Given her husband’s viewing habits, I do hope she washed it first…
UPDATE
No, that joke does not mean that I believe the porn claim was the most important bad thing about Jacqui Smith. It wasn’t even the worst thing about her expenses.
I have been working more or less full time for five years now against the systematic abuse of human rights and rollback of Civil Liberties in the UK. This ultra authoritarianism was by no means initiated by Jacqui Smith, and I fear it will not in the least be changed by her departure, unless by some miracle we get Bob Marshall Andrews or Andrew Mackinlay as Home Secretary (and they are about as likely to be appointed as me).
But this news does bring some light at the end of the tunnel, in that it is plainly a symptom of New Labour’s disintegration, which is proceeding in a remarkable fashion. I think a stong part of the public mood is indeed a dislike of the over-mighty state. I remain optimistic that I will not ultimately bequeath my children a country in which liberty is disappearing, despite this terrible ten years.
@Reason
Hangabout, even MPs need R&R, don’t they? Allowable perks are a matter of opinion. I suggest that videos of Mary Poppins should be regarded as necessary for the efficient performance of parliamentary duties. Just think, they could give our Chancellors and PMs valuable lessons about runs on banks..
Now Jacqui Smith has done us all a favour, what chance is there that Jack Straw will face the choppers block.He seems to be keeping a low profile of late or could it be there is a more tangled web being spun by some member of the black widow family that could well seal his fate.
I agree that videos of Mary Poppins should be regarded as necessary viewing for parliamentarians as it did feature a run on the bank!
Granted she didn’t originate the sustained New Labour assault on civil liberties, where does it come from? Who or what is pushing this agenda?
Well NuLab are in the final phase of their existence and will no doubt be trashed in the elections this week. Maybe this will be the satisfying result of the DT “expose” ?
Whoever takes over her job, it matters less, the game is up! I hope that when a general election is called, the winning party or parties have the balls to throw out most of the nonesense laws created by a pointless bunch of parasites.
Malcolm Pryce,
Joe Biden 47th Vice President of the
United States wrote the guts of the US Patriot act in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing.
The Patriot act forms the basis of the US version of the assault on civil liberties.
Bush probably gave it to Blair and told him to implement it in the UK.
I’ve no idea who was responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing, nor who instructed Joe Biden – who calls himself a Zionist – to write it.
Good question though.
You could also check out “The Power of Nightmares, The Rise of the Politics of Fear” particularly “The Shadows in the Cave”
Its a BBC documentary by Adam Curtis and was available on Google Video the last time I looked.
Tony
“Granted she didn’t originate the sustained New Labour assault on civil liberties, where does it come from? Who or what is pushing this agenda?”
Malcolm Pryce
I also wonder that question.
She got right up my nose, but – as others have said – I quite agree that her NuLab replacement will be no better. Less irritating hopefully. We need to keep a sharp eye on what might happen to our constitution. Tony Blair to be U.K. President before E.U. President? :-0
One of the last interviews given by American film producer Aaron Russo may provide some clues as to the identity of those driving the agenda.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA
Granted she didn’t originate the sustained New Labour assault on civil liberties, where does it come from? Who or what is pushing this agenda?
This is the fundamental issue which we should be looking at. All the rest is trimming.
My belief not only from what I’ve read but what I’ve experienced is that there is a permanent government which dictates policy to the elected government.
To me the account of Claire Short reported in the Daily Mail of the Cabinet’s meeting on March 17 to discuss Attorney General Lord Goldsmith’s advice on the legality of the war exemplifies this.
Ms Short said: ‘When we arrived, there was a piece of paper in front of each of us, a few paragraphs written by the Attorney General saying the war was legal, there were no problems etc.
‘Lord Goldsmith started reading it out but we said, “You don’t have to, we can read it.” Then Tony said something like, “That’s it.” And that was it.
‘I wanted to know if the Attorney General had any doubts about the legality of the war.
‘They all said, “Clare, be quiet, stop.” No one else wanted to talk about it. I was shouted down.
Why were they all so passive on the most important issue a country ever has to face? I don’t believe for one minute the decision came from Tony Blair and he intimidated all of them. From what was said it appears they all knew that they had to acquiesce but may not have liked it.
It’s important to support our politicians in this time of need. Send your message here – because we all know how hard it is alienating voters and fiddling your expenses.
http://www.dearjacqui.co.uk
That’s why they bumped off John Smith in my opinion. He wouldn’t have put up with being their gimp. But what do I know? I’m ‘crazy’. Tony may not have made the decision to join in with the invasion of Iraq, but he is clearly on the other side of the fence. Just a question of how high up. It certainly isn’t easy to know who in the cabinet knew what exactly. Russo talks a lot of sense. Any Joe Bloggs can figure out what is really happening if they ask themselves enough questions with an open mind. Global government and control is the agenda.
I don’t know if anyone has seen this or not, but check this pic out:
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/282/12665matrix22jpgnl8.jpg
It’s from ‘The Matrix’ (1998), dvd release 1999. I own the dvd and checked it myself. You can only see it by slowmotion and pause and twisting your head upside down. It’s the scene where he is first arrested and interrogated. However, it is there alright. Check it out yourselves. ‘The Matrix’ probably began filming in 1997. So, 9/11 was planned a good 4 years in advance at least. If you don’t believe the relevance of the expiry date and think it may be a coincidence, then check the passport birth date as well by typing it into wikipedia. It is pretty heavy. So, someone powerful having a pis take or a warning? I’m not sure, but would say a warning myself. This does all link in nicely with Jacqui Smith as she has steadily led us deeper into a Matrix style society.
Anyhow, everyone best stop all this fruitcake conspiracy talk, as we will soon have a pillar of society mysteriously appearing on the thread telling us the official narrative with Presidential authority, trying to disrupt discussion and cause arguments and saying we all belong in the loony bin. Odd that.
NL2, your comment on Straw made me chuckle. He certainly is keeping a low profile isn’t he… Maybe the thief has quit all second jobs and is working hard on his expenses receipts.
Maybe this is me being too obvious, but it’s worth listing the roll of NuLab home secretaries:
Jack Straw
David Blunkett
Charles Clarke
John Reid
Jacqui Smith
Truly an appalling list (with perhaps the exception of John Reid, who was only in the post a year and is not as morally deficient as the others, in my view)
“Not as morally deficient as the others”? A classic Glaswegian red mafia thug. He was Blair’s rottweiler over the Iraq invasion.
sorry to ‘bore’ you again Craig but I thought this article (below) should be of interest, considering who is doing the talking…….
……so you’re right, however much one loathes Jaqui Smith, her leaving is unlikely to make much difference to the onward march of the surveillance state.
We know we don’t like the growing resemblance of the UK to Orwell’s 1984 nightmare state. Do you think that NuLabour politicians like it any more than we do……or is ‘the government’, whoever they are at a particular time, in the grip of other forces……and that these ‘other forces’, who are the real power in the land, will always succeed in finding venal careerists to do their bidding? Indeed are the top rank of every political party where they are because someone has recognised this venality in them?
Ultra-paranoid?
Well, where is the political figure ‘of substance’ (i.e. highly placed whore) who has stood up against these horrors?
Leading Democrats Say Congress And The Senate Owned And Run By Bankers
http://infowars.net/articles/june2009/020609Bankers.htm
“the exception of John Reid, who was only in the post a year and is not as morally deficient as the others, in my view)”
Jason
In their order of being “morally deficient”…
1)Straw
2)Reid
3/4)Blunkett or Clarke
5)Smith
6)Caligula
Blunkett in third!
Hmm, a leftist who spent the weekends on a country estate and fathered a child with another man’s wife???
Ha. Shows the calibre all round.
Please note George, that it is opinion, so I don’t take it too kindly that you present your list as some kind of Universal Truth.
Jason
Where did I say it was a “Universal Truth”?.I am open to contenders for the number 6 slot.
We should chuck all of them out, like Ollie Cromwell said:
Gentlemen! An immovable Parliament is more obnoxious than an immovable King!
You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately… Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go! — Address to the Rump Parliament (20 April 1653)
@George
You might deny being in possession of a Universal Truth, but I think you have struck upon the path to one. Where can we position these NuLab people in the spectrum of moral awfulness? They are clearly idiots, and yet they are maintained in place: to whom are these idiots useful?
You have to withdraw Caligula as a datum – he was mad, bad and dangerous to know, but he was his own man. We need to place Straw, Reid, Blair, Blunkett, Hoon etc. along some other scale, the scale of notoriously ghastly puppets. My suggested datum would be the sonderkommando. Wiki: “They were forced into the position, and accepted it because it meant a few more days or weeks of life, as well as moderately less disastrous living conditions.”
Maybe I watched too much “Yes, Minister” in my callow years, but amidst all the commentary on the dog’s breakfast of economic, constitutional and civil liberties mayhem I am surprised that there seems to be absolutely no mention of the role of civil servants. There’s no shortage of conspiracy theories about neocons, bankers, new world order, even the Matrix and giant lizards. Politicians always take the rap for events that are, in many cases, well out of their control anyway. But what of the Civil Service?
Do we really believe the idea that – for example – Home Secretaries unswervingly pursue party policy (I nearly wrote ‘manifesto’ – how silly) and that a neutral, obedient Civil Service do their bidding? Or is there a credible argument that the case for, say, ID cards and retrenchment on civil liberties has been accepted by the mandarinate and evidence is presented to each incoming Home Sec. in such a way that they feel obliged to go along with it? When you look at the numerous and diverse (and variously able) holders of political office over the last 30 years, with ostensibly differing views, how come we see such a high level of continuity in key issues of policy?
If you want to create a conspiracy theory, who has the continuous influence on ‘decision makers’, are the gatekeepers of evidence, statistics and ‘experts’, control what actually gets implemented and how? And how transparent is this whole process?
Craig, you have a huge and privileged insight into how all this works – at the very least in matters of foreign policy. Can you comment? Or does omerta hold sway?
slacker,
Too big a subject for a comments thread, but certainly the senior civil service is a force for solcial inertia that can weigh down any but the most powerful and determined politician.
“Too big a subject …”
Accepted, but IMHO any process of significant reform must also increase transparency in the role of the senior civil service. More public debate needed?
@slacker
Bernard Donoghue was an adviser to PM James Callaghan. His diaries give a good insight into the influence of “the machine” (Civil Service).
It seems probable that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith had no knowledge of the police investigation initiated by her Permanent Secretary, which led to the arrest of the Conservative frontbencher Damian Green MP. At the time, I was astonished how little fuss Parliament made of the matter.