Yesterday saw a vital indictation of the viability of the coalition – and it was George Osborne who delivered an extremely good result.
Last week I blogged:
Next week, the EU Council of Ministers plans to adopt strict regulations enforcing transparency on hedge funds and private equity firms and limiting their leverage, ie how much they can gamble. NuLabour resisted these very sensible Franco-German proposals, because NuLabour was 100% bought by the City. The Tory right wants to oppose the plans because they are European regulations. Already we are hearing bleats that hedge fund managers will move abroad. Good. The attitude to these proposals will be an imprtant early indication of whether this government is more progressive than NuLabour.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/05/on_my_way_to_li.html
This is from the lead story on the front page of today’s Financial Times:
The approval of the controversial rules by finance ministers follows a similar endorsement by a group of EU lawmakers on Monday and brings regulation of the “alternative investment” industry closer.
Mr Osborne decided not to use up political capital in Brussels fighting to dilute an EU directive that has been ferociously pushed by France and Germany
end
More to the point, these regulations had been ferociously resisted by New Labour, just as Brown and Mandelson had ferociously resisted Franco-German proposals to limit bank bonuses and apply other brakes on casino banking. New Labour’s total defence of even the most extreme practices of most unacceptable faces of capitalism – hedge funds and private equity funds – was sickening.
It was notable in the election campaign that the Tories stance on banking regulation – in their manifesto, their rhetoric and the leaders’ debates – was much stronger than New Labour’s, and closer to the Liberal Democrats. There was room to doubt if this was just election populism. Osborne’s decision yesterday is a welcome sign that he Tories really are willing to take on City interests to which New Labour were slaves.
But the significance does not stop there. This decision also shows Cameron and Osborne are prepared to take on their own Europhobes. There will be fury from the combined forces of private equity millionaires and anti-Europeans, being poured down the lines into Conservative Central Office today.
Osborne in fact cleverly played the pro-EU card in the ECOFIN meeting and used his agreement to fund regulation to push forward the single market in financial services – something which has been disgracefully obstructed on continental Europe.
A friend of mine in UKREP Brussels tells me this morning that the view there is that it is great to have Ministers who do not confuse the interest of the City and the national interest as automatically the same thing.
And the icing of the cake for the coalition is that these very proposals for transparency and limitation of risk of hedge funds and private equity funds were initiated in the European Parliament by Lib Dem MEPs – led by my old mate Graham Watson.
Owen Lee Hugh-Mann: Interesting. Even the official public record is routinely distorted. For instance, Bush addressed the NAACP, and received some jeers at one point as he smirked and made light of the record of Republicans when it comes to black civil rights. The transcript logged at the Whitehouse registered this as ‘Applause’.
“In my opinion, what you gave up was a bum job going nowhere, in order to be a successful opinion moulder on the internet.”
Hardly. Referring to that great oracle, “The Simpsons”…
Milhouse: Why don’t we put it on the internet?
Bart: No, we need to reach people whose opinion’s really matter.
Anno: Craig hasn’t denied anything about the power of the banksters. What he has said to you repeatedly is that raving on about them being Zionists, and pretending that the natural greed and lack of morality in banksters is somehow evidence of a vast Jewish conspiracy (to do what??) is more than a little objectionable.
The behaviour of banksters does not require a one-race conspiracy. There is doubtless a lot of collusion among interested parties (hedge-fund managers in particular), but that has bugger-all to do with race, and everything to do with mind-boggling avarice.
Owen, for a minute when reading your piece on Prince Edward, I thought you were referring to Prince Edward, the son of Queen Victoria and was thinking, my God, this man is Methuselah!
Actually, Glenn,
Jews and banking have been intimately connected for a long while, since Jews, unlike the European Christians in mediaeval times were not prohibited from lending money at interest. Further, Jews were excluded from public office and thus, naturally enough, pursued opportunities to gain influence and power through banking, industry and commerce just as did the Quakers, who were also subject to religious discrimination.
While stereotypes may be applied with a lack of reservation, it seems foolish to deny the great prominence of Jews (as members of an anthropological, rather than a religious, group) in American banking and American banking and financial scams. Moreover, it has been argued, perhaps with some validity, that the racism and moral double standard of some jews accounts for their lack of scruple in financial dealings.
To get to a large group to London for the first anti-Iraq war protest, we hired a bus, so I was with Muslim friends and friends of theirs etc. In conversations during the journey, I discovered my friends would not taken part in the protest if Iraq had not been a Muslim country. I then made a point of asking all of the others on the bus. Not a single Muslim said he, or she, would have taken part had Iraq not been predominantly Muslim. (I do not claim that this was a representative survey and have no idea what proportion of the Muslims who demonstated that day would have done so regardless of the religion of the country involved). Almost all of them also said they thought that Irag was under attack precisely because it was a Muslim country and would not have been
attacked otherwise. Yet they also believed that the reasons given for the war were excuses and the underlying reason was to gain control of Iraq’s oil. I agreed with this last point, obviously, so asked why they thought Iraq was being singled out because it was Muslim if the reason it was threatened with invasion was to control energy resources? I gave plenty of similar examples of US, (and past UK), imperialist policy towards non-Muslim states. They continued with their doublethink however, which, sad to say, did not surprise me. I have little doubt as to what anno’s position on bank interest charges would be if Mohammed had been in favoour of them.
Alfred, fuck off with your ‘Jewish’ smears.
Owen: WTF? Are you trying to insinuate that Muslim people are only against violence against other Muslims? Yes, I think you are. I’m surprised.
Sorry for the language. I was incensed.
No such thing as a Zionist banker?
All “conspiracy theory” and “racial stereotyping”?
It’s nice to see Craig and Cathouse Larry at one on this issue.
What the Bejeez was Edmond de Rothschild doing in Palestine from 1882 onwards? Growing vines?
Old Edmond even thought about buying the Wailing Wall during a tour in 1887!
At the end,Edmond de Roth remarked,”Without me Zionism could not have prospered,and without Zionism I could have done nothing.”
Perhaps the old man was wallowing in hubris-he wouldn’t be the first Roth to do so.
Going further back in the historical record there’s the small geopolitical priority of the Suez canal.It was this strategic asset that British planners sought,by backing Zionist aspirations for a Jewish state in Palestine,to protect at all costs.
Who bought it for them? Lionel Rothschild.
Then there’s the other small matter of the role of Zionist bankers in the history of major revolutions and wars throughout the last and ongoing in this century.
Anyone who still believes Zionist bankers and their agents play no role in all these massive human tragedies should think about taking a leaf out of old Baron Edmond’s book.
Start your own personal colony…….in CLOUD CUCKOO LAND!
Oh, hello, Apostate. Have a couple of questions for you:
1.Do you really think banking is ‘in the genes’?
2. Do you think it would be better if we were more hateful?
Those I happened to share the bus said they would not have bothered to travel to London to protest if Iraq had not been Muslim. As I made a point of saying, I have no idea how representative they were, but I found their attitude disturbing as those particular individuals, according to their own freely expressed opinions, would not have been there had the invasion been of Cuba instead. If something is wrong, it’s wrong, but their attitude was “We are protesting against an attack on our fellow Muslims.”, rather than our fellow humans. I’ve no doubt that this is by no meams represetative of all, but I myself was shocked by the attitude of those I spoke to, which is what prompted me to investigate further.
Technicolour,
remember that there is ‘groupishness’, where people support and act in favour of what they believe to be ‘their group’ – race, religion, class, whatever.
Alfred and Apostate,
I don’t know how much overlap there is between Zionists and banksters, and I wouldn’t know how to find out.
But that doesn’t matter.
When people do wrong, oppose the wrongdoing, not the people. If you oppose ‘Zionist bankers’, you just start an argument about whether Zionists are bankers are Zionists – which obscures the real matter of what is being done wrong.
Supporting the violence of a racist state is wrong.
Sucking wealth from ordinary people to fatten the rich is wrong.
Hello Alfred,
What you might have forgotten to take into consideration is that Jews – throughout the middle ages – were _specifically prohibited_ from entering pretty much any of the crafts and tradesman’s guilds. You will not find a single Jew in, for example, the Masons, because of the blatantly racist policies held against them.
If you cannot – by law! – hold public office, and you cannot enter guilds which pretty much held a “closed shop” on crafts and trades, it is not unsurprising that Jews went into finance, as one of the few avenues in which they were allowed to make a living.
The fact that such some large financial institutions have a Jewish component to their background can actually be attributed to a definite programme – that which worked against Jews on entirely racist principles. Now that’s a pretty long way from the whacked-out conspiracy nuts who think Jewish representation in banking must somehow be a diabolical Zionist plot.
Next thing you lot will come up with is that the Shudras or the Dalits have cornered the market on moving rubbish and sewage in India, because of a vast lowest-class conspiracy.
*
Aside:
Don’t start claiming victory on the “911 thread” yet, tea-baggers like “wide-stance” Larry … I’ve decided not to write there again before the weekend. You’re utterly defeated there. It just hasn’t sunk in yet. 😉
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/may/20/torture-william-hague-terrorism
“A judge will investigate claims that British intelligence agencies were complicit in the torture of terror suspects, William Hague, the foreign secretary, said tonight.”
I have to admit I’m surprised at the speed this new government is acting. The cynic in me says this is a political move to further weaken the opposition, however the optimist in me says he is acting on principles.
“I have to admit I’m surprised at the speed this new government is acting. The cynic in me says this is a political move to further weaken the opposition, however the optimist in me says he is acting on principles.”
Well, it isn’t impossible for cynical party political motives and right actions to coincide.
“I’ve decided not to write there again before the weekend”
Is the 911 thread still active? I thought it had fizzled out. More to the point I don’t know how to get back to it. Anyone got a link? Thanks.
Here you go MJ:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post.html
Angrysoba,
yes, a change of government may increase the probability of such an overlap
Glenn,
“What you might have forgotten to take into consideration is that Jews – throughout the middle ages – were _specifically prohibited_ from entering pretty much any of the crafts and tradesman’s guilds. …”
If Wikipedia is to be relied upon, Jews were invited to England by William the First with the intention that they would bring capital, lend it and thereby enhance the wealth of the nation. So it appears they were not driven to engage in usury but came as usurers, fully fledged, and if the Domesday Book is to be believed, it was in that capacity that they became very rich, very arrogant and very much hated — for which reasons they were expelled in 1290, not to return until the time of the reformation. So I think both of us were in some error in believing that Jews in England were driven to usury by exclusion from other opportunities.
Hey, Technicolor,
I thought I might cause some reaction. But as I understand from your second comment, your initial reaction was pure knee-jerk. Thus, I assume you agree that Jews are by no means immune to racism.
Barbara Amiel, for example, has described Arabs as “animals,” and proposed that Israel should simply nuke them (I’d give you the links to the New Statesman and the Telegraph, respectively, but Craig’s blog software would choke on them). Jonah Goldberg condemns all Germans as Hitler’s “willing executioners,” while in Jerusalem, among young Israelis, it seems fashionable to call President Obama a nigger:
http://maxblumenthal.com/feeling-the-hate-in-jerusalem/
I assume also that you agree that Judaism, is a racially discriminatory religion.
As for Jewish prominence in American banking and American banking and financial scams, all I will say is that Goldman Sachs was not founded by Canadians and is not run by Canadians and that neither Michael Milken, nor Ivan Boesky nor Bernie Madoff are Canadians.
But just as most Germans are decent, honorable, and honest people Hitler notwithstanding, so most Jews are decent, honorable, and honest people, a few crooked bankers and a fairly sizable crowd of fanatical Zionists, notwithstanding.
As per usual we get the same PC brain-washed dingbats trying to turn the issue of financial terrorism into a race issue.
Insofar as families like the Roths practised endogamy over centuries and even surreptitiously inter-bred with dynastic lines to maintain their elite domination-genes are an issue.If only because they made it one!
I tend to think that hereditary greed is a more accurate description.
technicolor,Larry,angri et al will always use the antisemitism screen to obscure what really amounts to an important argument about a financial empire that’s now in its death-throes.
The imminent financial collapse may also prompt a major re-think on the part of the major banking families
descendants of the Venetian fondi,Warburg,Schiff et al as to the long-term quality of their gene pool!
It should certainly convince us that central banking has reached its nadir.
Warburg,Schiff,Rothschild RIP.
“most Jews are decent, honorable, and honest people”
So why bother even mentioning Judaism? What has Barbara Amiel got to do with anything?
My sentiments remain the same, Alfred.
It is not usually vouchsafed on mainstream history courses that communism and Zionism were twin-track operations.
Thus we find Trotsky regularly playing chess with Baron Rothschild in a Vienna cafe before the Bolshevik Revolution.
As to Marx’s aspirations for Zionist banker-led World Government-we’re not allowed to mention them either.
Chunks of history gone AWOL?
You bet!
“So why bother even mentioning Judaism? What has Barbara Amiel got to do with anything?”
You told me to “fuck off” because I pointed out that some Jews are racists. So I gave you the example of Barbara Amiel a vehement Zionist and anti-Arab racist married to the staunch Zionist, Lord Conrad Black, currently of the the Coleman Federal Correction Institute, Florida, USA.
What’s hard to understand about that?
Alfred, I apologised for my language. Substitute “get away with you” by all means.
I do not understand why you are bothering to point out that some Jewish people are racist? So what? So are some Christians. Would you like me to give you an example of a racist Christian? I can. What good would it do? What would it prove? None and nothing.
And yet you conflate individual instances of racism (Amiel disgraceful, I agree) with the assertion that Judaism is a “racially discriminatory religion”. In truth, it is not, as you should very well know. Anyone of any race can become Jewish. I don’t expect you to apologise for this misinformation, by the way.
“And yet you conflate individual instances of racism (Amiel disgraceful, I agree) with the assertion that Judaism is a “racially discriminatory religion”. In truth, it is not, as you should very well know. ”
But of course Judaism is a racist religion (which is not the same as saying all Jews are racist, if only because many so-called Jews are Jews only in the anthropological sense). Read the first five books of the Bible, i.e., the Torah. The Jews are to rule of the nations of the Earth, destroy the Canaanites and steal their land, et., etc. And their chief religious festival, the Passover, celebrates the mass murder of innocents.
I’m sorry, but the evidence is irrefutable. Yahweh is a total shit.
Which is not the same as saying even a religious Jew is a shit. In my experience, highly intelligent people believe all kinds of total nonsense which rarely affects they conduct or there intrinsic moral sense.
Passover does not celebrate the “mass murder of innocents” Alfred: this is another smear. It celebrates a tribe’s survival from a plague (yes, I know Egyptians are meant to have died in it). It is also in the Bible (Deuteronomy, Exodus), but you don’t bother pointing that out. I wonder why?
It’s all very well to change your terms and start arguing that instead of being a “racially discriminatory religion” Judaism is a racist one. Still, a conveniently single-minded use of sources; since Jewish religious ceremonies I’ve attended have insisted on ‘loving kindness’ – again a phrase from the Torah.
Have some sympathy for your view of Yahweh. Old Testament God gives me the same feeling (disconcerting to be demonstrably nicer than God). But the gods, until recently at least, have been growing up & learning with the rest of us.
Alfred that was me (above.)
Glenn: brilliant!
“Next thing you lot will come up with is that the Shudras or the Dalits have cornered the market on moving rubbish and sewage in India, because of a vast lowest-class conspiracy.”
Now, I don’t want to state the blindingly obvious or be hateful and unkind-but I don’t think it’s rocket science to work out that techni, Cathouse et al are not at the races when it comes to making a reasoned, evidence-based argument.
That might have something to do with the fact that they are nothing but Zionist shills.
These guys will do everything in their power to make you feel guilty about what an elite group of warmongering crypto-Jews (aka.Hitler,Eichmann,the “Third Reich”) did to a huge swathe of stateless,assimilationist and Orthodox Jews,who did not want to go to Palestine, during WW2.
In reality, the only people who should feel guilty are those responsible for initiating WW2 in the first place, and those who pretend that only one ethnic group suffered disproportionately compared to the infinitely more numerous Russians,Poles and millions of others who had started dying after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.
The guilty ones are those who pretend, in the face of all the evidence, that slavery, revolution and World War are the result of happenstance rather than the Money Power.They pretend that money is a token of value rather than the vital controlling mechanism upon which all human history is contingent.
The guilty and hateful people are those who stand between you and the facts of history:shills who depend on your continuing ignorance for their very survival.
Maybe you find it difficult explaining to your forebears who fought for their country in two World Wars that, like their modern day counterparts in Afghanistan and Iraq today, they are actually fighting for the Zionist Money Power.
Dick Eastman has all these issues covered here:
http://ww.rense.com/general75/znst.htm
If your brain has survived the shill-implanted guilt complex he might just change your way of thinking.
If, unlike techni,angri and Cathouse, you’re still thinking, that is!
Tech:
“”t’s all very well to change your terms and start arguing that instead of being a “racially discriminatory religion” Judaism is a racist one.”
Yes, it is all very well since discrimination is the essence of racism.
You say, “Passover does not celebrate the “mass murder of innocents”
Of course it does:
As Wikipedia relates:
“In the narrative of the Exodus, the Bible tells that God inflicted ten plagues upon the Egyptians before Pharaoh would release his Hebrew slaves, with the tenth plague being the killing of every firstborn male, from the Pharaoh’s son to the firstborn of the dungeon captive, to the firstborn of cattle. The Hebrews were instructed to mark the doorposts of their homes with the blood of a spring lamb and, upon seeing this, the spirit of the Lord passed over these homes, hence the term “passover”.”
And what this account does not mention, is that whenever Pharaoh resolved to let the Israelites go, that old bastard Yahweh hardened Pharoah’s heart, just so that he could demonstrate the strength of his right arm by inflicting one more plague on the poor brutalized Egyptians: the folks that had taken the Jews in when they were starving and who the “loving kindness” loving Zionist Jews now want to nuke.
As for the loving kindness, how often do we see that manifest by Israelis dealing with the indigenous people of Palestine? Not often. Right. Why? Because the Palis aren’t Jews and Jews have a two-face ethical code.
Do try to get a few of your facts straight.
Alfred: the festival is called “Passover”. That is because it is celebrating the “Passover”. It is not called the “Slaughter of the Egyptians” festival because that is not what it is celebrating.
Do try and twist a few more of your ‘facts’ more convincingly.
As for the way the Israeli minority elected government is behaving towards the Palestinians, that has nothing to do with Judaism, and you know that too.