Cabinet Ministers Son on Drug Charge!

Straws son sells drugs while Blair holidays in a porn film location?
Imagine decorating the Christmas tree with final touches of tinsel. Wrapping the last few presents while checking the slow cooking bird in the oven. Then you get a phone call saying your son has been nabbed for selling drugs on the streets of London? So what?? There are drugs charges being processed every day for both trafficking and selling narcotics. But it becomes a state emergency when the son of Cabinet Minister Jack Straw is caught selling a tenners worth of cannabis to an under cover reporter during the festive season. Especially when Straw is drafting up legislation to go hard on drug users his son turns out to be flogging the stuff round town? Straw marched his son down to the police station asking for no favours because of his public stature during the formal charging. From hereon in it gets a little misty about what to do. The journalist Dawn Alford was arrested for possession of cannabis after she walked into the police station to hand in the drugs purchased from Straws Son? The story broke in the Mirror but the high court judge Mr Justice Moses granted an injunction preventing the Mirror from publishing the name of Straw’s son and the identity of the cabinet minister’s name. To get around printing the name on the grounds of the 1993 Children and Young Persons Act not applying on arrest, the court granted the ban under general contempt principles that identifying the minister would prejudice his son's trial. The cover up of son and ministers name turns into a comical farce as the Scotsman newspaper, ‘who under no obligation to uphold English laws’ print the names on the first page leaving Mr Justice Moses, Straw and Straw junior a laughing stock. Of course Miss Alford ‘who initially turned the stash of drugs in’ was sent to the dogs, Detective Chief Inspector Keith Gausden when asked if he could help was told the matter was out of his hands?? She was set bail till the middle of January. While all this is going on Straw is in communication with Blair who is sunning himself in the Seychelles with his family. Courtesy of President Rene’s holiday home in La Digue. Better known as the setting for the porn film ‘Goodbye Emmanuelle’? We got the sex and drugs now. Two out of three isn’t bad at all!

To be, or not to be independent!

The BoE has always been privately owned?
No sooner Labour are elected as the new government in May 1997, Gordon Brown goes to work on one of his primary tasks to ‘Free’ the Bank of England from its economical ties to the treasury. The decision to make the Bank of England independent was described by city economists as ‘one of the most radical changes in the BoE’s history!’ The government has ‘allegedly’ been in control of the Bank of England’s monetary policy since 1946 when it was publicly acknowledged that the bank had created a deficit of 22.2 billion pounds for the country. With the angry public mob quelled and Clement Attlee’s labour government taking control over interest and inflation rates, many economists of the time described the treasury’s 1946 take over of the monetary policy as…… ‘wait for it?’… ‘one of the most radical changes in the BoE’s history!’ Each consecutive government from 1946 to 1995 that followed managed to turn the national debt from a mere 22 billion to a staggering 300 billion pounds. At face value it seems that the government who claim ownership over the Bank of England’s monetary system are responsible for the huge debt accumulated over the last fifty years. But it appears that the most noticeable ‘radical changes’ seen within the last fifteen years are the growing number of ministers who have begun to publicly argue how little influence the government actually had over the Bank of England. It was stated by the former home secretary Michael Howard that the BoE’s alleged independence was the first step of yet another ‘radical change’ to achieving a singular European monetary union governed by the Maastricht treaty, and not by the government. It becomes very clear that setting the bank free was never the idea of Brown or the government but that of the European monetary policy laid down ten years previously by the European central banks. Brown and his conservative chancellor predecessor were simply working to a timetable set out by the BoE to be rubber stamped by the Maastricht Treaty! It does seem that the ‘radical changes in the banks history are more common than first thought! Where there does appear to be a bona fide ‘radical change’ with the government getting its grubby little hands on the BoE’s money is in 1844 and the Bank Charter Act. The profits of issue on banknotes were paid directly to the HM Treasury. A more recent ‘radical change’ was the attorney general giving the BoE immunity from prosecution during the BCCI fabulous public collapse. This caused an old question to be raised from its slumber, ‘Who actually owns the Bank of England?’ After the BCCI scandal and the grand 1997 divorce between the treasury and the Old Lady of Thread needle street, many analysts were hit with the realisation that the Treasury and the BoE may not have been married in the first place! The government was accused of sleeping with the Bank for a monetary arrangement only? This is not the first time the ownership of the Bank has come into question! In 1929 the MacMillan Committee was appointed to find out the ownership of the Bank of England, It turns out that the BoE is a private concern owned by the Rothschild banking family since 1694. The bank is still privately owned by the same family today. And given the un-negotiable stance by the Rothschilds forbidding any control of the monetary system to the government whatsoever it does seem that setting the bank free in modern times is a smoke and mirrors trick.

“Give me control of a nations money and I care not who makes its laws!”

Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Of course, he knew whomever had control of the money also made the laws!

Police enquiry launched into Labour MP bribery charge!

Sleaze!! Not our new labour party.
Not a fortnight into the new labour term in office comes the first official allegations of sleaze within the party? Mohammed Sarwar, the newly-elected member for Glasgow Govan and Britains first Muslim statesman is accused of bribing a fellow MP to ensure his own party seat whilst trying to discredit another MP. Blair who publicly trumpeted the new labour as the party which was to stamp out sleaze from the political arena barely got his arse saggy in the top chair of the country when the story hits the headlines. Apparently some of Scotland’s labour party MP’s seem to have waylaid the normal democratic electoral process in favour of a more capitalist approach? It was alleged that Mohammed Sarwar slipped a bung to fellow Muslim MP Badar Islam for the control over the marginal seat? It does give the impression that certain Muslims and Christians with political fever running through their veins share the same traits of greed and ignorance when a position of power is up for grabs! Five grand is five grand no matter which god is prayed to? So Mr Sarwar is summoned to Downing Street to face labour’s chief whip Nick Brown. But the outcome of the meeting in which the labour party decide to stick by Sarwar until the investigation is complete outrages the conservatives. The recent past saw Blair as the newly elected labour leader in a similar sleazy incident screeching like a banshee for the head of conservative Neil Hamilton during the cash for questions allegations before any formal investigation had begun! Blair and Straw (both lawyers) as opposition leaders are willing to have MP’s hung drawn and quartered without a trial but as soon as they are in office, resort to the letter of the law??

The Secretive way to do business

British Airways & American Airlines merger goes invisible!

Enter: Bob Ayling? The chief executive of British Airways, who’s arse is sweating buckets that his BA & AA merger may be left at the departure lounge if John Major’s Tory government don’t get their finger out and leave the T’s & C’s of the European Commission to sling a no fly zone over Heathrow. So Ayling bags himself a few slimey politicians off the street and swear them to secrecy with a back door deal to conspire away from the prying eyes of the public and any other body or institution that may not see eye to eye with their agenda.

So, does Bob’s airline have inside information that the Tory’s are on their way out ‘four months’ before the May election? Or are they lobbying both sides on a safe bet? Or is it that they have it on good authority that the leader of the opposition ‘Tony Blair’ has had the old boy’s wink and is going to win the premiership and is already chomping at the bit to sigh the bastard no sooner he gets the keys to number 10?

Queue:  Michael Heseltine ‘deputy prime minister’ and Neil Kinnock ‘European commissioner’ (and they don’t come any slimier than these pair of runny shits).

A Labour git helping a Tory chump? Who’d of thunk it! But it’s all in the common cause of Moollah, Folding money. £128 million ‘A DAY’ worth of cash to be exact. There is nothing more that travels the cross party trough faster than a slight whiff of a big wedge of spending stuff! Pigs only run in one direction when the farmer rattles the feed bucket!

The problem stems from these pesky ‘landing slots’ that can’t be swapped, changed or given away due to ‘fair competition rules’ set out by the European Commission. Their value is only credited as part of planning procedure to get aircraft in and out of Heathrow. So our man Kinnock comes up with the idea of changing the context of the landing slots and give it a monetary value instead? So the slots become a valuable monetary asset which can go onto BA’s balance sheet, ‘and can be sold or bought for profit’!

So if it’s a secret, there is no disclosure? If there is no disclosure then it must be unlawful?

Source:  Heseltine in secret talks with BA over US tie-up
             Randeep Ramesh Transport Correspondent - The Independent
             Friday 28 February 1997