Thursday, January 27, 2011

Help the Save Our Forests Campaign

In my last post in this blog Stop the Selling off of our Forests and Woodlands I listed the things, we as the electorate could do to stop the Government selling off the Forests and Woodlands in England that are owned by the Nation and which they are, through the Forestry Commission the custodians.

Top of this list was Sign the Petition at the 38 Degrees Website: Save our Forests. This petition which started off with a target of 200,000 Signatures has when I looked today (27 January) had reached 254,878 and was now aiming for 300,000! Obviously this petition has caught the Public's imagination and if you haven't yet signed I urge you to do so.

38 Degrees now want to take this campaign to a new level by launching an advertisement in the National Press and are requesting donations to make this possible. In this time of austerity, this request give me pause for thought as the sum required to do this is £20,000, of which when I looked over £5,800 had already been raised. As I believe that is very important that the Government does NOT sell off these National Assets (and covertly this has already started - See: Rigg Wood, article from the Telegraph 23 January 2011), so if you can, please donate here: Sponsor the forests advert today

Here is a mock-up of the proposed ad:


There are other petitions:
Also you can lobby both your MP and the Lord's through the WriteToThem website


Sunday, January 23, 2011

Stop the Selling off of our Forests and Woodlands

David Cameron who had promised to make his administration the greenest government in British history (perhaps he meant greediest Government in British History?), is determined to sell off one of our National Assets the government owned Woodlands and Forests in England, For once devolution has proved useful as the Scottish and Welsh Forests and Woodland will remain safe. Because the Westminster Politicians cannot get their greedy hands on them.

As a sign of what the future may hold if the Government gets its way see the case of: Rigg Wood, article from the Telegraph 23 January 2011. Which rather negates message in the letter sent to all MPs by defra (see below):

The Government, through the Forestry Commission are merely custodians of these national Assets, which are part of the Nations Heritage and should not have the right to treat them as a commodity that can be sold in the market place. What makes this disgraceful situation even worse is they have decided to start this process without even bringing the subject before parliament by selling off 15% of the Forest Estate by 2015. They can do this without debate, or changing legislation. So much for transparent, open Government. Also within the Public Bodies Bill which is currently at the Committee Stage in the Lords is a clause allowing the Environment Minister Powers to transfer Land Ownership without reference to Parliament (so much for reducing Big Government?). This must be stopped.

So what can we, the electorate do about this, after all there isn't going to be a referendum on this issue,
  • Sign the Petition at the 38 Degrees Website: Save our Forests - When I last looked 176,504 already had!
  • Sign the Petition at the Woodland Trust Website: Save England's Ancient Forests
  • Sign the Petition at Save England's Forests: Save England's Forests
  • Email everyone you know who is a British Citizen to also sign these petitions.
  • Start lobbying your MP either directly, or through: WriteToThem website
  • Their Lordships can also be lobbied through: WriteToThem website, This is important as the Public Bodies Bill, which includes clauses allowing the Secretary for State to transfer ownership of land without further reference to Parliament, or anyone else. The Lord's Committee reviewing this bill restarts its deliberations on the 25th January 2011. What is required is an Amendment to the Bill, removing the ability of a minister to make the decision, without reference to parliament to sell off certain national assets and especially sections 17, 18 & 19 in the bill which are specific to the Forestry Commission & its assets.
  • Every time the subject comes up in an Online News Site add a comment opposing the Sale of the Forests and Woodlands and the effective destruction of one of few Government bodies that actually does a good job, the Forestry Commission.
The slow and almost covert sale of National assets to Private and indeed often foreign ownership by successive Governments has been going on for far too long. But this is not just a privatisation too far, but a disgraceful act and needs to be stopped.

Here is the text of a letter sent to all MPs (including those in Wales , Scotland and Northern Island who are not really affected) by defra:

Dear Sir/Madam

In view of recent speculation I am writing to explain the reason behind the inclusion of powers for modernisation of the forestry legislation in the Public Bodies Bill, which has just been introduced into Parliament.

Contrary to some beliefs, the Forestry Commission’s estate covers only 18% of England’s wooded areas. Nevertheless it is of great importance in the provision of access, biodiversity, carbon storage and many other public benefits. Some of it is producing much of our domestic timber, other areas are almost entirely devoted to public benefit and others are a mix of the two.

We are committed to shifting the balance of power from ‘Big Government’ to ‘Big Society’ by giving individuals, businesses, civil society organisations and local authorities a much bigger role in protecting and enhancing the natural environment and a much bigger say about our priorities for it.

By including enabling powers in the Bill we will be in a position to make reforms to managing the estate. We will consult the public on our proposals later this year, and will invite views from a wide range of potential private and civil society partners on a number of new ownership options and the means to secure public benefits. We envisage a managed programme of reform to further develop a competitive, thriving and resilient forestry sector that includes many sustainably managed woods operating as parts of viable land-based businesses.

We will not compromise the protection of our most valuable and biodiverse forests. Full measures will remain in place to preserve the public benefits of woods and forests under any new ownership arrangements. Tree felling is controlled through the licensing system managed by the Forestry Commission, public rights of way and access will be unaffected, statutory protection for wildlife will remain in force and there will be grant incentives for new planting that can be applied for. When publishing our proposals we will explore further the options for securing and increasing the wide range of public benefits currently delivered by Government ownership and how they might be achieved at lower cost.

This will be a new approach to ownership and management of woodlands and forests, with a reducing role for the State and a growing role for the private sector and civil society. At the same time, it reflects the Government’s firm commitment to the continued conservation of the biodiversity and other public benefits which forests and woodland provide. These aims are not incompatible with alternative models of ownership, or our commitment to the natural environment.

What load of tosh! See Rigg Wood!

Despite my almost genetic distrust of Politicians I did have a smidgen of hope that David Cameron might just make a good Prime Minister. So far my hope has not been realised and supporting the sale of Forests and Woodlands does not bode well.

External Links:
Save England's Forests
Save our Woods
Woodland Trust
38 Degrees Website: Save our Forests

The Magical Forest (Blog Post)

Social Networks
Facebook - Save our Forests

Friday, January 21, 2011

Linda Norgrove Articles Guardian 21st Jan 2011

Today the Guardian ran two similar articles on Linda Norgrove and both are informative, interesting and worth reading:
Linda Norgrove took photos of Afghan captor before death in botched rescue
and
Linda Norgrove: 'She took a lot of risks'
I just wish they hadn't used the word 'botched' (twice in the first article and once in the second), 'failed' would have been fine.

Moving on: One important element in both articles is that Linda Norgrove's parents have established:
The Linda Norgrove Foundation which is a new grant-giving trust that provides funding for women, families and children in Afghanistan. The Foundation provides help in the following areas:
  • Education
  • Health
  • Childcare, including orphanages
  • Scholarships to help Afghan women go to university.
  • The foundation certainly deserves support in its aims.

    To its credit the Guardian has made a donation to the Foundation. One hopes it makes similar donations to the families of British and Americian charities that support the families of those killed in action? Appears not, but then maybe I botched up my search keywords!

    Thursday, January 20, 2011

    Prisoners and the Vote - No Change required!

    The BBC's Nick Robinson published an article earlier this morning (0515 20 Jan 2011) with the title: Ministers in climbdown over prisoner vote rights in which he writes that the government is preparing to scale back plans to give the right to vote to thousands of prisoners serving sentences of under four years. They now propose to limit the right to those sentenced to a year or less.

    But this misses the point, Belgium and Eire, and indeed 11 other countries who signed the 1953 European Convention on Human Rights do NOT allow Prisoners the vote. Yet they are not being singled out by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Belgium goes further and can deny the vote to Prisoners even after they are released.

    So why has Britain been singled out? Because the ban is automatic rather than part of the sentencing procedure. So just change the law, so that every year handed down as a sentence is given the same number of years voting ban (this to remain in force even if paroled, or early release).

    However better still face down the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and MPs will have the opportunity to defy the court's ruling in a couple of weeks' time when the Commons debates a motion tabled by Conservative David Davis and Labour's Jack Straw (I for one will be watching how the MP for my constituency votes on this).

    Actually I would much rather the vote was on withdrawing completely from the 1953 Convention and instead preparing over the next few years a British bill of Human Rights which is based on the safety of citizens and the protection of victims of crime rather than the rights of those whose Criminal or other acts endanger the Citizens of this Country.

    Related Post in this blog:
    EU Law overrides UK Law and (some) Convicts will get the Vote 02nd November 2010
    Douglas Carswell MP: Governed by judges? 05th November 2010

    Other Articles:

    Monday, December 20, 2010

    Len McCluskey Speaks out in support of the Student Protest.

    The Leader of the Unite Union Britain's Biggest and the owner main financial supporter of the Labour Party, Comrade Mr Len Mcluskey has spoken to the Guardian in an article entitled: Unions warn of massive wave of strikes. In the article he discusses his support of the Student Protests and how the Union movement should be planning a broad strike movement against the cuts. Oh goody an unrepentant former supporter of the aims of the Militant Tendency is alive and well and running the largest of Britain's Unions, just what this country didn't need!

    Links
    Other Guardian Articles by Len McCluskey
    The Telegraphs Article 20th Dec 2010, which quotes his latest Chat to the Guardian:
    Len McCluskey: head of Britain's biggest union praises 'magnificent' student protest movement
    Also from the Telegraph but back on the 28th Nov:
    Len McCluskey refuses to rule out strikes on Royal Wedding Day (What a miserable man!)

    In this Blog:
    In Reference to Mr McCluskey's Election:
    Vote Unite sorry I meant Labour - NO WAY. 22nd Nov 2010

    Student Protests:
    Students Protestors, no Criminal Vandalising Hooligans 10th Dec 2010
    The only ones to come out of the Student Protests with Honour! 11th Nov 2010


    Saturday, December 18, 2010

    Granted Asylum in Britain dies an al-Qaeda Martyr in Afghanistan!

    Having just read (belatedly) the Telegraph Article about Mahmoud Abu Rideh a British al-Qaeda refugee killed in Afghanistan. I thought I would do some limited research on the Background of this man.

    Background to Mahmoud Abu Rideh in Britain:
    Mahmoud Abu Rideh was born in Jordan to Palestinian refugee parents. He came to the UK in January 1995 and claimed asylum, whilst living off benefits with his wife and five children. Initially His asylum claim was refused because his story was not credible but he appealed and was granted refugee status in November 1998!

    In December 2001 he was detained under anti-terrorism laws after the then home secretary David Blunkett concluded he was "an active supporter of various international terrorist groups, including those with links to Osama Bin Laden's terrorist network". The reasons for which are covered in the Telegraph Article and I quote:

    The central allegation was that he had been involved in fund raising and distribution of funds for terrorist groups with links to al-Qaeda as well as procuring false documents and facilitation of the travel for volunteers to training camps in Afghanistan.

    Although he was living on benefits, he was said to have raised around £100,000 in just two years, using the Arab Bank in Park Lane to funnel his money to al-Qaeda.

    He also held an account at the Wimbledon branch of HSBC entitled “Islamic Services Bureau – Treasurer’s Account.”

    He was said to be closely involved with senior extremists and associates of Osama bin Laden both in Britain and overseas.

    He spent most of his time after his arrest at Broadmoor Secure Hospital (I think all Islamist Terrorists are mentally deranged, but the Law says otherwise). Surprisingly he was granted bail in January 2005, due to his deteriorating mental health (surely all the more reason for keeping him in a secure environment?).

    This followed the overturning by the Law Lords of the Detention without Trial System for Terrorism Suspects (on the 16th December 2004) as this was against European human rights laws. The same day as Charles Clarke became Home Secretary. As the European Laws are binding on this Country a way had to be found that was acceptable to the unelected people who made these laws and so Control Orders were introduced. This almost exactly coincided with Mahmoud Abu Rideh's release on bail. Not surprisingly Mahmoud Abu Rideh became one of those subject to a Control Order.

    In early 2007 Mahmoud Abu Rideh came before Mr Justice Beatson who on the 4th April 2007 ruled the order should be quashed, saying "its cumulative effects in my judgment deprive [Mr Rideh] of liberty, and the secretary of state has no power to make such an order". This judgement came as no surprise to Home Secretary John Reid (who would probably, if he had stayed in Office the best Home Secretary in living memory) as Mr Justice Beatson had made the same ruling in a previous case. However unlike most Home Secretaries who would have been 'extremely disappointed' by this judgement, John Reid immediately issued a new Control Order.

    From this moment on there and increasing campaign to get the control order on Mahmoud Abu Rideh lifted.
    When John Reid was sadly replaced by Jacqui Smith (who's lack of suitability for the post almost matched David Blunkett's) the campaign got seriously underway with Amnesty International (UK Branch) launching an appeal and PetionOnLine (they got 1078 Signatures).

    By June 2009 he was working on generating his own publicity by appearing at the reception desk of the Guardian Newspaper. This resulted in the Guardian taking up the cause of this 'tragic figure' with his Walking Stick, worn clothes, visible evidence of self-harm and his tale of how his wife had finally left him with the five children to live with her parents in Jordan. The result was a 'heartbreaking article' and video: A day in the life of a terror suspect a man driven to despair due his loss of his freedom, his family and with suicide on his mind. Didn't actually mention his pre-British life working for a school in Afghanistan for Arab Speaking children, many of those fathers were some of the world’s most wanted men, or his later work with Islamic Services Bureau in Pakistan, run by Osama bin Laden’s mentor Abdullah Azzam. Or even his publicly known fund raising support of Terrorism whilst in the UK. But hey why spoil a good story!

    On the 3rd July 2009 Amnesty International was able to trumpet that the Home Office, now under Alan Johnson had agreed to allow Mahmoud Abu Rideh to leave Britain (and Never Come back, although wasn't mention in the Amnesty release). So in September 2009 he left Britain but NOT off to Jordan to see the Wife and Children, no destination Syria and by whatever means eventually arriving in Afghanistan and then dying with a group of al-Qaeda Terrorists.

    For 14 Years this man and his family lived in Britain at cost to the Taxpayer was a supporter of terrorism and when able was an active participant in raising funds for terrorist organisations and finally achieved what was probably his life's ambition of dying a terrorist. I hope whose who supported him like Mr Justice Beatson, the Guardian, Amnesty International and those who signed petitions are proud that they assisted him to achieve his goal of becoming a Martyr for a cause, that would, if it could, ensure that the very institutions and the people that supported him would be eliminated. In a world run by al-Qaeda, life in the 12th Century AD would appear utopian!

    Monday, December 13, 2010

    Another Brief Update on Mexicana

    As those of you who follow this blog know I have a sentimental affection for Mexicana and monitored its decline and fall with a strange mixture of emotions.

    However despite ceasing operations, efforts continued to revive the carrier and now the three main unions have finally accepted reality and with some creditor support, there is every chance a much reduced Mexicana will begin operations in the New Year.

    For more on this see: Unions Back Mexicana Revival an Aviation Week Article.

    The previous posts in the Blog on Mexicana:
    05th August 2010 - Will Mexicana Survive?
    25th August 2010 - Bringing Mexicana Back from the Brink - Step 1
    31st August 2010 - Mexicana - Two Steps back and Teetering
    12 November 2010 -A Brief Update on Mexicana



    Friday, December 10, 2010

    Students Protestors, no Criminal Vandalising Hooligans

    Actually I am being unfair, firstly only a proportion of the student protestors in London actually were involved in the attacks on People and Property. However far too many of those non-involved seemed to have found these actions at least in part acceptable and only a tiny minority tried to stop it.

    Also I think I am being slightly unfair to Vandals and Hooligans, who are locked in a world with little future and lack the ambition and/or intelligence to escape from it. Whereas those involved in the Mob Violence in London are supposed to be well educated, bright people who will make a positive contribution in the future.

    Well I hope those who participated in the Vandalism and Violence discover their future is blighted not only by being brought to justice and having a criminal record and a really hefty fine,  furthermore, if they are indeed students being excluded from their current university, or college and banned from attending any other in the UK for life. 

    For the small number who attempted to stop the Vandalism and attacks, I salute you as it was a brave thing to do. Whilst Policing of the Protest may draw criticism (and it wouldn't matter how it was policed there would be criticism), the Police Officers on the 'frontline' who faced the Mob deserve the highest praise and once more they took causalities in the performance of their duties.

    However in general the 'Students' have lost the last smidgen of my sympathy for their plight and as a tweet I received put it: After the childish behaviour today/tonight if the govt had another vote tomorrow the fees would go up to £12k. A view I can understand, but probably in time I won't totally agree with.

    Monday, December 06, 2010

    Some Questions for MP Mike Hancock: 1st why hire a Foreign National?

    In the furore over whether Katia Zatuliveter is, or is not an agent of the SVR (KGB by any other name is still the KGB), some questions don't appear to have been asked.
    • The most important being: Why employ a foreign national as a research assistant?
    • Were there no suitably qualified Citizens of the United Kingdom?
    • If, as stated she was the best person for the Job, how was the Job advertised and how many applicants interviewed?
    • Was her ability to speak Russian a consideration? Because there are a large number of Russian Speaking UK Citizens. But this may have been a consideration as Mr Hancock does it appear have more than passing affection for Russia (as a state) and has made numerous visits there. Although exactly how many is publicly difficult to know, as his Passport 'fell into the sea'. However this begs another question:
    • Who paid for this unknown number of trips to Russia?
    A little more on Mike Hancock MP
    Also there are it appears concerns about Mr Hancock himself, not that he is a spy, but his more than somewhat 'rose coloured' view of Russia plus his unusually large number of detailed questions on Defence Matters. Well as he is MP for Portsmouth South and Portsmouth is a major Royal naval base this might be understandable! But majority of these were a series questions were about the Trident Flotilla which is not Portsmouth based and the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston. He is also a denier of the Armenian Genocide and a 'friend' of the government of Azerbaijan. There are rumours he is womaniser and he is currently on Police Bail on suspicion of indecent assault (this will be heard in January 2011). He is also involved in supporting worthy causes notably: NSPCC, Captive Animals Protection Society and has been involved with MENCAP.

    Links:
    Mike Hancock CBE - Personal Website
    Which has a Heading: Standing up for Portsmouth.

    Mike Hancock on Wikipedia







    Sunday, December 05, 2010

    British Journalistic Integrity, Responsibility & Professionalism - Bah Humbug

    Simon Jenkins In his column on the 2nd December 2010 for the Guardian wrote an excellent piece entitled: In this World Cup sewer, we reptiles of British journalism hold our heads high and I suggest it is worth reading.

    However from the viewpoint of this post, one paragraph caught my attention and I 'cut and pasted' it to my Notepad and intend to learn it by heart, because it totally sums up my view of British Journalism and henceforth when I hear any of the following
    • Journalistic Integrity.
    • Journalistic Responsibility
    • Accurate Factual Reporting
    • That Journalism is a Profession
    • Journalists only report what is happening, they do not make things happen.
    I shall quote this back:
    I have no illusions about the press. I have watched enough dirt swilling down the journalistic sewer to abandon any quest therein for responsibility, accuracy, sensitivity or humility. The great American editor Oz Elliott once lectured graduates at the Columbia School of Journalism on their sacred duty to democracy as the unofficial legislators of mankind. He asked me what I thought of it. I said it was no good to me: I was trained as a reptile lurking in the gutter whose sole job was to "get the bloody story".

    Well there you have it a major figure in British Journalism whilst obviously only commenting on his own lack of ethics, responsibility and accurate reporting, has further confirmed my own impression of the state of British Journalism in general.

    Whilst I have always accepted that Print Journalists in particular carried the 'baggage' of their Publication owners agenda and all Journalists had a need to 'keep in' with the main figures of their 'patch' whether Politics, Law and Order, Defence etc, etc. I did feel that other than the 'dirty Mac brigade' (who's only difference between them and a Peeping Tom, was they were paid to do it and would corrupt by bribery or other means anyone they felt necessary to obtain a corruption story in high, or even low places) there was a smidgen of ethics and some residual Integrity in the Journalism Trade (I gave up considering it a Profession around 1990).

    I still hold some Journalists in high regard and indeed respect for their writing, or broadcasts. Unfortunately although I still will, on occasion read Simon Jenkins, I can no longer view him as someone I respect. Not that he will care as he has made a good living in his sewer of journalism.

    Thursday, November 25, 2010

    Learco Chindamo Paroled Killer arrested for Alleged Robbery

    When he was 15 Learco Chindamo was in a gang and was personally responsible for murdering Philip Lawrence in west London, when as Headmaster of his school, Mr Lawrence went to the assistance of a Pupil being attacked by the Gang.

    When convicted Learco Chindamo was given an indefinite sentence, which at minimum was to be 12 Years. After 15 Years in Prison he was released on Parole, despite being refused previously for not making 'sufficient progress'.

    Just four Months after he convinced the Parole Board he had reformed and that he would spend the rest of his life atoning for his crime and was placed in a Parole Hostel he is arrested for carrying out an alleged violent mugging. Obviously his Parole licence will be revoked and he will be returned to Prison.

    Now whilst I seriously doubt he should have been given parole in the first place, as an Italian Citizen he should have been immediately deported on his release from Prison and banned from ever entering the UK again.
    But NO, a Judge ruled three years ago (when he was still in prison) that such a move would breach his Human rights, despite a warning from the Home Office that Chindamo "represents a genuine and present and sufficiently serious threat to the public in principle as to justify his deportation". . So instead he is free to breach the Human Rights of others.

    Speaking to the Telegraph Philip Lawrence's widow, Frances Lawrence said:
    "My first thought was 'My God'. I feel shocked. I find it odd that he is arrested so soon after the 'atonement'. What does it say about the justice system and the notion of what is justice? True justice surely cannot pick and choose who it supports. In this case it appears Mr Chindamo is being given every help, while my family is being hung out to dry."

    She also said she had not been informed about where Chindamo was living after he was freed and added: "The last few months have been the worst time for me since Philip died."

    The full Telegraph Article can be found here: Philip Lawrence's killer Learco Chindamo arrested

    This once again raises the same questions that keep being asked and never receive a satisfactory answer:
    • If only three years ago the Home Office was stating that he represents a genuine and present and sufficiently serious threat to the public in principle as to justify his deportation, Why was he even considered for Parole?
    • If given Parole he should have been deported, and this raises the question of what David Cameron is doing to honour a pledge he made in opposition to scrap the Human Rights Act?
    • If Paroled and not deported why was he not Monitored closely?
    • Assuming he is returned to Prison, then he should be given at least 20 Years, but I suspect he will be given 3 to 5. This man should not be allowed out whilst still a danger to the Public ,but when will Judges and Ministers take this onboard?
    In addition I wonder:
    • How much support the Lawrence Family received in the last 15 years compared to the support Learco Chindamo has had in attempts to rehabilitate him?
    • What percentage of the cost of keeping Learco Chindamo in Prison for 15 years was paid to the Lawrence Family for the murder of a Husband, father and brave Man?
    I doubt if in either case it was more than a tiny fraction of that spent on a Murderer.
    I am sure Theresa May will as usual be 'extremely disappointed', but I am sorry Home Secretary that is not good enough. Let us have a Human Rights Act, where it is the Victims Human Rights that are protected, not the perpetrators. Deport people who are a danger to our society and ensure they never come back, regardless of the consequences to them in the country to which they are deported.

    Monday, November 22, 2010

    Vote Unite sorry I meant Labour - NO WAY.

    Unite, the Union that owns the Labour Party, sorry I mean contributes, the most to the Labour Party has voted as Leader one Comrade, I mean Mr Len McCluskey, who still quotes Communist guerrilla leader Che Guevara (which would be quaint if he wasn't so powerful) and believes there is no such thing as an irresponsible strike! It is also apparent he still espouses the agenda of the Militant Tendency which in the 1980's set out infiltrate Labour Constituency Parties with the objective to moving the Party much further to the Left. Overall he reminds me of the most Militant and Destructive Union Leaders of the 1970's and that is an extremely bad thing for the average Unite Member, future of Industrial relations, the Labour Party and most importantly the Country.

    I had hoped that Bob Crow of the RMT was the last throwback to that era to make it to the leadership of a Union. Sadly I was wrong.

    As Unite is the Labour Parties biggest backer and regardless of how the party spin it, a major unelected influence on their future direction, something that I have always felt was a concern. Now with Len McCluskey leading Unite, I think they will be unfit for election to Government for the foreseeable future.

    The only bright spot is I shall no longer even have to bother reading their Election Literature, whether for Council Election, Bye Election, or their Manifesto for a General Election, because with his brooding influence, however worthy their Candidate they won't be getting my Vote.

    Friday, November 12, 2010

    A Brief Update on Mexicana

    After I effectively 'buried Alitalia' in a series of Posts, only to be proved wrong, I have been loath to write an obituary on Mexicana. It appears this was a sensible move (I hate apologising) because there is light at the end of the tunnel for Mexico's premier Airline. Like Alitalia the plan involves a massive reduction in Routes, Fleet and Staff. Therefore a successful re-launch will depend on the Unions as much as refinancing. More on this from:
    USA Today Travel 11th Nov 2010: Rescue bid: Mexicana may fly again,
    Bloomberg Businessweek 10 Nov 2010: Mexicana Unions Get $155 Million Bid to Save Company
    Airwise/Reuters 10 Nov 2010: Mexicana Picks Recovery Business Plan

    As with Alitalia, I have a sentimental attachment to Mexicana, so I hope the Unions accept the reality of the situation and Mexicana does indeed fly again.

    Thursday, November 11, 2010

    The only ones to come out of the Student Protests with Honour!

    The only people to come out of the Student Protest in London Yesterday with Honour were the Policemen and Women who stood their ground and despite being attacked with 'missiles' as well as abuse acted with restraint and paid a price for it with a total of 41 officers received injuries, and a "small number" were taken to hospital for treatment before being released.

    A policeman who was injured in the clashes Photo: EDDIE MULHOLLAND
    From Telegraph Article: Student tuition fees protests: police got it wrong, says Nick Herbert


    At least their boss, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson recognised their fortitude, nay bravery in an internal message to staff:
    Sir Paul paid tribute:
    He said: "Many faced thuggish and disgraceful behaviour which has been well publicised in the media. Their bravery and professionalism in the face of adversity was hugely commendable and, once again, demonstrates the commitment and dedication of our officers in the Met."

    "We know that the vast majority of protesters were entirely peaceful and well behaved, but it is clear that some chose to engage in senseless criminality. Sadly, some of our colleagues, my officers, were injured in the line of duty and some came perilously close to being seriously injured."

    "This, once again, demonstrates the willingness of officers to put themselves in harm's way for the people of London."

    Sir Paul said those responsible for the violence must be found and brought to justice "swiftly".
    He added: "That is our number one priority and an investigation to achieve this is already well under way."



    Student protest against tuition fees turns violent at Millbank Photo: Dominic Lipinski/PA
    From Telegraph Article: Student tuition fee protest: Infantile behaviour

    I certainly hope that all those who engaged in Criminal Damage (Smashing windows in private cars was NOT a Political Act, or Protest, but Criminal Damage for which those responsible should pay, both financially and with a Criminal Record).
    Whilst some would argue attacking Conservative Party HQ, could be construed as Political, as itwas both Violent and in some cases, as e.g. the dropping of a Fire Extinguisher from the Roof of the building was life threatening. In this case custodial sentences are appropriate.

    The Senior levels of the Metropolitan Police are going through a period of navel gazing and soul searching over what they could/should have done and those who weren't there (including the Politicians - See: Student tuition fees protests: police got it wrong, says Nick Herbert ) will voice what they would have done better, but to some extent they are in a no win situation; A much larger presence, especially of Riot Police and they would have been accused of being 'too heavy handed', or as in this case too few and they are blamed anyway.

    My views on the Protest in general have been summoned up, so much better than I could myself in this article in the Telegraph Online (and the Headlines says it all): Student tuition fee protest: Infantile behaviour


    Wednesday, November 10, 2010

    As Remembrance Day Approaches: Forever Young - A Song for Wootten Bassett

    'Forever Young', is a song that was inspired by the people of Wootton Bassett for the silent and moving way they repatriate our fallen troops through the town. All involved in the production of this song gave of their time and talent for free, and all profits will be donated to the Charity 'Afghan Heroes' who's goal it is; to help and support the families of those affected by the war. We have been overwhelmed by the support and do hope you enjoy the song.

    Although you can watch the especially commissioned video below (via YouTube) please visit the Forever Young a song for Wootton Bassett Website and don't forget to scroll down to buy the CD, and/or make a donation.




    Now go to the Forever Young. A song for Wootton Bassett and Buy the CD and/or Donate.
    Thank you

    Monday, November 08, 2010

    Should UK cyber defences include offensive operations to protect UK interests?

    This question was posed in a tweet by @Warwick_Ashford, which was retweeted to me. He raised the question because of this article US Cyber Command calls for offensive powers in Computer Weekly.

    The debate in the US over this request is not over National Interest, or National Security, but over the Legality of offensive operations and some Senior Advisors and Lawyers want to limit such operations to existing War Zones, such as Afghanistan.

    I see this as somewhat 'out-dated thinking' Cyber-war can be waged without forces deployed in the field and a state, or indeed individuals can mount an attempted Cyber Attack without escalation to a Military Deployment. Perhaps the 'rules of cyber engagement' should be no 'First Strike' and that any offensive response against the perpetrators  of an attack should 'be measured' and except in exceptional cases Politically Approved by the Prime Minister, or in the case of the USA the president/ This would seem to me to be a reasonable base line posture to adopt for UK, USA, NATO Countries and indeed other Western Nations.

    I would be interested in comments

    Dealing with Mentally Ill & Drug Addicted Criminals

    In the Telegraph online for 08th November 2010 there is an Article, Headlined: Drug-addicted criminals will be spared jail which indicates Kenneth Clarke and his officials at the Ministry of Justice are working out plans to get the Police and the Courts to the Mentally ill and Drug Addicts from Prison sentencing to “treatment-based accommodation”.

    As in previous posts on Law & Order, my views are that far too many people with Mental illness end up in Prison because of a total failure of the Care in the Community approach to their needs. Back in July in my Post: Crime & Punishment UK - Getting Emotive I covered this:
    Reverse the Care in the Community approach to those with Mental Health Problems and as this will take a long time beginning by building (or converting existing buildings) to secure institutions and moving these people out of prison and then over a decade moving down the scale of danger to sheltered accommodation for the non-dangerous. Yes this will cost money, but these people should not be in prison, but at the same time cannot function in normal society, leading them into crime.

    The Telegraph Article pre-empts the Planned Whitepaper, but the indication is that the plan is to reverse Care in the Community on the cheap. There is no indication that 'Treatment Centres' for the mentally ill will provide them with long term care and residence, nor that the Centres will be designed to handle the needs of the varied levels of illness.

    Moving on to Drug Addicts: I did not go into detail in my July Post, other than note that there should be mandatory treatment for Drug and Alcohol Addiction.
    I would go further, for those Addicted to Class A Drugs the treatment should be intensive and they should be detained in the 'Treatment Centre'  for a minimum of three months after they are deemed 'clean' and for the next two years they are to visit a Parole Office Weekly for testing. Failure to attend a test or the test shows a return to Drug Abuse would result in an immediate return to the treatment centre.

    Where Prison for an Addict is deemed necessary (Crimes of Violence, Murder, Armed Robbery etc), the Mandatory Treatment is to be carried out there. But Prisons must start to crackdown on the smuggling to Drugs into Prisons, with all visitors to convicts treated as potential 'drug mules' and checks to be carried out on Prison Staff to ensure they are not bringing Drugs in for Prisoners.

    My other concern is that Mandatory Treatment of Addicts and Intensive Searching of Prison Visitors and Staff, will fall foul of the European Court of Human Rights. So that situation has to be dealt with 'head on' by removing this Country from its jurisdiction.

    Friday, November 05, 2010

    Douglas Carswell MP: Governed by judges?

    Republication: See Original Blog Post by: Douglas Carswell MP: Governed by judges?

    Abu Hamza must have a passport. Prisoners must have votes.
    Ever get the feeling public policy is increasingly made by judges, rather than anyone you elected?

    And then we wonder why voters are starting to get hacked off with politicians for talking the talk, but not taking action?

    Posted on 5 November 2010 by Douglas Carswell

    Whilst Mr Carswell an I do on some subjects have very differening views, on this one we see eye to eye!

    OH and our Prime Minister has joined the Theresa May "disappointed" Fan Club
    Mr Cameron Disappointed doesn't Cut it, this man should be stripped of his citizenship by Royal decree!

    Tuesday, November 02, 2010

    EU Law overrides UK Law and (some) Convicts will get the Vote

    First a statement of my view on this: Convicts should NOT get the Vote!

    Sadly as a British Citizen I do NOT have the right to Vote on this issue, my Elected Representative does NOT have the right to try and get this ruling over turned, 'the extremely disappointed' Theresa May as Home Secretary can do nothing (which is actually no surprise, but on this occasion not her fault), the Prime Minister has tried, but doesn't have the power to change this European Court of Human Rights Ruling.

    So we in Britain have no say on this! This is the unacceptable face of EU Power via the European Court of Human Rights to force Member Countries to accept Laws they don't want. Although I disagree with the ruling (even if passed by UK Parliament), my real irritation, nay anger is that this has been imposed over our Sovereign Rights as a Nation.

    For a more objective view on this (rather than my rant) see:
    BBC: Convicted prisoners to get vote after European ruling

    Monday, November 01, 2010

    The Parcel Bomb Attacks - Failure, or Win?

    Despite the apparent sophistication of the Devices, the attack using Parcel Bombs Carried on Aircraft has, at least so far failed, or has it?

    Even though detected, due the Media frenzy Worldwide a classic climate of Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt (FUD) has been generated, this in it's self could be considered a win by those who planned/authorised the attacks. There is nothing new about Parcel Bombs and other than these were designed to explode in Flight, were a reversion to 'old school terrorism'. What has changed is the way the Media now 'spin' such stories.

    When Intelligence and Security services foil a planned attack without publicity, the Terror Planners, may, or may not learn a useful lesson from the failure, but there is no getting away from the fact it was a failure.

    But when as in this case, the plan fails, but does so under the spotlight of intense Media Interest (almost obsessive analysis of every aspect) then the failure can be turned in to a PR win. Actually killing people can rebound by hardening the resolve of the targeted Nation, or Culture, but not killing anyone whilst reinforcing the possibility of at anytime doing so, generates the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

    Also the Media demands action, leading to Politicians having to react publicly and immediately, which can in turn result in unfortunate statements being made and possibly counterproductive reactive action being ordered.

    I find causalities from IEDs tragic, but the IRA were using remotely detonated roadside devices 30+ years ago, parcel/letter bombs have been used by many groups , again including the IRA, even bombs on Aircraft predate Lockerbie by decades. What has changed is the way the Media Report these events (actually report is often an incorrect term, express opinions that they may not be qualified to give, is too often the case). It is fair to say groups such as Al-Qaeda has learned that in many ways the Western Media, due to the way they react to events, useful in assisting in raising the climate of Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.

    It probably why, although individual Journalists and film units have been targeted, no attacks have been launched against News Media Studios and Headquarters.

    A cynical update of the view: 'A capitalist is someone who sells you the rope with which you then hang him', could be rewritten as 'The Western News Media's way of reporting, assists in the destruction of their way of life'.

    Link to an Article in Aircargo News 02nd November 2010: Bomb plot fails but terror still rules