He claims that the EU had made the working class "effectively an underclass". He calls on everyone to "Come and join the people's army! Let's topple the establishment!". Clegg looked as if he would rather bury his head in the cushions of a Brussels salon.

Conventional wisdom holds that Ukip draws support from everyone and so threatens none. Roughly half its voters are former Tories, the rest spread equally across the other parties (and undecideds). Yet as YouGov's Peter Kellner points out in the latest edition of Prospect magazine, while "Tories may not be the only source of Ukip support, they are by far the biggest". They donate to Ukip four times more supporters than Labour.

If Ukip holds on to its current 12% in next year's general election, says Kellner, "it will probably cost Cameron the election". Ed Miliband can gain power on just 35% of the poll, as did Tony Blair in 2005. Cameron simply must reduce Farage's support to half its present level to stand a chance. Of the 32 crucial Tory-held marginals identified by the party's private pollster, Lord Ashcroft, all have experienced a tripling in Ukip vote share since 2010. Farage has offered a deal in which he does not put up candidates against Eurosceptic MPs. He has little to lose as he is not going to win the election, but if he can help a few Eurosceptics save their seats, he will win over many Tories for being a decent chap. Cameron has vetoed the deal.

At the same time Cameron comes up with hamfisted promises on immigration and EU renegotiation, promises he has made before and not kept. He also leaves naked his flank to Farage's lethal skirmishes on matters such as HS2, wind turbines and rural planning laws, all of which are infuriating local Conservatives. Farage claims that every time the planning minister, Nick Boles, opens his mouth another thousand votes switch to Ukip.

Farage's party is a classic political corrective. He has seized on the nation's present discontents and is riding them for all they are worth. He has no answers, but he asks telling questions. He is a standing rebuke to politicians whose casual promises are made only to be broken. He is patently a Tory who should by rights be challenging Cameron from inside the party, not outside. A contest for the leadership between him and Boris Johnson would add vastly to the entertainment of the nation.

Until that day, the gadfly will continue to sting. It will one day go to ground, but before then it seems likely to humiliate Cameron's party in May and, next year, possibly drive it from power. The Tories are mad to underrate him.

Britain’s UKIP leader warns of ‘unpleasant’ end to EU
Published time: April 03, 2014

Neo-Nazism is on the rise in Europe and if nations do not opt-out of EU democratically, the entity has a violent end ahead of it, UKIP leader Nigel Farage said during a second public debate on the UK’s EU membership.

Farage specified that if EU members could not rein back control over their own countries diplomatically, then neo-Nazi groups, like the Golden Dawn party in Greece, would do it for them through violence.

"I want to see the EU brought to an end, but I want it to end democratically. If it does not end democratically I am afraid it will end unpleasantly,” Farage said during the debate with the leader of Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg.

According to the viewers, Nigel Farage won the television debate on Europe by 69 percent to 31 percent, a Guardian ICM poll showed.

During the debate Farage criticized big business, wealthy landowners and focused on growing violence in Europe, stating that his goal was to take care of the white working class.

"Already some countries are beginning to see the rise of, worryingly, political extremism. There is a neo-Nazi party in Greece that look certain to win seats in the European parliament …We see in Madrid, we see in Athens very large protests, tens of thousands of people, a lot of violence,” Farage said.

"If you take away from people their ability through the ballot box to change their futures because they have given away control of everything to somebody else then I am afraid they tend to resort to unpleasant means and that’s my big worry," he added.

Clegg responded with accusations that Farage is trying to turn back the clock back to the 19th century.

"I don't believe in the dishonesty in saying to the British people that you can turn the clock back. What next? Are you going to say we should return to the gold standard or a pre-decimal currency, or maybe get [Victorian-era cricket player] WG Grace to open the batting for England again? This is the 21st century, it is not the 19th century,” Clegg stated.

“There are huge difficulties in the eurozone, but the idea that it is somehow a good thing … for it to fall apart, to perhaps even predict, as Nigel Farage has just done, that it will do so with violence on the streets across Europe and at the same time to side with [Russian President] Vladimir Putin on some of the biggest issues, rather than our own country and the European democracy we work together with, I just think it’s a huge difference of priorities."

Other things discussed during the debate included immigration policies, trade and international issues such as Ukraine.

http://rt.com/news/farage-clegg-eu-debate-993/

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Apr 2014 04:31

Eric Pickles: Britain still a Christian nation – get over it
Communities secretary calls on militant atheists to stop imposing 'politically correct intolerance' on UK's Christians

Christianity'. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

"Militant atheists" should accept that Britain is a Christian country and "get over it", the communities secretary Eric Pickles said yesterday.

Pickles changed the law in 2012 to ensure that English parish councils could not face legal challenges for including prayers in public meetings, and accused the last Labour government of "diminishing Christianity" by suggesting that religion and politics could not mix.

The minister told delegates at the Conservative spring forum in London that non-believers should not be able to impose "politically correct intolerance" on others.

"I've stopped an attempt by militant atheists to ban councils having prayers at the start of meetings if they wish," said Pickles. "Heaven forbid. We're a Christian nation. We have an established church. Get over it. And don't impose your politically correct intolerance on others."

Pickles also said that the government had backed British values by stopping Whitehall from "appeasing extremism", whether it came from the English Defence League, militant Islamists or "the thuggish hard left".

"They're all as bad as each other," he said.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 07 Apr 2014 12:34

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/other-news/Case-determining-fate-of-Indian-doctors-in-UK-begins-on-Tuesday/articleshow/33363762.cms

A landmark case that will decide the fate of Indian doctors in UK - a challenge to the fairness of the Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA), the most crucial element of the exam process for trainee general physicians - is all set to begin on Tuesday.

The case has been filed by the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin (BAPIO) against both the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) which conducts the exam and the General Medical Council (GMC) which is accountable for ensuring a fair process.

The legal action claims that the CSA is racially discriminatory.

The RCGP's annual reports show that UK based trainee GPs from Indian background are four times more likely to fail this assessment and international medical graduates are 16 times more likely to fail the CSA than their white counterparts despite having successfully completed the same stringent training process up to this point.

The case has found tremendous support from Indian NRI doctors who have raised 190,000 pounds for BAPIO to help with legal costs.

Speaking to TOI, BAPIO chief Ramesh Mehta said they expect to raise 250,000 pounds by the end of the three day court case ending on Thursday.

Mehta said he was confident that BAPIO would win the case. They are being represented by a top British advocate Karon Monahan.

Mehta said, "Patient safety is paramount to BAPIO. Interestingly prior to the introduction of the new CSA in 2010 the pass rates were relatively equal amongst candidates regardless of ethnic origin. Trainees who take the CSA element of the exam process have been recruited following a thorough selection process. They have completed training over three years and have seen an average of 3000 patients gaining positive feedback along the way. Many GP trainees from ethnic backgrounds have had their careers and prospects hijacked at this crucial CSA stage having previously secured a successful track record during what is both a stringent and lengthy qualification process."

BAPIO's lawyer William O Neill, a partner at Linder Myers Solicitors said, "We are bringing this action against both the RCGP and the GMC and seek to have the very apparent inequality of the CSA both recognised and addressed. The GMC sets the standards for postgraduate medical education and training and has a responsibility, to both the trainee GPs and the public who deserve a high standard of patient care, to ensure that each aspect of its examination process is both fair and equal. The result of the hearing, if the decision goes in our favour, will mean that good quality medical graduates, regardless of ethnicity, can continue to become fully practising doctors giving the overly stretched NHS a welcome boost."

An investigation carried out by Aneez Esmail, an expert on racism in the NHS had found that Indian doctors are four times more likely than white candidates to fail their CSA exam. The review into 5,000 candidates was ordered after ethnic minority students complained the exam was unfair.

Esmail has confirmed that an "unconscious bias" exists. On Oct 18, the Court said even the GMC was answerable for such bias.

RCGP figures for 2010-11 indicate that the failure rate for Indian medical graduates is 63.2%, compared with 9.4% of UK graduates. A British Medical Journal study had just recently confirmed that white doctors in UK are almost three times more likely to land a hospital job than ethnic minority doctors (13.8% versus 4.8%).

The data provided by the RCGP and the GMC found that Indian medical candidates who trained outside UK were also more likely to fail the clinical skills assessment than their white UK colleagues (65% versus 4.5%).

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 08 Apr 2014 09:06

Eric Pickles: Britain still a Christian nation – get over it
Communities secretary calls on militant atheists to stop imposing 'politically correct intolerance' on UK's Christians
..
"Militant atheists" should accept that Britain is a Christian country and "get over it", the communities secretary Eric Pickles said yesterday.
...
Pickles changed the law in 2012 to ensure that English parish councils could not face legal challenges for including prayers in public meetings{secular meetings with prayers in British parliamentary system?} , and accused the last Labour government of "diminishing Christianity" by suggesting that religion and politics could not mix.
…

Communities secretory seems to be a highly effective position in UK politics- which no one mentions only when talking about British/Westminster Parliament system. There seems to be much more than what meets eye in the most revered British Parliamentary system that Britishers chatter about with eloquence!

However if in India someone talks like this then heavens will fall due to slightest deviation from most secular system!

More on Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government from wiki

Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, is a Cabinet position heading the UK's Department for Communities and Local Government.

This department was created in 2006 by then British Prime Minister Tony Blair to replace the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
...

Now who among these is polarizing figure only.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 08 Apr 2014 10:53

Silver bullion from sunken WWII ship makes it to the Mint at last

The coins, intended for collectors, are made from part of a haul of almost 100 tonnes of silver
..
In 1940, the decision was taken to import silver from India when the Mint's supplies were running low during the war.
..

Earlier, gold from a Spanish ship was recovered link

cargo of coins minted in Lima, Peru ..

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 10 Apr 2014 01:44

Top UK diplomat in Sri Lanka intervenes in drug peddling case

The interest shown by a British diplomat in Colombo, in what seems to be a high-profile case of drug trafficking involving suspects from at least three countries, has raised eyebrows here.

On April 3, the Deputy High Commissioner at the British mission in Colombo sought an appointment with the Inspector-General of Police N.K. Illangakoon to discuss a recent heroin seizure. The diplomat had said a suspect arrested in connection with the case was an informant to one of Britain’s officers in India.

When The Hindu asked the British High Commission for a response, officials there declined to comment.
...
...

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 10 Apr 2014 03:31

^^^all hints of British intel having interfaces all over the subcontinent is mere CT. Freudian slips are merely non-Freudian non-slips in this case.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Apr 2014 15:56

Great British tradition,"beating the retreat"! Described in graphic detail ,the battle of Mons,WW1.
But also highlights another great British tradition of turning defeat into a sort of moral victory,as seen in the Crimea (charge of the Light Bde.),Dunkirk,etc.

A History of the First World War in 100 Moments: The defeat that turned into a rallying legend

The Battle of Mons was a shocking setback for the British Expeditionary Force. Yet somehow, like Dunkirk 26 years later, the defeat and subsequent retreat became a cherished symbol of heroism and hope. John Lichfield examines the making of a military myth
John Lichfield

Wednesday 09 April 2014

Mons was the Dunkirk of 1914. In both cases, British defeat and retreat has entered national mythology as moral, or strategic, victory. In both cases, there is some truth to the myth-making. In both cases, the narrative of heroic failure has camouflaged much that was unheroic or incompetent or ill-prepared.

According to the received version, the outnumbered British Expeditionary Force (BEF) of about 80,000 men fought valiantly in its first battle with a much larger German force around the Belgian town of Mons on 22-23 August 1914. (According to legend, they were reinforced by an army of phantom longbowmen from Agincourt – the “Angels of Mons”. More of that later.)

Having inflicted, and received, severe casualties, the BEF retreated southwards for 10 days, fighting several rearguard actions, some large and many small, to keep the German juggernaut at bay. Reinforced by two divisions originally left behind in Britain (following a German invasion scare) the BEF turned to help the French to defeat the invaders on the River Marne just north of Paris in early September.

Recent historical work – notably Challenge of Battle by Adrian Gilbert – gives a different picture. The behaviour of British troops and their commanders, who were fighting in western Europe for the first time since Waterloo almost a century before, ranged from the stalwart to the feeble; from the clear-sighted to the muddled and defeatist.

Gilbert quotes an officer who observed one incident during the BEF’s retreat: “It was an awful sight, a perfect rabble of men of all ranks and corps abandoning their equipment and in some cases their rifles in order to get into safety in rear.”

One of the most detailed eye-witness accounts was written by Corporal Bernard Denmore of the 1st Battalion of the Royal Berkshire Regiment. His illegally kept diary, published in the 1930s, portrays the “Great Retreat” as a rout at times.

August 27: “The marching was getting quite disorderly; numbers of men from other regiments were mixed up with us… During the night a man near me quite suddenly started squealing like a pig… ran straight down the hill towards the town and shot himself in the foot.”

August 28: “The men were discarding their equipment in a wholesale fashion, in spite of orders to the contrary; also many of them fell out and rejoined again after dusk.”

The BEF was the British regular army, rebuilt and reformed after the calamities of the Boer War. It was claimed to be the best-trained and best-equipped force that Britain had ever sent abroad. Such claims are mocked by Corporal Denmore’s account.

On the other hand, his diary also describes countless small engagements in which the British troops, starving and their boots in tatters, turned to fight off their pursuers. The Battle of Le Cateau, just south of Mons on 26 August, was – at least in part – a model defensive action that saved the whole BEF from calamity.

Like all the early fighting of the 1914-18 war – on both western and eastern fronts – the Battle of Mons and its aftermath was a rapid and terrifying introduction to the crushing power of modern artillery, machine-guns and powerful magazine rifles. The retreat was not pretty. It was not well-organised. The BEF’s commander, Sir John French, was plunged into depression at times.

Yet simply by remaining in being, the BEF helped to prevent an early German triumph. Without the help of the newly extended British force, the French might not have defeated the Germans on the Marne. The 1914 campaign might have ended like the 1940 campaign, but with no Dunkirk available through which the BEF could escape to fight another day.

By preventing an early German victory, most of the BEF signed their own death warrants. Other than the staff officers and the wounded, little of the original force survived the first Battle of Ypres in late 1914 and the early fighting of 1915. And what of the Angels of Mons? It has sometimes been suggested that they were a hallucination, experienced by exhausted and terrified men. In truth, their existence was even less substantial than that.

The phantom longbowmen were invented by the writer Arthur Machen for a fictional story published by the London Evening News on 29 September 1914. Months later, they made a second apparition in a parish magazine as a “true account”. Their legend spread through the febrile Britain of 1915. Anyone who challenged the existence of the Angels of Mons – even their inventor, Arthur Machen – was vilified as unpatriotic. That could not happen in the rational days of the internet. Could it?

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 10 Apr 2014 22:05

pandyan wrote:may be he is informing what the demand-supply situation is to replenish onlee.

Haven't opium wars of egalitarian so-called civilizing times been over? More civilizium oops more opium anyone? And where are people yelling Visa visa gone..

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Apr 2014 12:43

Indian elections: Everything you need to know in two minutes from ppc

video starts with

One of the largest exercises in democracy

No mention of NaMo (Everything you need to know)

Index of ch#$^giri of pee pee cee,free media and britain.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 11 Apr 2014 23:51

BBC’s photos of Nehru with Edwina and four women at diving board of a swimming pool in London in early 1950s in Britain.

http://www.niticentral.com/2014/04/11/s ... 10174.html

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 12 Apr 2014 15:00

putnanja wrote:Top UK diplomat in Sri Lanka intervenes in drug peddling case

The interest shown by a British diplomat in Colombo, in what seems to be a high-profile case of drug trafficking involving suspects from at least three countries, has raised eyebrows here.

On April 3, the Deputy High Commissioner at the British mission in Colombo sought an appointment with the Inspector-General of Police N.K. Illangakoon to discuss a recent heroin seizure. The diplomat had said a suspect arrested in connection with the case was an informant to one of Britain’s officers in India.

When The Hindu asked the British High Commission for a response, officials there declined to comment.
...
...

The traffickers nabbed by Sri Lankan police included Pakistanis.

Posting an older article from Feb 2013, during Cameron's India trip:

A reality check for David Cameron's India quest

In South Asia the control of the drug trade has involved the use of the Inter Services Intelligence, Pakistan's notorious spy agency established in 1948 by a serving British army officer, to godfather Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Together, they have kept Afghanistan as the lawless badlands necessary to produce opium; it now supplies over 90 percent of the world's illicit supply.

Where Britain does not maintain operational control of drug trafficking, as in Latin America, it provides money laundering facilities. Last year American authorities slapped a $1.98 billion fine on HSBC, Britain's largest bank, after investigators discovered that it had been laundering billions of dollars of Mexican drug money into the United States.

The fine made not a blip in the stock market value of HSBC shares because investors have known of its primary source of profit since traffickers established the company during Britain's 19th Century ‘Opium Wars’ to force the drug into China.

In terms of state policy, a renewed British-Indian relationship will require Britain to withdraw support from terrorist groups and insurgencies, wind up its involvement in the drug trade, and stop running the global black market.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 13 Apr 2014 04:22

Lilo wrote:

BBC’s photos of Nehru with Edwina and four women at diving board of a swimming pool in London in early 1950s in Britain.

http://www.niticentral.com/2014/04/11/s ... 10174.html

Nehru was a playa

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 13 Apr 2014 05:22

Karan Dixit wrote:
Nehru was a playa

Here's one of me (the little guy with the flowaz) to present to Edwina after having been threatened with physical pain to do bidding.

http://imgbox.com/L6xdEhE3

Believe it or not, I had to do this three times with this broad 1956-58 in three different countries. She was giganto and the Mountbatten beak was even bigger and I had to proffer flowaz while being enveloped by the imperial nostrilz.

They did not have shrinks then. I still bear scars

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 13 Apr 2014 07:17

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 13 Apr 2014 09:41

wow, indeed! so who are the crossed out man and woman?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 14 Apr 2014 04:01

devesh wrote:wow, indeed! so who are the crossed out man and woman?

Pater and Mater

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 15 Apr 2014 02:14

In the Islamic Emirate of Less Britain, Occupied Scotland, Held Wales and English-Administered-Northern Ireland.... Pakistani immigrants being unjustly deprived of their fair share of life and power. What would Winston Churchill say?

Twenty-five Birmingham schools inspected over Islamist 'takeover plot'

Sir Albert Bore detailed the investigations as he announced the appointment of a new chief adviser to deal exclusively with the fallout from Operation Trojan Horse – a dossier claiming to reveal a plot to "overthrow" teachers and governors in secular state schools in the city and run them on strict Islamic principles.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 15 Apr 2014 06:34

Cosmo_R wrote:
Karan Dixit wrote:
Nehru was a playa
Here's one of me (the little guy with the flowaz) to present to Edwina after having been threatened with physical pain to do bidding.

http://imgbox.com/L6xdEhE3

Believe it or not, I had to do this three times with this broad 1956-58 in three different countries. She was giganto and the Mountbatten beak was even bigger and I had to proffer flowaz while being enveloped by the imperial nostrilz.

They did not have shrinks then. I still bear scars

You got to give Edwina flowers. That is quite impressive given your age at that time

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Apr 2014 06:49

Karan Dixit wrote:
You got to give Edwina flowers. That is quite impressive given your age at that time

At that age, it was not a wonderful task. I did not know who she was and I had to do this 3X. My sister was 9 years older and away in college and got laugh at my expense.

You've no idea how many of these types I had to give flowers to. The novelty wore off for me even before I started.

Oh! and BTW, next day ins school, I had to endure endless ragging.