´óÏó´«Ã½

..it's high time the UK joined the Euro....

the credit punch has brought out all the marginals. From lefty agi-props trying to storm the Royal Exchange to eurozoids saying the euro is the cure. That 'its 'high time' as if that was an economic reason? What's low time?

why would the uk want to join the german economy, i mean, euro? As a solution to problems in the banking sector?

ALL OF A PIECE

Dubya says he went to war on bad intelligence - no change there - but what a pathetic attempt to cover his true volition.
There is much evidence that America was slow to heed warnings of the 9/11 attack; and now India is behaving in a similar way. America 'took revenge' with the public roused and approving - will India do the same? (Ironic that America warned India!)

Guantanamo showed the ease with which a 'civilised democracy' throws away all pretence of such. British history is littered with similar behaviour. Plus ca change.

Obviously there is 'something going on' in the Green affair. But after Kelly, 45 minute WMD, and the nuanced independence of retired judges, an Attourney General and the like, I will not expect to find myself privy to the truth. No, not in Britain.

World leaders are no more controlled by us, in these 'democracies', than they are by any morality I recognise.

The Indian authorites were given intelligence reports about the terrorist attack weeks ago, not just the US a week ago (Intelligence reports date back from 21st August 2008).



This isn't the first time the authorities have ignored warnings from security agencies such as in the terrorist attacks on the Indian Parliament back in 2006, where Shin Bet/Mossad had received intellligence reports that it was going to happen. The government (regardless of party) is highly corrupt, and it isn't out of character for politicians to receive bribes either.

1. At 5:39pm on 02 Dec 2008, bookhimdano

I have to concur.

What, in the great 'derriere's rush' scheme of things, does this sentence mean or suggest?

Returning to a topic which has become somewhat unfashionable, or at least is now little discussed even in the context of Mumbai, if we are to win the ‘war’ against global terrorism we need to understand who we are fighting, and what are their strategies. At the time of 9/11 I became convinced that there was a brilliant military strategist lurking somewhere within the Al Quaeda high command. In that context I had, not long before, been a personal friend of one of the most brilliant military leaders of the 20th century. As a revolutionary leader he had employed many of the same principles, and I had long discussions with him about their strategy. Accordingly I thought I was perhaps able to see what lay underneath the Al Quaeda strategist’s decisions at that time. Thus, although 9/11 only required 19 ‘soldiers’ armed with box-cutters, it clearly had been a year or more in preparation; where my friend’s most important battles had also taken a couple of years in preparation. The military strategy behind 9/11 had involved sound intelligence, extended training and brilliant innovation; in particular the concept that a fully-fuelled wide-body jet formed a bomb with the power of a small nuclear weapon was nothing less than genius (albeit a perverted one). In terms of political strategy the attack was focused on the two most sensitive parts of the economy, the finance sector (occupying the twin towers) and the airline industry (which is still bedevilled by the security apparatus the attack spawned). It also displayed a mastery of media manipulation. On the other hand, although Al Quaeda was quite vocal about its objectives, it did not claim direct responsibility for the attack; thus increasing the uncertainty which it aimed to create.

However, over recent years I had gradually changed my mind. With no similar spectacular taking place for more than seven years, I had slowly grown convinced that 9/11 was just a fluke. After all, nobody could have predicted that George Bush and the neo-cons would have taken advantage of the event to start their own wars. This was even though those of us who were long-range planners at the time, in the think-tanks advising the UK government and through it the US security services, had clearly recommended that the necessary reaction to such an attack was to play it down and avoid the fear the attackers wanted to create.

I was, of course, wrong to change my mind! The Mumbai attack has now shown exactly the same brilliance of strategy. It clearly demonstrated the same long term investment; this time in terms of at least a year or two of commando training, for the same handful of well-trained of soldiers, and the detailed intelligence gathering going before. It also showed the same flair for media manipulation, and even focused on the same (finance and tourist industry) sectors, which are under stress in the interregnum at the end of the disastrous Bush presidency. It was not as ‘successful’ in terms of body count, where nobody could have predicted the structural weakness in the twin towers which resulted in most of the 3,000 deaths there. However, it may have been even more successful in terms of creating international tensions. India and Pakistan are a (nuclear) tinder-box, so this looks as if it was deliberately planned to light the fuse; and hence the ‘trail’ of clear evidence leading back to Pakistan. It remains to be seen whether this happens. In any case, it seems, at least to me, the Al Quaeda military genius is back in business with this spectacular.

So what has been his role in the years between? What other strategies has he implemented?

The first point to note is that, despite its prominence in the media, Al Quaeda almost certainly contains no more than a few score of full-time organisers at its core. Accordingly, apart from its infrequent spectaculars which even then require that no more than 20 soldiers be expended, it has to be very efficient in its activities. Thus, its main ongoing efforts seem to be in fomenting trouble in areas where there already is significant instability; in this case India versus Pakistan. At the moment the long term involvements seem to be Afghanistan/Pakistan, where local (Islamic) nationalism amongst the Pushtun population (directed against the Western imperialists) has been rampant for centuries, and Somalia, where much the same is now true (and the piracy there may offer Al Quaeda a useful source of funds now its Saudi sources have been largely cut off).

Our Al Quaeda strategist, however, seemingly has learned the equally important lesson of when to cut his losses and downgrade his efforts. Indonesia and Yemen now seem to have been put on the back-burner; as has even been that in Iraq, though that may have been necessary to resource the Mumbai spectacular. The remainder of Al Quaeda’s business seems to be in the form of a franchise. It appears to be willing to offer its brand to local groups, as previously in India. It even offers its blessing, and training, to amateur groups; such as those in Europe. All of this adds to the uncertainty it seeks to create.

The key to our winning the war therefore is our recognition of how limited Al Qaeda really is. Even if you add together all the fatalities accruing to its activities over the past decade, the total of its victims is probably less than 5,000 (of which 3,000 came from the ‘accidental’ part of the twin towers). To put it in context, this was a total of just six minutes of the total deaths in the Second World War! Thus the main damage is done by the fear inculcated, with the very willing help of our media. Our best weapon, therefore, is to drive out the fear by putting the true risk in context.

Our main active ‘pursuit’ thereafter should focus on the two main areas of instability (Afghanistan/Pakistan and Somalia), not least to cut off the resources it needs. Even here the effort should be to expend some part of the current military costs in building the necessary civilian infra-structures which will win hearts and minds; as this seems to have recently started to work in Iraq.

As for the ‘franchisees’, especially the amateurs, the best route seems to be tracking them, and their contacts, via SIGINT received at Langley and Cheltenham; and stopping them from making fools of themselves and us.

On the other hand, if you want a very speculative scenario which illustrates how serious the next Al Qaeda ‘spectacular’ could be, this next attack might again take a minimum of four or so years to prepare; so it could take place in 2012, or more likely in 2016, to take advantage of a US election year. In this extreme scenario, with increasing chaos in Pakistan this attack might involve use of a nuclear device for the first time. This could be sourced in Pakistan, with the plutonium smuggled over a long period to the target in small (undetectable) pieces. The most damaging target might then be on the West Coast of the US; the most accessible because of the large numbers of containers arriving there. Although a nuclear device sounds devastating, an explosion on the ground would likely kill just a few hundred, and any airburst vehicle would be shot out of the sky before it got near a suitable centre of population. Assuming our ‘genius’ moves the goalposts however, and getting even more speculative, one ideal target (indicative of the potential escalation) could, for example, be the Upper Crystal Springs Reservoir below San Francisco. A nuclear explosion there would flood large parts of the Santa Clara Valley (and southwards) with radioactive water; the radiation increased by that coming from the Stanford linear accelerator in its path. Large tracts of California would be made uninhabitable and thousands condemned to a lingering death from the radiation. There might even be the added effect of triggering the San Andreas Fault which runs under the reservoir. The odds on all of this might be many millions to one, but those are the sort of odds our Al Qaeda strategist looks for. More important, the scenario indicates just how serious the next major incident might be; and shows why massive efforts in winning hearts and minds, rather than local fire-fights, will be justified.

My apologies for the length of this contribution, but it is an important subject.

we didn't learn our lesson over our decision to leave the last joining of currencies and Lamont's abysmal performance made us stand alone because we went in too high, the German mark was 2.42 and was far too high, but now we are haemorriging sterling against the euro so lets go for it and join, after all, all we can lose our losses....

#1 I think we agree on this one!

Happy Xmas.

STRANGE SIMILARITIES (#5)

Both India and America were well advised of what was coming. Both 'somehow' failed to prevent it. America made god use of the hyped affront. We have yet to see what India does. It seems to me the 'brilliance' of strategy lies with the 'good guys' while the inept bad guys had clearly had their cover blown to the point where - certainly in America - the dummies were blatantly used for Machiavellian purpose! Or is there even an element of co-operation?

LISBON FAIT ACCOMPLI? (THE 'DOWNTURN')

"Another day - another drop in the value of the pound. Paul Mason looks at how much worse things could get. And we speak to the French Finance minister about whether it's high time the UK joined the Euro"

My my, what a lot of activity in the markets and on the Europan stage in recent times. Central banks injecting liquidity, governments calling in retails banks for little chats, governments nationalising this bank, pressuring that (to 'get with the programme....'.

It's almost as if there was an idea was to ....

The flooding in Scotland in 2006 and England/Wales in 2007 under international guidelines should have been considered a Terrorist attack.

The easiest way to ensure people died and as much damage as possible was done, was for those who knew it would happen, was to ensure it wasn't prevented.

I told Tayside Police in October 2006 it was going to happen.

I also told them at the same time the UK economy was going to crash. Not only that it would, but more or less exactly the amount it did. I even reported this correctly as Economic Sabotage.

For the Blog Mods, I can write that. Because:
1) I have the evidence

2) Before either event happened I reported them to the police. Even though they decided to take no action. I had fulfilled my legal and moral responsibilities.

Tayside decided they couldn't look at the evidence in either case as they considered the offences criminal and outside their jurisdiction.

It didn't stop either event happening, just as they knew they would -in advance.

Flooding and economic chaos could have been prevented.

India? Here again we have the UK media reporting on foreign "did they, didn't they know in advance" stories.

While in the UK 13 people dying, £5 billion of damage. The collapse of the UK economy is met with.............ssh

Silence

Celtic Lion

1. mps need their own police force independent of the state that solely reports to parliament.

Otherwise state agencies can contrive an allegation and investigation to gain access to MP's offices, devices and correspondence to identify sources who leak information embarrassing to them.

2. The idea the Chief of ACPO is independent is laughable. (See ACPO's recent press releases.)

3. In this case I think the Police are simply trying to work out if the MP tried to procure the information, rather than simply receive it. That said they shouldn't have access to ALL communication to the MP from other constituents.

Yes MPs are not above the law, but MP communication with the people must be private and protected. Especially if that communication revealed corruption at the top of the intelligence agencies or the police force. mps therefore need their own police force independent of the state that solely reports to parliament. They alone can search offices without permission and release information and communication they see fit. Police and intelligence agencies MUST not be able to access ANY communication unrelated to the matter at hand, or else it's a licence to detect and prevent whistle blowing in the intelligence agencies or police.

I don't feel this current issue is a conspiracy by the police. I just feel they could have got a warrant and spoke to the MP under caution and they should have no access to any communication from those unrelated to the enquiry. My point is in the future, the police or the intelligence agencies could misuse an enquiry to access information they seek under the pretext of a different investigation. To stop whistle blowing and protect the guilty.

1. I feel moderation of comments should be done by the programme team itself, not a separate unit; so comments can be read before and during the programme. (If the moderator feels a comment is particularly pertinent or provides an angle/idea/comment of interest to the programme makers.

2. I respect the number of comments to moderated, but I do feel there should be more moderators to allow faster moderation.

The Seer of Blairgowrie writes at comment
#10:


"The flooding in Scotland in 2006 and England/Wales in 2007 under international guidelines should have been considered a Terrorist attack.

The easiest way to ensure people died and as much damage as possible was done, was for those who knew it would happen, was to ensure it wasn't prevented.

I told Tayside Police in October 2006 it was going to happen. "

I also told them at the same time the UK economy was going to crash. Not only that it would, but more or less exactly the amount it did. I even reported this correctly as Economic Sabotage."

"Tayside decided they couldn't look at the evidence in either case as they considered the offences criminal and outside their jurisdiction.

It didn't stop either event happening, just as they knew they would -in advance.

Flooding and economic chaos could have been prevented."

In defence of the local fuzz: what they did do was to crack down on a related issue
viz the nicking of 'cundies' (drain covers)
(from the French 'conduits' for benefit of
Christine Lagarde).

I remember reading in the Courier about
a couple of felons getting a lecture from
the bench in Perth about six months ago
about the environmental consequences
of cashing in illegally on surging metal
prices by nicking drain covers in Perth.

I now see that this of course a wider
UK problem:

There was incidentally a wonderful cartoon in today's Herald of the 3 Wise Men. They
are bearing gifts labelled: Frankincense; Myrrh; and Socks!

Outstanding interview by Jeremy with Christine Lagarde - an instant classic if ever I saw one! Much more please :o)

An excellent interview with the Indian High Commisioner on the failings of Indian government's security and the fact that it is now the 2nd most dangerous country in the world.

My Personal Views -

Damian Green

1)
The Police should have sought legal and constitutional advice before going near a MP for such an alleged minor offence (not being a national security issue or a serious criminal offence).

2)
Parliament should not have allowed the Police in until or not, MP's had decided to withdraw Parliamentary privilege from Mr Green.
It is not the Police's job to protect Parliamentary Democracy in this country , it is mainly Parliaments job, and the Queen protects us from Parliament and some fundamental freedoms.
If MP's want to relinquish their responsibility in this area they should say so.

Tumbling pound

I think Emily hit the nail on it's head when she asked the Chancellor, when he was at the G20 meeting in the USA a few weeks ago -

Sterling at it's lowest against the Euro ever and the slide against the Dollar, do you see that as a vote of no confidence against the Bank of England or on the Government itself ?

If Emily had to ask the question, don't you think international investors are asking the same question ?

So I see no need to join the Euro and hopefully we won't in my life time !

India

Sadly I don't think Pakistan and India are going to see eye to eye any time soon.

Guantanamo

This is going to be Mr Obama's headache now.


I enjoyed tonight's program, thank you !

Correction to #16

Damian Green

2)
Parliament should not have allowed the Police in until or not, MP's had decided to withdraw Parliamentary privilege from Mr Green.
It is not the Police's job to protect Parliamentary Democracy in this country , it is mainly Parliaments job and the Queen protects us from Parliament and protects some fundamental freedoms .It's a fine balance.
If MP's want to relinquish their responsibility in this area they should say so.

mercerdavids #5

A well written piece but I must take you up on what appear to be a couple of E&Os.

The Mumbai attack was on nothing like the scale of 9/11. There, thousands were killed and many millions of dollars worth of damage to property (3 major buildings completely destroyed remember) resulted along with a costly period of dislocation in the financial marketplace.

Mumbai on the other hand resulted in (so far) less than 200 dead and one luxury hotel in need of a refit. I must make it very clear that I am in no way belittling the sorrow visited upon the people of Mumbai. It was a barbaric act and should not be tolerated by any civilised people.

Also, technically you are wrong to state that a fueled 727 has the same explosive power as a small nuclear weapon. The aircraft did not bring the building down, the resulting fire did. A tactical nuclear weapon (say 7-10 kilotons) would have made a much larger hole in Lower Manhattan than did the falling buildings.

You also for some reason overlook the London and Madrid incidents which were also (although terrible) on a fairly small scale.

I remain convinced that the 'War on Terror' is a political ploy designed to keep us all in our places. I would say that 'The Power of Nightmares' had it about right. I also wonder sometimes if the accusations of 'foreign flag' operations isn't altogether wide of the mark.

I don't believe your scenario of a nuclear weapon being accreted near San Francisco is very likely - if an organisation wanted to detonate a nuclear device where it hurt, much easier for one of the many far eastern tramp vessels making its way up the Thames to be 'carrying'. That should keep our minds off the current governmental failures in economy for a while.

if the pound drops to parity with the euro then it will be defacto the same the as the euro. So there is no need to formally join. then one will have the 'benefits' without the ball and chain of euroland political machinations.


if the uk recovers faster than the 'basket' [case?] of countries that comprise the euro, given that must always be an average, then the pound will be in better position to take advantage of that.

as it is the pound still buys more than the euro.

#13 Neil Robertson

Going Down the Drain

Drain cover thefts tend to follow the price of steel/iron. This does fluctuate highly in terms of 'weigh in' price. (See previous posts on keeping old cars on road).

The drain covers are 'clean' metal, unlike a scrap car which will have carpets, plastic, glass etc. So high scrap value.

I first noticed it around 2001, related to the increase of scrap price and the emergence of China requiring resources.

I did a technician engineering apprenticeship. Specialising in metallurgy, so I worked in foundries. In my 40's I find the things I did are now a dead art. People recently posted on Fred Dibnah. I could/can mould make, sand cast etc.

I have this thing about reading old grid covers. To see where they were made, when by whom etc. Grid covers from Perth and Blairgowrie often have the Falkirk Foundries mark.

So I find the stealing of grid covers upsetting. Those grid covers are a link to a lost world of furnaces, pattern makers, copes and drags, runners and risers, molten metal, fettling shops. The ability to make and manufacture from the the most basic elements. Skills that have gone. Local foundries serving local communities, each individual. Made by hand, with care, skill, love and pride.

I gave directions to someone once. "Is that the the 2nd or 3rd on the right". Without thinking. "If you stand at the kerb and look at the drain it was made by Stantons".

I'll get me anorak...

Celtic Lion

REVELING IN (NEFARIOUS) RHETORIC

'I did not personally authorise the search. It was later that evening that I was told the search had gone ahead only on the basis of a consent .'


"Acting Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson told the Metropolitan Police Authority that his officers had been given the proper written permission to search Mr Green’s office by Jill Pay, the Serjeant at Arms, who is responsible for security and keeping order within the House of Commons. "It is our duty to follow the evidence wherever that may take us," he said."


So, the police asked, were given permission by the Serjeant at Arms, and got a signed consent from her too.

MPs need to stop emoting and try pursuing truth a little more instead of reveling in nefarious rhetoric. The fact that they don't do this much of the time is why they don't know what they are talking about much of the time, and why so few trust them.

Economical with the truth sums them up. The interview with Paxman on this saw all but Livingstone being very carefu to not say anything substantive, and Paxman didn't press any direct questions either.

But then, one must always remember that natural languages are intesional, and as such, they are not truth functional. That's an important, and paradoxical, point believe it or not.

That should have been 'intensional' (other typos are less important - but this term is important).

It's odd that despite this being the case, most people seem to think that they DO understand what's being said much of the time. I guess this just goes to show that most people don't really listen to each other very carefully most of the time?

In science it's altogether different (most of the time anyway),

Re comment #20: surely a classic posting?!

On the Green affair I am struggling with the idea that:

"Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has said she had no prior knowledge of Mr Green's arrest."

If she knew who the mole was and she knew where the information was surfacing then of course she knew. Possibly not "legally" knew but would have known who to place her money on at Ladbrokes?

IT'S ALL IN THE CALLING (#21)

Well said JJ. But only the other day I was watching a bit of 'bullying in the workplace' as Batman Martin, warned hecklers that he might never 'call' them again. Mother of Parliaments? More than an ordinary mother -the Americans have a word for it.

Livingstone is not dominated by martins whim.

KNOWN UNKNOWNS (#24)

In the Arms to Iraq affair, there was much that Margaret Thatcher 'did not know'.
I am utterly convinced she KNEW she did not know - but THAT was not asked.

All part of the elegant way we British do corruption.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

IT ISN'T JUST THE FSA WHICH IS LIGHT TOUCH AND HOG-TIED

thegangofone (#24) ostensibly, this was a Civil Service and police matter. Non politicization of the agents of the (executive branch of government) the crown/state means just that. Senior politicians are presumably far too few in number and much too busy (not doing 'stuff') to get involved in every event. Once laws are made it's the duty of agents of the executive (crown/state, i.e. Civil Servants, including the police) to enforce those laws. Civil Servants are also bound by a Civil Service code, and administrators enforce that code through disciplinary measures, and sometimes, when laws are suspected as having been broken, asking other Civil Servants (the police here) to investigate and submit their evidence to the CPP if the evidence looks like it's likely to result in a successful prosecution, and note, this government hs been very eager to point out that despite perceptions tothe contrary, the rate of crime has gone down.

Even if Smith had known about any of this, there would have been little she could/should have done about it, especially in these liberal, 'free', deregulated times that we all love so much. The government stopped the SFO's Saudi/BAE investigation by asserting it was in the interests of national security, but what grounds would Smith have used to stop this investigation?

Surely this is what the 'rule of law', and prevention of the abuse of power is all about. Freedom for business with minimal intrusion of the state?

It's fiendishly complicated all this toothless regulation in our dregulated free-market.

"It is difficult to underestimate how important this case is for SFO morale. The agency has never managed to convict any company of a crime, with high-profile failures against the likes of Blue Arrow, Marconi and Guinness hitting its credibility."



One might have expected the SFO to be not too pleased or !

But then, maybe they're just there for appearances, a bit like other agents of the ('vile') state these days?

'Freedom is good...'