Good Zim elections, bad for UK

UK is facing a crunch time on Zimbabwe and Africa. They have to decide to drop sanctions against the country. If they don’t, many Africans on the continent will begin to have serious doubts about whether they’ve given up on their racist colonialism.

A key indicator is the US. They have stayed totally silent on alleged voter fraud. This is because Obama doesn’t want Africans to think of him as an Uncle Tom. Another indicator is the EU are saying they won’t comment on the “massive voter fraud” until they’ve had time to think about it. In reality, they accept that the UK-US coup campaign has failed. The UK is being left on a limb.

Most people in the West, including the Left and many black people, believed the media when it told them that Mugabe held on to power by vote rigging and mass violence. They will think that if Mugabe has a landslide win without much violence there must have been massive vote rigging, as the MDC and some local ‘observers’ claim.

Yet, the African Union and the Southern African Development Community seem prepared to say the elections were free and fair. And there are more observers from other countries not publicised by the media, also saying: ‘free and fair.  Are they all liars? And why would they lie for the pariah Mugabe? This is a total puzzle for those people who will  will deal with by denial, by pretending  SADC and the AU are not saying what they are saying. For most people, though, Zimbabwe doesn’t matter and they can accept views that appeal to their fantasies.  On the other hand, the UK government’s views will be judged by Africans and their governments.

Many ordinary Africans have also gone along with the West on Mugabe. But now they see a Zimbabwe that is being supported by China, that is economically growing, where violence has apparently vanished and where the Western supported MDC is shown to be corrupt. Ordinary Africans are beginning to distrust the West

The Zimbabwe elections have been similar to recent elections in Kenya. A pro-Western party has lost and accused the winner of fraud. The winner defied Western put-downs and won. Age-old, violent ethnic tensions, as we were told, have mysteriously vanished.

In reality, people were duped by Western orchestrated ‘ethnic violence’ done to help their man, Odinga get into power. He would then stop this trade with China that had been freeing Kenya from ‘Western aid’. Like in Zimbabwe, their covert operations didn’t work. Africans increasingly don’t buy the ‘Chinese neo-colonialism’ propaganda. They are also rejecting the talk of ‘hopeless Africans in need of Western interference’.

The UK has a problem.

The Kenyan Presidential Election and What It Means for the West
by Kevin Kraft March 15, 2013

Berkeley Political Review

…In spite of the ever-present ethnic and political tensions, this year’s presidential election has been almost entirely peaceful. Odinga has again claimed fraud, but has promised to challenge the election results through the established court system. While Odinga supporters are undoubtedly unhappy with the results, they have expressed their frustrations through peaceful protest and publicly maintained faith in the courts to solve the problem. Both on a domestic and international level, there seem to be proud feelings that Kenya has matured as a democratic country.

The election of Kenyatta in spite of his ICC indictment suggests a shift against Western influence in Kenyan politics. Rather than detracting from his political appeal, as many expected, Kenyatta’s ICC indictment may have actually won him more votes by galvanizing public opinion in defiance of the West. In Kenya, and in most other African nations, it is increasingly popular to portray the ICC as a tool of the West that unfairly targets African leaders. The influential Western leaders who publicly doubted Kenyatta’s electoral prospects no doubt added to this anti-Western sentiment and served as a defiant rallying cry for Kenyatta’s supporters. As Ayo Johnson, the director of ViewPoint Africa, put it: The election of Kenyatta “sent a loud message to the ICC…don’t interfere. And it does not matter if you brand our leaders as criminals”…

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Islington meeting wants no bedroom tax evictions

IHOOPS is calling on Islington Council to clarify any confusion about its eviction policies concerning the bedroom tax.

A 70-strong meeting agreed the call at the Walter Sickert Community Centre in Canonbury Crescent on Tuesday 19 March.

IHOOPS invited the public and community activists to debate how to resist the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition’s cap on housing benefits due to come in April.

PIC IHOOPs, Housing Meeting, 13-03-19

Local campaigner speaks up at bedroom tax meeting

The call followed Labour’s Deputy Leader of Islington Council Richard Greening’s attack on the tax and promise not to evict anyone without an alternative home.

Eviction policy

Yet, the meeting demanded to know whether the Council would evict anyone who refused the alternative.

An audience member said to Cllr Greening: “They’re asking people to move out of their homes when fat cats have dozens of rooms. I say to the council, we want to fight to defend our welfare state and if you want to stand with us, you’ve got to say you won’t implement the cuts. You’ve got to put your money where your mouth is and say no evictions.”

In response Cllr Greening said that the Council had to balance support for people in need with the need to raise money for vital services. He said: “You are absolutely correct to demand no evictions, we understand that, but we also have to find money to keep public services running. I’m not going to give you the answer you want. But I’m going to say that we’re with you in campaigning against this tax.”

PIC IHOOPS, Housing meeting1, 13-03-19

Cllr Greening: Council needs rent money to fund services

Chair of Islington Trades Council and IHOOPS member Gary Heather warned against in fighting between people opposed to the cuts.

He said: “Richard Greening was invited by IHOOPS because IHOOPS wants to work with the Council. I think Richard was being honest when he said he doesn’t want to evict anyone. We mustn’t fall out with a council that is building council housing that is not implementing market rents. It would be a big mistake if IHOOPS led a movement that wasn’t going to work with the Council.”

IHOOPS’ secretary and chair of the meeting, Suzanne Jeffery, said the public could discuss this and other ways to resist the bedroom tax at the next IHOOPS meeting on 2 April at Islington Town Hall.

The meeting supported:

  • creating a petition demanding no evictions,
  • backing the defend London’s NHS demon on Saturday 18 May,
  • opposing evicting people out of London and
  • supporting a ‘mothers’ anti welfare cuts protest in Tottenham at Tottenham Town Hall, 11:00, 13 April.

PIC IHOOPs, Housing Meeting, handsup, 13-03-19

Meeting supports call for clarity on eviction policy

Council support for vulnerable tenants

In his talk, Cllr Greening also said that the Council supported replacing willing tenants in under-occupied homes with households experiencing over-occupation.

He stated that the Council can make funds available to households facing difficulty due to the bedroom and it supports advice to tenants such as financing a new Citizens Advice Bureau in Islington. He warned that this Council’s funds would run out.

He said the solution to the tax was that the Tories should face a new general election because of a split with the Lib Dems.

He said: “We have to reduce the Liberal Democrats to a cinder and they should stop supporting the most right-wing government in my lifetime.”

Fair private sector rent

The meeting heard that the lack of social house building over 30 years resulted in serious shortages and that the Tory abolition of fair rent tribunals, allowed rents to escalate. The Con-Dem Government solution is to rob from the poor and not to cap the super profits of the landlords.

Islington MP, Jeremy Corbyn told the audience that the principle of a welfare state needs to be defended and people need to go on London-wide demonstration on the bedroom tax.

He said: “We have hundreds of families threatened with removal from this borough. I am meeting people all the time where they have been asked to pay £1500 a week from their benefits. That’s before the cap of £500 pounds a week. The worst case I’ve come across is an ex-council flat where someone is charging and getting £600 a week where the council flat next door is £100 a week. It’s disgusting which is why I have introduced a private members legislation to control rent levels in London. It’s high time we had a fair rent policy in the private sector. IF we don’t, we get social cleansing in central London as a start.”

Pilgrim Tucker of Unite’s north London Community branch spoke about her union’s efforts to organise those not in employment particularly to campaign against welfare and job cuts.

The PCS speaker Tony Reay described the cuts as revenge for the gains of the working class over many years. He wanted to see benefits workers claimants talking and united in the struggle against the Government. This call for unity was repeated by many in the audience.

Eileen Short from Defend Council Housing said giving advice was not enough. She said campaigns should unite, campaign against evictions by private landlords, publish a proper council budget, and that communities and councils should protest, occupy offices and show that the tax is unworkable. She said: “I don’t know why councils are not marching on Whitehall.”

Disabled people facing onslaught

Tracey Lazard from Inclusion London talked about inequality faced by disabled people that will be made worse by the bedroom tax. She said: “WE are facing an onslaught of attacks. Disabled people face systematic discrimination but it’s getting worse. Everything that disabled people and their allies have fought for over the last 30 years is at risk. If the government gets their way disabled people will be shut away in their own homes or in residential care.”

She pointed out that:

  • disabled people are 5 percent of pop but are baring 29 percent of the cuts,
  • disabled people set to lose £9bn in benefits,
  • 73 disabled people declared are fit for work die a week,
  • 420,000 disabled couples will lose benefit because they cannot share a bedroom,
  • by 2018 607,000 disabled people would have lost disability living allowance,
  • by 2018 there will be a 50 percent cut in social care funding for disabled people and
  • scrounger rhetoric has led to increases in disability hate crime.

Tracey said that disabled people were fighting back and the campaign against ATOS has been working. There are legal challenges to the government over its consultation on disability living allowance and against Barnet Council’s privatization programme.

She went on say: “I might be naïve but I think we can win this. I think a majority of people do not want to punish the poor to give more money to the 1 percent.”

Eileen Short of Defend Council Housing suggested some courses of action, including publicising the discretionary budget so that it is claimed and seen to be too small, and campaigning for landlords, other than councils, not to evict. Other options of protest were also discussed.

Suzanne Jeffrey said last weekend there were anti-bedroom tax marches around the country including 900 in Liverpool, 500 in Manchester, 250 in Norwich, 250 in Durham, and 200 in Newcastle.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Blair signals start of WWIV

This was posted in August 2006 and there have been changes in world politics since. The Bush Neo-Cons have lost gound. There has been an economic crash. There was the ‘Arab Spring’ and ‘militant Islam’ is invading black Africa. Perhaps, the most important change is the rise of elite opposition to the Neo-Cons. China and Russia are significant opposition and also dissent within the US and Western military-industrial-intelligence complex. This has slowed down the desired Iran war and following New World Order.

A personal analysis –

People around the world face two possible agendas resulting from events in Lebanon – one regional and the other global. Tony Blair’s speech suggests it is the worst one: war, economic collapse, other calamities followed by a one-world government ruled with feudal powers by a global elite.

Regional Agenda: Oil and The Lewis Plan

The grandfather of the regional agenda is former British spy, Foreign Office official and Princeton academic Bernard Lewis.

The `clash of civilisations’ was his idea. His perspective on the Middle East has been influential in academia and in political circles. He promoted the idea that Islam was a backward religion that produces terrorism. His solution was the Balkanisation of the region.

After the first Iraq war, in the influential `Foreign Affairs’ journal, he argued that Middle East states would and should degenerate into fratricidal, parochialist violence and chaos ethnic entities. This would mean that the only powerful local state would be Israel and with its US partner they would dominate oil production.

The elite did not want to be honest with its public instead this aim had to be marketed. They used a threat. This was done in the 1990s by political elites such as former Secretary of State, George P. Schultz, former CIA chief James Woolsey, former Iraqi administrator Paul Bremer and their Committee on the Present Danger. They claimed the West needed a World War IV (World War III was the Cold War) last would last for decades.

Their propaganda is that militant Islam wants a war against Judeo-Christian, liberal, democratic West. The West needed a war on terror against terrorists and `rogue states’ like Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Tunisia and North Korea but also Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

Perhaps it is more than convenient for Al-Qaeda to then show up. The CIA and Saudi financing of bin Laden is well documented. The Muslim Brotherhood was used in the 1950s in an attempt to get rid of Egyptian nationalist, Nasser. When Nasser used violence to get rid of them, the CIA helped them to find a new home in Saudi Arabia. But the CIA claims that the current terror is all `blowback’.

One of the first plans for war on terror appeared in 1996, when the US’ Defense Policy Board delivered a policy document, `A Clean Break’ to Benjamin Netanyahu, new Israeli PM and leader of the right-wing party, Likud. It advocated dumping `land for peace’ compromises with Arabs to replace confronting enemies, regime change and securing economic independence.

This is what Condeleezza Rice really meant when she talked about death in Lebanon being the `birth pangs of a new Middle East’. Clearly, Iraq was the first war to bring this about and Israel is a tool to begin a bigger Middle Eastern conflagration.

Most of Tony Blair’s 1 August 2006 speech on a new Middle East policy fits into this, . Indeed, the public may warm to some aspects of his speech. He talks of “moderation”, tackling poverty, a two-state solution, winning hearts and minds. It leads people to believe that he thinks the military solution is not working. But given his position on the Lebanonese conflict, this is all spin.

What suggests Blair was speaking in code was his reference to `arc of extremism’. Meaningless for most people but the elite and their supporters will know it comes from `arc of the crisis’ by influential writer and former US National Security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinksi. For Brzezinksi, the arc was territory, the Eurasian landmass, from the Middle East to Pakistan, as one rich in resources, including oil. He says, the West should to get hold of it.

International Bankers: The Anglo-American Establishment

If it is code, then other parts of his speech suggests something else. Firstly, the speech also comes at a time when there is an increase in violence in Iraq and Afghanistan: there indeed is a crisis in the arc. Also, according to US press, Blair met Schultz at an elite club called Bohemian Grove. Many leading US and UK politicians and figures have taken part in the Grove jaunts. But conspiracy theorist who have gained access to the Grove state that it is Masonic and sinister in its mission.

The sinister mission centres around powerful, wealthy, criminal international bankers who can buy politicians and major companies. What they want is a feudalist global government that they will control and they will use global war and chaos to bring it about. Their plan has been set out by the late Professor Carroll Quigley, in his book `Tragedy and Hope’. Quigley’s insights are used in William F Engdhal’s `A Century of War’.

Quigley gained inside information about a group called the Anglo-American Establishment and revealed `too much’ about them. He revealed a hidden world of power, intrigue and conspiracy that most people would regard as malevolent. Most people would find its secrets unbelievable. In his book, he states: “The powers of financial capitalism had a far reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences.”

It started in the late 17th century with the Bank of England, the world’s first major, privately-controlled central bank. Until 1947, the UK bank notes were controlled and produced by this bank, a private company. It began because the King needed its money to finance a war and international bankers have been aligned to wars ever since. It took another turn in the 19th century with a body called the Rhodes-Milner Group  set up by Cecil Rhodes’ millions. Through international bankers, this group secured a place in the US (Wall Street) and became the Anglo-American Establishment.

Grabbing other people’s resources was key. Racism and slavery helped to produce the UK’s banking system and the City of London was a major player in the criminal colonial enterprise. The UK’s black colonies were `Crown Colonies’ but some argue that it did not mean that the Monarch were responsible for them.

The `Crown’ referred to the people who controlled the semi-autonomous area called the `City of London’. The City could count on the British military to control the colonies and also do as much exploiting as they wanted. The Anglo-American Establishment’s imperial aspirations have not dimmed.

The key bankers include Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin, Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris, Warburg Batiks of Hamburg and Amsterdam, Lehman Brothers Bank of New York, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York, Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (controlled by the Rockefellers), Goldman Sachs Bank of New York and JP Morgan. They run the Federal Reserve bank. Rockefeller is said to be worth $12 trillion while the Rothschild fortune has been estimated to be up to $400 trillion (Robert Gaylon Ross, `Who’s Who of the Elite’).

The Establishment’s major tools include privately-controlled central banks, the politicians they back, the Western intelligence agencies, Freemasons, Rhodes Scholars, thinks tanks and charities, the major oil and arms companies, the main Western media outlets, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, the powerful Council on Foreign Relations in the US, its sister organisation the Royal Institute for International Affairs, the International Bank of Settlements, the IMF, the World Bank and the UN. It was the Council on Foreign Relations that created the UN. A key Establishment family, the Rockefellers, donated land for the UN. They want one world government with one currency that they will control because they control gold, oil, banks and the money supply of the most powerful nations.

Supporting the Rothchilds, the Rockefellers, et al can make you rich. Seriously oppose them and you can end up dead. The Rockefellers support Kissinger and Brezinski. It is claimed that President Jack Kennedy began to oppose the international bankers and he was assassinated. Indeed, most of the US Presidents who have been assassinated have opposed a privately controlled central bank. Most of the nations regarded by the US as rogue do not allow international bankers to control their central banks.

Many people think that US Vice-President, Dick Cheney is calling the shots in the Middle East. In reality, he is actually following a policy determined by George Shultz and it is Schultz who is representing the bankers. Schultz is on the board of Bechtel, the pharmaceutical company, Gilead, and the investment company Charles Schwartz Corporation. He is also on good terms with the Rothchilds.

Global Agenda: War And One World Government

When the aims and historical role of the Anglo-American establishment is understood, then the apparent psychotic behaviour of Israel and Blair’s code can be understood. So when he said “we are far from persuading those we need to persuade”, he means the public in the West and just not in the Middle East are unlikely to support their feudalist program any time soon.

He indicates that there will be a step change in the way the elite policy, plans and activity: “to change dramatically the focus of our policy…in the short term we are not winning”. It is not persuasion that he is talking about when he refers to those who will oppose the elite inside and outside the West but chaos and violence: “we must commit ourselves to a complete renaissance of our strategy to defeat those that threaten us”.

He says Hizbollah wants to create “chaos, division and bloodshed and to provoke retaliation by Israel that would lead to Arab and Muslim opinion being inflamed, not against those who started the aggression, but those who responded to it”. When it is the Anglo-American Establishment has actually planned this and set up Israel to take the retaliation.

Indeed, the reality of the `arc of the crisis’ is that it is created by the West. Staggering incompetence – too staggering without planning – by multiple US agencies led to 911 and a war on terror supported by the US public. They claim they do not know where Bin Laden is yet Al-Qaeda is full of their double agents. ( http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/11/04/MN117081.DTL, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/17/1472/52474, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/06/23/walq23.xml, http://www.911citizenswatch.org/print.php?sid=82). Analysts like Peter Goodgame in `The Globalists and the Islamists’, claim that the global elite has had a hand in shaping and financing all the terrorist organizations of the twentieth century, including the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, Hamas of Palestine and the Afghan Mujahideen.

But Blair does suggest that it is not only one region when he states the conflict in the Middle East and beyond was “in part a struggle between what I call reactionary Islam and moderate mainstream Islam, but its implications go far wider. We are fighting a war – but not just against terrorism, but about how the world should govern itself in the early 21st century, about global values.” When he says “how the world should govern itself” and “global values”, it is code for one world government.

The man behind the regional agenda is George Schultz who is also the political point man for the global agenda. Many rich and powerful groups, such as MPs, can be allured to support the regional agenda but it is likely that it is being used as a trap to spring the global one-world government agenda.

But the global agenda is not really about the Project of the New American Century and US domination. It is about the bankers’ fear that they will not indefinitely control the US so they are pushing the US into wars that will exhaust and bankrupt it. It is about creating global chaos and economic catastrophe. Such chaos will persuade people and politicians that the world needs less national sovereignty and more global government.

This is the view is supported by Dr. Tatyana Koryagina, a senior research fellow at the Russian Ministry of Economic Development and special adviser to President Putin. She became famous after predicting the collapse of the Russian economy in 1998 and the collapse of the US economy after an autumn attack in 2001.

Her interview in the newspaper, Pravda, in July 2001 was widely discussed. She said: “There are international `super-state’ and `super-government’ groups. In accordance with tradition, the mystical and religious components play extremely important roles in human history…

“The U.S. has been chosen as the object of financial attack because the financial centre of the planet is located there. The effect will be maximal. The strike waves of economic crisis will spread over the planet instantly and will remind us of the blast of a huge nuclear bomb.”

Lebanon may have been chosen as the beginning of a new agenda. If so, then Bush-Blair will want the conflict there to continue and to spread. They will face serious opposition from other Western elites and other countries, particularly Russia. And it may be that they will require a second 9/11 to launch the war on Iran.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Buy #gold? Will it go up if the #economy goes down?

  • Big banks manipulate gold price down
  • Gold will go up

One way to protect your savings is to buy physical gold – not paper. ‘Goldbugs’ say that paper currencies are not real, they are not backed by anything valuable. Gold has been trusted over centuries so when currencies go down, gold goes up.

Yet, the gold price has dropped a staggering £15 in 12 hours. By 09:00 on 15 February, it was £1,052 for one ounce. By  21:00, it was only £1,037. So does this prove that gold is a risk?

It’s not the first time gold has been driven down. The gold market is confused due to ‘paper gold’ – or certificates that say that the buyer can claim its value of gold when the claim is made. Trouble is, there is far more paper gold than real gold. And speculators and the big banks like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs and even central banks like the Bank of England can use paper to manipulate the gold price.

But despite this, over the years gold has gone up in value as currencies loose theirs. So, what’s happening now?

From it’s 7 October 2012 high of £1,108, gold has been hammered three times. It went down to £1,047 on 2 November. Went up to £1,092 by 24 November. Hammered down to £1,024 by 24 December. Back up to £1,068 by 4 February. I believe that the big banks plan to get it to £985 and hope it goes back to £929.

Between June 2011 and August 2011, it went from £929 to £1,161. A big increase (probably being over-bought) that had to be stopped. So, it dropped to £1,029 by 13 October. It’s been trading between £1139 and £985 ever since. Yet, looking at trends, it ought to be at around £1,350.

In June 11, the stock market had its biggest fall in the year ‘due to Greek crisis’ and bad US economic news. Fulford says that China and Middle East were refusing to subsidise the US.

I’d say the decline will be over one and a half months. There will then be a series of big purchases over 10 days to create a big increase. Or there will be a stock market fall.

What’s interesting is that the big sell off started around 12:00 on Friday. This is when the New York banks start trading. That’s when sell offs usually occur. But there was selling on Thursday.  This could be hedge funds. If so Gregory Mannarino may have a point. It also suggests hedge funds and banks working together.

But it seems to me that the rest of the world will pile into gold if it goes down. So, their plan won’t work. It would be good to save money and get ready to buy.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Packed meeting calls for a halt to #Whittington sell off

Whittington Hospital’s proposed property sell off could lead to a private health business replacing it, a former health minister has warned.

Camden MP and Labour’s ex-health secretary, Frank Dobson, speculated during the meeting on 12 February that a US health business could buy up part of the Whittington.

He was speaking at the Defend Whittington Hospital Coalition’s a 500-strong meeting at Archway Methodist Church called to oppose a shock plan to sell up to one third of the hospital’s land and buildings.

PIC IHOOPS DWHC Archway meeting 13-02-12

Packed meeting rejected Whittington Hospital board claims

Frank Dobson said: “Who is going to buy the land? The land’s been designated for use for health facilities. We will get a private, American health company who will buy it and then build a hospital.”

He also said: “The Whittington is the safest hospital in England. This might have something to do with the fact that it has a high number of staff to its patients. Yet, in seeking to qualify for foundation status, it is reducing its staff to the national norm.”

Tottenham MP David Lammy passionately warned that a few years in the future with a smaller, less viable Whittington, arguments could be made that it should be merged with another hospital.

Islington MP Jeremy Corbyn told the meeting he examined the pages and pages of proposals. He warned that bed numbers would be cut by half to 177 and staff could be reduced by between 300 and 500.

He confirmed that planning regulations designated the hospital land for use for health services only but he also reflected fears that the land could be used for luxury flats.

Hospital board chairman Joe Liddane admitted to the meeting that they botched their communications and pledged to hold meetings with the public to explain all.

He claimed that public health would be improved through spending sell off proceeds on maternity services and an increase in care in the community made better by medical advances.

He was backed by board members at the meeting and one GP, from the audience, who pleaded that managers were doing their best to keep the hospital in the NHS.

But most speakers from local associations and hospital campaigns in London rejected the proposal. Islington MP, Emily Thornberry and council leader, Catherine West, stressed that the local community loved the Whittington.

Speakers from the Save Lewisham Hospital, the Camden’s defend health services campaign and local author and political commentator Owen Jones, called for mass demos, occupation and strike action. Coalition chair, Shirley Franklyn attacked the lack of consultation fo the decision and called for a picket of the next hospital board meeting due for 17 February.

The meeting overwhelming supported a call to the managers to halt the sell off and backed a planned protest march on 16 March.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

#PFI – timebomb to blow up the #NHS

Hospital’s debt bill – Camden New Journal, Letters, 22/07/2011

http://www.camdennewjournal.com/letters/2011/jul/hospital’s-debt-bill

IN 2002, Whittington Hospital signed a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract. It cost around £30million. Using borrowed money, the hospital settled for an impressively spacious modern development of the somewhat rundown, busy and popular hospital. The price tag was not on show.

PFI funding has long been controversial because of its high cost.

How dire the Whittington’s present financial situation is I do not know. But a stark reminder of a major continuation of its financial problems was recently disclosed in the hospital’s response to a question asked by a member of Islington Pensioners? Forum. Using the Freedom of Information Act 2000 he elicited the information that the annual interest payment on its PFI debt for the financial year 2010-2011 was the staggering sum of £2,228,000.

Could not this money have been better used in patients’ interests? What NHS assets may it now be obliged to sell?

My conclusion: reject any PFI  borrowing ‘solutions’ as appallingly wasteful and benefiting shareholders at taxpayers? expense.

ANGELA SINCLAIR-LOUTIT

Highbury Hill, N5 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Derivative fraud not insurance mis-selling

The Financial Services Authority (BBC Radio 4, Today Programme, 31 Jan.) know what exactly is going on but they are too busy covering up for the banks.

Derivatives

Known by the US Congress as ‘complex financial products’, or ‘exotic financial products’, derivatives are bets. Bets that a share you don’t want to own will go up or down.

According to the Bank of International Settlements, there is around $648 trillion outstanding (only Over The Counter because there’s more) – the global economy is around $70 trillion.

Derivatives did for Dexia Bank in Belgium in 2011 (they told you it was something or other to do with Greece and the Euro not that it’s Europe’s top derivatives bank) and the people are now suffering (PM Programme, 30 Jan.) because the government decided to take 15% of the economy to pay off Dexia’s debts.

If the politicians allow it, derivatives will sink the global economy (global GDP went from $65 trillion, 2010-11 to $70 trillion, 2011-12. It’s not in recession, yet.)

You are not allowed to use the term ‘insurance’ when you flog these things to the financial sector. Because, it’s not insurance, it’s betting. Yet, this is what banks told SMEs, that is, they lied.

Because banks are losing billions on the derivative debt, they thought it would be a good idea to con business people and get their money to pay for their stupid, fraudulent deals.

They knew what they were doing.

More info.

Today there is a horrific derivatives bubble that threatens to destroy not only the U.S. economy but the entire world financial system as well…

In terms of Dexia, not only were they not particularly exposed to Greek debt but Greece at the time had not defaulted. They blatantly lied to us.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment