Friday, April 30, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! noting the latest peddling of CrossRail by the BBC. We also note - for the N'th time in the past 6 years and 3 months - that the BBC is hiding the truth about transport and is failing to show how totally irresponsible Transport for London [TfL] has been in its use as a tout for the Big Business agenda-prompted propaganda line and lie to the effect that Crossrail is 'vital' while at the same time denying fact of the huge deficit and waste in TfL that are causing the existing huge London tube infrastructure to remain unreliable and unfit for purpose in many areas...And how even a 'completed Crossrail' will NOT solve THOSE pressing transport problems in and around London.. The lying for Crossrail is being brought into sharp focus by the transport mess that is being predicted during this long Bank holiday’ weekend when people needing to use the transport system are set to experience sustained delays and frustrations….And illnesses caused by those…[To be continued]



FROM the BBC online


"

Page last updated at 16:34 GMT, Friday, 30 April 2010 17:34 UK

Maidenhead candidates debate the £16bn Crossrail bid


The scheme will connect Maidenhead in Berkshire to Shenfield, Essex
Maidenhead's parliamentary candidates have backed the Crossrail scheme, which will run through London connecting Berkshire with Essex.
The £16bn project - linking Maidenhead with the capital - is expected to be completed by 2017.
The Conservatives say they want to make sure public money is spent effectively.
The Liberal Democrats say they want to reduce taxpayer funding. Labour says it plans to finish the scheme on time, if it is re-elected.
The 72-mile route will include a link to Heathrow airport and will run through central London and out eastwards to Shenfield in Essex.
Faster journeys
Conservative candidate Theresa May told BBC Radio Berkshire: "We are absolutely clear that Crossrail is an important infrastructure project for London but obviously also for Maidenhead.
"We have got it in our manifesto, we will want to make sure the public sector money element of Crossrail is being spent effectively and properly.
"But crucially for Maidenhead we need to ensure we are going to get fast services still on the main line and I want to see fast services on Crossrail as well."
Lib Dem candidate Tony Hill told BBC Radio Berkshire: "I hope that all infrastructure projects will be looked at very carefully and will go ahead.
"Crossrail is very important - we need it because it is going to bring business to Maidenhead.
"We have got to make sure that the rail lines that go from Twyford to Maidenhead to London continue to provide fast services for all the commuters who live in the area."
Labour candidate Pat McDonald: "I think we can safely say that Crossrail will go ahead.
"Anything that makes a commuter's life easier has got to be a good thing because it can be an absolute nightmare going through the London Underground first thing in the morning.
"Anything that brings business into Maidenhead for the people of Maidenhead is a terrific idea."
Candidates announced for Maidenhead are:
Green: Peter Forbes; Lib Dem: Tony Hill; Conservative: Theresa May; Labour: Pat McDonald; British National Party: Tim Rait; UK Independence Party: Kenneth Wright.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! Updating the diagnosis of the corrupt agenda being slotted and promoted on the BBC for Big Business. We begin our diagnosing reporting on Tom Edwards, allegedly the BBC London’s transport reporter. We show that he is following the same Big business agenda peddling for Crossrail as his predecessor in post [as far as publicly consistently recorded] Andrew Whinelie had done before. We also examine the role being played by the Rupert Murdoch-fabricator Andrew Neil who cannot wait for public services are cuts to begin and the social breakdown to be accelerated in the UK after the scheduled Election UK on 6 May 2010. We shall expose the diabolical logic of ALL peddlers of cuts and of Crossrail! How shockingly untruthful they all are. And blatantly so! They do not care! [To be continued]on

2208 [2158] Hrs GMT 
London
Sunday 
25 April 2010. 
Editor © Muhammad Haque.

Continuing to diagnose the lying role-played by the many corruptly assigned slots on the BBC networks. This one is on ‘straight talk’. 

Nothing could be further from the straight [as universally defined, conceived and understood] than that title as associated with Andrew Neil. 


Andrew Neil’s voice reaches a high pitch as he feigns to criticise uk con party fronter [regionally adjusted! during the ‘election 2010’] Kenneth Clarke on the latter’s diffidence on spelling out the spending cuts! 

Neil is one of the ills that the BBC keeps on foisting upon the body politic. What licence payer licensed the BBC bureaucracy to engage the persistent vehicle of lies? 

What purpose does this slot serve? When was the last time that any of the four slots permanently given to Andrew Neil on the BBC broadcasting networks broke any story, uncovered any secrets and served any principle of democracy, audit and accountability in the UK? It could not do that. So why does the BBC keep him slotted? The answer must be to suppress the truth. To hide the truth. 

Like Tom Edwards has done in the past day or so in his online plug for CRASSrail. Although Edwards has not, as the ‘BBC London News’ ‘transport’ reporter [so far] committed [as in perpetrated] anything as blatantly dishonest as Andrew WhwineStonlie did for Crossrail [on the day that Rod Eddington had officially published his report on the furtive of railways in the UK], he is equally in the grip of the Big Biz touting agenda that must exert such power in setting the BBC’s news and factual propgrammes.

 [To be continued] 

KHOODEELAAR! is telling it again: You cannot trust any of the touts in post who ever promoted the Big Business agenda scam Crossrail. As has been again exposed in the case of Ruth Kelly the holder of the post at the UK DAFT before Geoff Hoon was railed in! And what a load of trash Hoon was then found to have carried in the wake of his pathetic career! Today, the Mail on Sunday [25 April 2010] publishes details of how Ruth Kelly behaved dishonestly over and in 'transferring' her 'geography' so that her children could escape the wonderful misery that most parents are condemned to accept for their children in Tower Hamlets! What a good example of Crossrail carrying benefits galore for the 'deprived East End'! KHOODEELAAR! says again: every single one of the tout in post in the past 7 years that ahs touted for Crossrail ahs been found to have been a faker, a sleaze ball, an expenses fiddler or worse. How can THESE people be treated as good sources of honest information? What basis can there be on the facts to say that only because a Ruth Kelly says Crossrail is ‘good’ so we must fund it to the tune of £Billions? What does Geoff Hoon possess, by way of morality, ethics and truthfulness, that makes him a more reliable source of judgement than the ordinary people who have to put up with the costs, the debts, the causal deprivations and the correlated denials and cuts [to NHS, schools, employment, housing] of the waste that these postholders cause as they serve Big Bossiness looting the UK public and depriving the UK public? [To be continued]

2118 [200 [1950][1930] Hrs GMT
London
Sunday
25 April 2010.
Editor © Muhammad Haque.
Crass role by Crassrail-peddler Ruth Kelly!  Ruth Kelly whose sluttish whisper we pointed out in our latest update of our questions to her and her co-touts for the Big Business agenda wasteful scam CrossRail only in the past 24 hours, was, of course the UK Transport Secretary when she resigned as part of the last Bliaring putsch as part of the mini-bid to oust the BLIARing ‘rival’ Gordon Brown out of No 10 Downing Street.    What a Crass role model!  How could Ruth Kelly be trusted on her sluttish whisper for CrossRail? Those cringe-making words uttered by her on camera [5 October 2007] in an even more cringe-making way than any of her contextually known and citable co-‘Bliar-Babes’ could be accused of being capable of…She was never one of the people as far as the 'most deprived’ borough Tower Hamlets was concerned. No one in the East End, unless they were in some secret arrangement or dubious deal or trade that was not an ordinary, decent way of earning a living, who was on an ordinary income, could dream of doing the things that she was doing whist still claiming to live in the same borough.  The offensive claim that she was [and probably still is] married to a former Tower Hamlets Borough Council [Bliaring] councillor was also misleading as it gave the additional false impression that she had married one of the ‘designated depriveds’. The truth was a hundred miles away from that kind of fabricated image making. Just as the Canary Wharf station – so overly hyped by the liars touting on for Big Business agenda scam CrossRail- is from the typically ordinary and neglected and deprived parts of the inner London borough of Tower Hamlets. As the truth of the ‘regeneration’ of any parts of the East End as touted by Ruth Kelly’s co-peddler, Ken Livingstone [same date, 5 October 2007] Now, the disclosure about her dishonesty and opportunism over her children’s schooling comes in the Mail on Sunday today [25 April 2010] showing her hypocrisy and her utter contempt for any standard of equality for the ordinary people. As far as she is concerned, the ordinary people can rot in their deprivation while the likes of Ruth Kelly move on and 'provide for their children'. What the likes of Ruth Kelly do and have been doing for years is to condemn the ordinary people to low standards or no standards. When she took her own children away from the 'comprehensive' schools OPTION she had in Tower Hamlets and put them in exclusive ones that ordinary Tower Hamlets parents could only dream about, Ruth Kelly showed that as a BLIARing selfish self-seeker she did not have to hide her low standards and morality free ‘life choices’. She could flaunt them and she could do so whilst still putting on a smile as she knew that neither the Bliaring regime nor the Blaring local Tower Hamlets Council corrupt controlling clique was in a position to disown her, let alone to make an example of her by publicly distancing themselves from her misconduct. Misconduct is the word we intend to use and have used. We invite her to provide us with evidence that can truthfully invalidate our use of the word that she is guilty of public misconduct.

All of that stands in sharp contrast to her other image, which the corrupt sections in the ‘mainstream’ 'media’ perpetuated for years, that she was some sort of diehard religiously dedicated Roman Catholic fanatic due to her claimed membership of the sect Opus Dei which she was reported to show in her near-fetishist wearing of a particular piece of excruciatingly painful item of sect-linked ritualistic gear!  Some have even tried to link her with very far right tendencies, such as was done in the immediate aftermath of her appointment to the post of Education Secretary by Tony Blair.

The hostile profiles of Ruth Kelly included several references to the Da Vinci Code and its portrayal of the Opus Dei as a nasty outfit involved in sinister activities.

It is our studied view that Ruth Kelly was probably so seriously targeted in THAT propaganda because of the frustration as experienced by Big Business interests which wanted to promote in Britain a whole range of experiments which the Roman Catholic faith forbids and which Ruth Kelly would not therefore support.

Ruth Kelly has behaved as an irresponsible politician. She has failed to address those allegations in public and for that she alone is to be held responsible. Not her faith. Not her Sect. Not even her husband.

Compare her silence on those allegations to her vocal as we have shown, sluttishly whispered promotion of - Yes, a Big Business scam - Crossrail! The mind seriously boggles.

Ruth Kelly has behaved as another MP or now, as a soon to become ex-MP. Grabbing and doing so ruthlessly! Irony, satire and contempt all rolled into that one recitation of her published first name!

And what a trail of moral poverty she has left behind in her once parliamentary constituency in Bolton, Lancs as well!

Ands she was asking the UK public to allow her to waste £Billions on Crossrail! She could not be trusted at all.

[To be continued]

Saturday, April 24, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! has been telling ALL peddlers, touts and assorted bag-carriers of the Big Business scams that NO SCAM, no matter how dressed up, would benefit ordinary people in the East End of London. That the only way that ordinary people would benefit would be if the local Council and others who 'sought and got elected' in the name of the people of the East End did their job and deliver the full range of services that on paper existed but in truth failed to materialise. We also told them that the Crossrail scam and the 2012 Games Hosting scam would NOT deliver anything like the hyped up bonanza that touts were claiming to the people of either Tower Hamlets or of Newham or of Hackney or of any other inner city and or deprived area London Borough [To be continued] ...



1728 Hrs GMT 
London 
Saturday 
24 April 2010. 
Editor © Muhammad Haque. 
KHOODEELAAR! told you so! And we told the Tower Hamlets Council 'full council' meeting in September 2007 so three years ago... Now, three years later,  a former Sports Editor of the BBC, Mihir Bose in effect echoes what we said about 2012 Hosting  hype and the actual waste of public money that the scam was causing.. Mihir Bose is calling the 2012 Stadium  “legacy”-linked goings on a FARCE! [To be continued].  “Mihir Bose: West Ham Olympic Stadium saga is beginning to repeat itself as farce
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
 
History may not always repeat itself first as tragedy then as farce, as Karl Marx said, but there are some very curious and interesting similarities in the latest attempt to get West Ham into the Olympic Stadium.

The tragic episode came back in 2006, so is it possible that we have now reached the stage of farce? And in the end could, as one football chairman told me, the stadium become a place where Tower Hamlets play Shoreditch Grammar School with grass growing out of the seats?

Well, let us go back to 2006 when the last serious attempt was made to make West Ham an anchor tenant for the Olympic Stadium. Richard Caborn, the then Sports Minister, was very keen on it so was Sir Robin Wales, the Mayor of Newham and so were the owners of West Ham.

Indeed Terry Brown, then chairman, saw the move to the Olympic Stadium as crucial to West Ham competing on anything like equal terms with the likes of Chelsea or Arsenal. It also formed a central plank of his desire to sell the club. And on the field of play the club faced relegation.

Out of that cocktail of possibilities the only event that actually materialised was the sale, although Sheffield United fans will forever claim that relegation would and should have happened had West Ham been prevented from paying Carlos Tevez.

The sale had its own drama with Brown and Co not selling to the Russian-born Israeli that Tevez's manager Kia Joorabchian had introduced but to a then rich Icelander. Nevertheless Brown and co still walked away with something close to a £100 million.

Four years later the club has new owners, is again facing relegation and the move to the stadium is back on the agenda. The difference is Messers David Sullivan and David Gold, now see it as crucial to the club's salvation. It is a reflection of the completely altered economic climate that a post-2012 move to Stratford is not meant to make West Ham the equal of Chelsea or Arsenal, more to ensure the club stays afloat.

Given the mess the Icelandic owners created, Sullivan and Gold can hardly hope to walk away with £100 million but are coping with clearing debts of £100 million.

Any talk of football moving to the Olympic stadium means we renew the tennis match, or to borrow Lord Coe's phrase, replay the cracked record of the future of the running track. Sullivan, soon after he completed the takeover, lobbed over the argument that it had to go which promoted a volley back from Coe, the 2012 chairman, that it had to stay.

And this view was reiterated by Baroness Ford, chair of the Olympic Park Legacy Company, in her evidence to MPs last month when she insisted that athletics could co-exist with football. Her words are worth noting, "for me premier athletics must be part of the mix because that was part of the bid commitment."



So can all this be resolved? One man who can claim to have an insight into all this is Barry Hearn, the chairman of Leyton Orient. While West Ham moving to the Olympic Stadium has been the main news, ever since the stadium was planned the default position of the Olympic authorities has been that the League One club could be the anchor tenant and help pay the costs of its upkeep.

I have been talking to Hearn and he tells me that, whatever happens, his club will not be moving to the OIympic Stadium after the 2012 Games. Hearn told me: "For three years we have been talking. Leyton Orient would have loved to have been in the Olympic stadium."

At Brisbane Road Leyton Orient can accommodate 9,000 although at present they average round 5,000. Post-2012 with a 25,000 stadium to fill Hearn felt this "would have given us capacity to grow to perhaps 24,000. But I have told the Olympic authorities we will not be moving there."

Hearn's reasons for turning the move down is simple.

"They have built the wrong stadium. In an athletics stadium the slope of the seats is different, they go up at a different angle to a football stadium. When Seb said, 'I have given my word that the running track must remain,' I said spend money on a hydraulics system, like at Stad de France where seats come forward during football to cover the track. But they did not want to spend the money. A running track kills football. In modern football proximity to players generates the atmosphere."

Hearn is absolutely scathing about what has happened. "We will have spent £500 million plus and in two years we will end up with Tower Hamlets playing Shoreditch Grammar School and grass growing out of the seats. Wonderful, well done boys."

And then, in a voice drained of any hint of sarcasm, he added: "They have built a stadium which will be completely useless after the Olympics, totally, a waste of public money, a disgrace.

"Because they don't listen to anybody, they don't think it through and they don't have common sense. Nobody has taken any responsibility."

Since Hearn turned down a move to Stratford he has closely followed the discussions West Ham are having and is convinced that for all the warm noises coming a deal with West Ham is impossible. A few days ago David Sullivan rang Hearn to tell him he was confident the talks would be successful. Hearn said: "David is a friend of mine but he does not understand the infrastructure and the details at the moment. He is a clever man and, when he does, he will realise the deal with West Ham cannot be done."

Time will tell whether Hearn is right but with Hearn’s rejection of the stadium this does mean it severely limits Baroness Ford’s options to get a workable post 2012 deal.

Options that are even more restricted as a result of Boris Johnson taking over from Ken Livingstone as the London Mayor. Back in 2005 when the cost plans for the Olympic Park were being made Ken Livingstone, essentially on the back of envelope calculations, said he would provide £10 million a year for its upkeep.Johnson was aghast when he heard about it. For him the £10 million a year for the park that Ken talked about has never made any sense.

He is much more concerned with grass roots legacy and he has ring-fenced £15 million which with matching funding is part of the £30 million pot he wants to ensure 2012 will provide a real  sporting legacy.

So where will Baroness Ford get the money for her legacy plans and will this not put her under greater pressure to do a football deal with West Ham? But how she can square it with the running track is difficult to see.

All this suggests to me that this stadium story far from being concluded has now entered its most difficult and its most unpredictable phase. If Hearn is proved right this will turn out to be a farce which will produce tears not laughter.




Mihir Bose is one of the world's most astute observers on politics in sport and, particularly, football. He formerly wrote for The Sunday Times and The Daily Telegraph and until recently was the BBC's head sports editor.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! Evidentially contextually noting a prize incident: a comment on the London Guardian web site denouncing Crossrail and Ken Livingstone. Livingstone and Crossrail are not really scrutinised on that Guardian slot. It is a grinning one dedicated to serving the ego of Ken Livingstone and peddling the agenda of Big Business elements pushing for the looting scam to be made legitimate. That slot on the Guardian web site is on the facts reserved and maintained for peddling all lies, fabrications that will reinstate the careerist Ken Livingstone to the post he still craves, in the name and at the expense of the people of London. For this reason, the slot fabricates an image of Ken Livingstone as being all things designed to help the poor and the assorted stereotyped ‘dispossessed’ people of the rest of the world. It is of course a lie and a distortion. The truth is as it always has been that Ken Livingstone only ever serves his own ego, his own career, his own personal agenda and his own ambitions. In pursuing these, he will tout for anyone that he thinks will do the job of meeting his craving for the craved objective. There is no morality in his scheme. Only opportunity and opportunism. And he is a backer of the worst stereotypes that perpetuate racism and other discrimination. Discrimination as defined universally and objectively. The following quote taken from the “grinning, peddling-for-Ken Livingstone slot on the Guardian web site” is a typical, classic piece of distortion. It is deeply racist and is an outrage to truth. Although the source of the comment may intend to criticise and expose [as objectively defined] the records and the proclivities of Ken Livingstone, the commenter gets it wrong by relying on his or her own ignorance of history, of migration, of the UK’s dependence on the rest of the world for the UK’s economic substance and social stability as he or she lumps together groups of stereotyped people as being the beneficiaries of the agenda they wrongly attributed to Ken Livingstone.



0850 Hrs GMT 
London 
Thursday 
22 April 2010. 
Editor © Muhammad Haque. 
KHOODEELAAR! Evidentially contextually noting a prize incident: a comment on the London Guardian web site denouncing Crossrail and Ken Livingstone.  Livingstone and Crossrail are not really scrutinised on that Guardian slot. It is a grinning one dedicated to serving the ego of Ken Livingstone and peddling the agenda of Big Business elements pushing for the looting scam to be made legitimate.  That slot on the Guardian web site is on the facts reserved and maintained for peddling all lies, fabrications that will reinstate the careerist Ken Livingstone to the post he still craves, in the name and at the expense of the people of London. For this reason, the slot fabricates an image of Ken Livingstone as being all things designed to help the poor and the assorted stereotyped  ‘dispossessed’ people of the rest of the world. It is of course a lie and a distortion. The truth is as it always has been that Ken Livingstone only ever serves his own ego, his own career, his own personal agenda and his own ambitions. In pursuing these, he will tout for anyone that he thinks will do the job of meeting his craving for the craved objective. There is no morality in his scheme. Only opportunity and opportunism. And he is a backer of the worst stereotypes that perpetuate racism and other discrimination. Discrimination as defined universally and objectively.  The following quote taken from the “grinning, peddling-for-Ken Livingstone slot on the Guardian web site” is a typical, classic piece of distortion. It is deeply racist and is an outrage to truth. Although the source of the comment may intend to criticise and expose [as objectively defined] the records and the proclivities of Ken Livingstone, the commenter gets it wrong by relying on his or her own ignorance of history, of migration, of the UK’s dependence on the rest of the world for the UK’s economic substance and social stability as he or she lumps together groups of stereotyped people as being the beneficiaries of the agenda they wrongly attributed to Ken Livingstone. 

[To be continued]






"



I keep telling ya, Crossrail is basically a very expensive busing scheme to try and keep white collar workers and white collar jobs in London.
Livingstone was happy to see middle class people (of all shades) leaving the capital at a rate of 170,000 per year (ONS stats based on re-registration at NHS GP practices).
And the Tories probably regard the areas inside the North and South circulars as enemy territory, so why should they give a stuff for Crossrail?
Zone 1 and 2 Ken wanted to build a trans-national city state of the poor, ambitious and dispossessed and he succeeded to a great extent. Perhaps we can now stew in our own transient, minimum wage, multicultural juices.
Incidentally, I saw that Martin Linton round my way the other day. When he loses Battersea, the seats on the western edge of the WEZ will have gone Tory...wonder why?



"

Saturday, April 17, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! TOLD YOU SO before the 'LEADER' DEBASE' staged from Granada TV HQ at Manchester on Thursday. Now the unaccountable BBC is in a frenzy of its own making: to destabilise the two Parties and insert 'Ant and Deck' in a way that will neutralise any Party that wants to hold the BBC to “any degree of account”. The BBC’s controlling bureaucracy is engaged in implementing a hugely anti-democratic agenda and in its conduct is behaving just as dishonestly as Rupert Murdoch has done for decades. The BBC has been debasing debate and has been dumbing down standards in all respects. No wonder it is “excited” by the prospect of 'Ant and Deck' at the helm of British Govt post-6 May 2010.

0015 Hrs GMT
London 
Sunday 18 April 2010. 
Editor © Muhammad Haque. 

KHOODEELAAR! Told you so! We did so before the ITV Leaders’ DEBASE staged on Thursday. Now even Ian Collins, not known for universally recognisable depth of analysis, has cottoned on and described the post-debate ‘phenomenon’ as the political equivalent of ‘Ant and Deck’ show. Collins, descried by the BBC News Channel fronter Clive Myrie as the Political Commentator of Talksport radio, emphasised the point that the so-called ‘surge’ in British sephological [our word this one] installation was in fact superficial. As if Ian Collins’ rejection of the surge and the surge-promoting hype was not acute enough, his co-guest as ‘fri9nt pages reviewer’ [of the Sunday press as 'issued' from London] turned out to be a former political editor of the Rupert Murdoch Sunday Times. Being thus free from Murdoch’s ‘commands’, he too put the boot in and uttered to the effect that effectively echoed what Ian Collins had said. All this while ‘poor’ [NOT!]  Old Clive Myrie, one of the BBC’s most useful ethnic surrogates befitting the BBC’s own Obama-esque business and imperial strategy, battled on to put on the table the BBC’s scripted formula intended to make the post-Debase ‘surge’ look authentic and lasting! We had said that the DEBASE was a hyped up event and ploy. And we have now been vindicated. The BBC is operating the ‘domestic’ strategy so that neither the likes of Bern Bradshaw nor the likes of his Tory counterpart ['Shadiw'] get to be at the hearty of UK ‘elected’ ‘Government’. So a ‘surge’, any surge, away from those two would be welcome to a BBC that is bent ion remaining unaccountable. We hasten to say that neither Bradshaw nor the Tories amount to accountability. However, they do, for their own partisan and other proclivities, represent smothering almost preferable to what the BBC is prone to get up to when left to its own devices, ploys, plots and corruption. This is why our diagnosis is that the ‘Ant and Deck surge, to borrow the names from Ian Collins’ contribution, can mean only a good option for the BBC. With any luck, if "Ant and Deck" get to be in a position   to demand terms of their ‘own’ on 7 May 2010 [the scheduled day after the scheduled UK elections] then it is more likely that the BBC and their colluders will be able to influence the agenda to their own advantage than would be the case if either the Blaired party or the Ca-moroned one were in the leading posts. 

No wonder then that ‘Ant and Deck’ have been peddled furiously by the BBC since the Debase ended on Thursday. 

The BBC has found now an entrance via the opinion polls, including the cooked up one that dominates today's Mail on Sunday front-page, and it is going to maximise its exploitation to maintain the BBC’s anti-accountability agenda going. 

[To be continued] 

Thursday, April 15, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! Pointing out that the ITV 'Debase' presenter Alistair Stuart did not give any reason for his repeated preference for Nick Clegg. So what was the reason? Simple. Big Business has decided that the UK Lib Dems will deliver the BIG BUSINESS agenda 'better' than either the Bliared Party or the UK Con. This is also linked with the unstoppable and the still ‘mysterious’ promotion by the mainstream British media of Vince Cable. Neither Clegg nor Cable has ever been quizzed on their records. Far less on the records of the Lib Dems controlled Councils. Had they been, the media would quietly drop them from the platforms on which they are being now placed without any apparent reason. We have shown how Cable came unplugged in Bethnal Green on 15 October 2009 about Crossrail. Cable was ‘passionate’ in his backing for Crossrail and yet he admitted at the same time that he wasn’t even aware whether Crossrail route ‘came through’ Tower Hamlets! Clueless cable and unplugged Clegg surely will be most useful to big business MIC agenda pushers. No wonder the Big Biz media is now agog in praise of the duo, especially after the launched their 2010 manifesto confirming how savagely they will cut public services in the UK!


0315 Hrs GMT

London
Friday
16 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

KHOODEELAAR! Pointing out that the ITV 'Debase' presenter Alistair Stuart did not give any reason for his repeated preference for Nick Clegg. So what was the reason? Simple. Big Business has decided that the UK Lib Dems will deliver the  BIG BUSINESS agenda 'better' than either the Bliared Party or the UK Con. This is also linked with the unstoppable and the still ‘mysterious’ promotion by the mainstream British media of Vince Cable. Neither Clegg nor Cable has ever been quizzed on their records. Far less on the records of the Lib Dems controlled Councils. Had they been, the media would quietly drop them from the platforms on which they are being now placed without any apparent reason. We have shown how Cable came unplugged in Bethnal Green on 15 October 2009 about Crossrail. Cable was ‘passionate’ in his backing for Crossrail and yet he admitted at the same time that he wasn’t even aware whether Crossrail route ‘came through’ Tower Hamlets!  Clueless cable and unplugged Clegg surely will be most useful to big business MIC agenda pushers. No wonder the Big Biz media is now agog in praise of the duo, especially after the launched their 2010 manifesto confirming how savagely they will cut public services in the UK!

[To be continued]

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Khoodeelaar! Noting UK Lib Dems' Nick Clegg referring to 'corruption' in politics! Clegg is in cloud cuckoo land with this utterance...



1915 Hrs GMT
London
Wednesday
14 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque



Khoodeelaar! Noting UK Lib Dems' Nick Clegg referring to 'corruption' in politics!

Does Nick Clegg know what he is uttering?
Does he know what he is letting himself in for by even mouthing the word 'corruption'?

A word that is taboo in Britain.

Taboo in British media. Oops! Taboo in the mainstream media.

Taboo in the lexicon of the BBC.

Taboo in British ‘Parliament’.

Taboo in the Palace of Ghostsminster!

We do not see any evidential basis for Nick Clegg to assume that he is being taken seriously by any objective observer of the VERY CORRUPT careerists' electoral business that is currently on.

Or indeed that he is being credible in his elaborate utterances contained in the packages now being broadcast as part of the very corrupt media circus.

So we must tell Nick Clegg that we are not impressed by his entry into the arena of pseudo ethical politics. Or moral politics.

Why?

For a start, he has got to free himself from the brainwashed idea that Vince Cable is somehow the personification of universally understood wisdom.

Cable is clueless on economics.

Yes. We are putting this on the record.

The Manifesto is manifest nonsense.

As are the other two.

The point about the UK Lib Dems is that they are flying kites.

Seasonal kites.

Like children fly them.

Kite flying is not the behaviour of a political party that either knows about corruption or is determined to behave acting against crooks.

We saw how corrupt the Lib Dems’ role in the Parliament was in 2005-2008 when the Crossrail Bill was massaged and passaged by stooged Mps and Peers who were carrying out the agenda of Big Businesses MIC.

Nick Clegg was already in the House of Commons and part of his tenure did cover the massage and the passage of The ‘CrossRail Bill’.

He ‘colluded’ with the Crossrail-passaging crooked stooged MPs and Peers!

[To be continued]

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

KHOODEELAAR! TOLD It so! For SIX years and two months, we have been saying it. That Big Business agenda 'Crossrail' scam destination, 'canary Wharf' was an outpost for the take-over of the inner city deprived Tower Hamlets... The peddlers of that agenda denied it. The touts of Big Biz CrossRail denied it... Now, oddly, strangely, even the REUTERS news agency, not exactly strangers to Big Business themselves, are admitting it! Historic....

 0155 Hrs GMT
London 
Wednesday 
14 April 2010. 
Editor © Muhammad Haque. 


KHOODEELAAR! TOLD It so! For SIX years and two months, we have been saying it. That Big Business agenda 'Crossrail' scam destination, 'canary Wharf' was an outpost for the take-over of the inner city deprived Tower Hamlets... The peddlers of that agenda denied it. The touts of Big Biz CrossRail denied it... Now, oddly, strangely, even the REUTERS news agency, not exactly strangers to Big Business themselves, are admitting it! Historic....






[To be continued]




Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000013058 StartFragment:0000001921 EndFragment:0000013022
Rich and Poor: London's tale of two cities
Clara Ferreira-Marques and Kate Holton - Analysis
LONDON
Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:36pm EDT
Related News
UPDATE 3-UK's Brown pledges reform, clashes on economy
Wed, Apr 7 2010
British parties launch month-long election campaign
Tue, Apr 6 2010
FACTBOX-Key political risks to watch in Britain
Tue, Apr 6 2010
Instant View: Uncertainty, economy loom large over UK vote
Tue, Apr 6 2010
Timeline: Highs and lows of British PM Brown
Tue, Apr 6 2010
(Reuters) - Residents of the decaying Robin Hood Gardens estate, where grimy windows punctuate concrete, prison-like corridors, say they feel no connection with those living a short walk away in the luxury Canary Riverside complex.

Most of those in and around these overcrowded east London blocks live on incomes less than half the national average.

Their nearest green space is a small hill scarred with burned litter and the remnants of a fire.

The scene is a far cry from the gleaming business hub of Canary Wharf with its gyms and minimalist restaurants, where a penthouse flat can cost over $3.04 million.

That discrepancy -- and the wider social gulf it represents -- is unlikely to pass unnoticed in the run up to Britain's May 6 general election.

The Labour party swept to power in 1997 with a promise to close the gap between rich and poor. Yet figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank indicate inequality is now higher than when Labour took office.

"It is an amazing area for all the wrong reasons," said Tim Archer, local councillor and opposition Conservative candidate for the London seat of Poplar and Limehouse, which includes both deprived Robin Hood Gardens and financial center Canary Wharf.

"We have a difference of 10 years in life expectancy within the borough. We've got huge unemployment rates, but, thanks to Canary Wharf, we also have one of the highest numbers of jobs per head. We have prosperity and deprivation cheek by jowl."

London is home to some of Britain's richest and its poorest. The city's main newspaper, the Evening Standard, ran a campaign titled "The Dispossessed" earlier this year, highlighting the plight of the capital's needy. It found that in one of the world's wealthiest cities, poor children are still being buried in mass graves.

TOUGH LONDON

London has four out of England's eight most deprived local authorities, according to official statistics.

Tower Hamlets in east London, which includes Poplar & Limehouse, is the third poorest local authority in England. Islington, spiritual home of New Labour -- the rebranded form of Labour politics that helped it to power in 1997, is eighth.

Islington shares a border with London's financial district and is known for its trendy boutiques and numerous restaurants. It was for years home to former prime minister Tony Blair.

But, the borough is deceptive. More than 40 percent of children in primary school here are defined as living in poverty and it has the highest suicide rate in England.

The problems, say residents in these boroughs, are manifold: a chronic social housing shortage, immigration, low-level crime, poor state education.

"We know that children go to youth clubs and after-school clubs and that's where they go for a meal," Kristina Glenn, the head of the Cripplegate Foundation which funds voluntary projects in Islington, told Reuters.

"The youth workers tell us that if they don't have a meal here, they're not going to eat tonight."

For many, the latest financial crisis has exacerbated the contrast between "them and us" -- prompting hand-wringing over what the opposition Conservative party calls "Broken Britain."

It has also fueled the popularity of minor parties like Respect, fronted by maverick politician George Galloway, who has capitalized on disaffection among east London's immigrant, largely Bangladeshi, population.

"The real division that counts in this borough is between the extremely rich and politicians who serve them and the rest, who are either poor or middle income, in either case struggling to get by," Galloway said in an interview, before an afternoon of hand-shaking and door-knocking at the Robin Hood estate.

This sort of complaint strikes a cord with many of London's poorest residents, who felt left out by the boom years and now say they feel the pain of rising unemployment and spending cuts.

Labour has talked down the criticism, saying crime levels have reduced, neighborhood policing has improved and unemployment remains below the levels seen in the 80s and 90s.

"When Labour came to power in 1997, there were two million homes below the decency threshold, we've now refurbished over a million, including tens of thousands in Tower Hamlets," said Jim Fitzpatrick, Limehouse Labour MP since 1997, and standing again.

But it's a tough message to sell to an electorate disaffected with politics and politicians following an expenses scandal in which many MPs were shown to be claiming for items many voters felt to be extravagant.

"There's always been this division in Islington," shopper Marion Jones said, browsing the local outdoor market. "The wealthy have got really wealthy and everyone else has just stayed the same. It's just the way it is. It'll never change."

After reading this article, people also read:
Pupils "sadistically tormented" at German monastery
Apr 12, 2010
Welcome to a humbler retail recovery
Apr 9, 2010
Creator of Java programming language leaves Oracle
Apr 12, 2010
Krankcycles: Spinning the body's other half
Apr 12, 2010
Criminals con al Qaeda with bogus nuke material
Apr 12, 2010
COMMENTS
SEE ALL COMMENTS (3)  |  POST COMMENT

Apr 12, 2010 8:31pm EDT
This is like Rio

Story_Burn Report As Abusive


Apr 13, 2010 2:57am EDT
People need jobs and a sense of worth …..capitalism is failing the common man…time for a change.

Wicki Report As Abusive


Apr 13, 2010 11:50am EDT
It has alway’s been the best.. and sometimes the only way.. to truly understand and comprehend the struggles of the working class.. The impoverished..and the those left behind in a heightened technological society is to “Become” one of these people.. and then work your way back to prosperity. The education and understanding received is wealthy beyond compare.. and you have helped.

KHOODEELAAR! challenges the latest 'journalist' to carry plugs for Big Business scam Crossrail to produce evidence-justifying Crossrail. This challenge has been published on the New Statesman magazine’s web site. They had carried a plug in their reporting of this morning’s launch of the UK Con party's Election 2010 Manifesto. They said that the UK Con party were being ambivalent on Crossrail. What they meant was that the David Cameron-fronted UK Con party ‘Election Team’ has refused to go OTT in hyping the CRASSrail scam.. And that that was taking a political gamble. They meant that Crossrail would carry votes. Khoodeelaar! rebuttal so far to the New Statesman [the London-based journal which has been often hyped because it was linked with the trendies' favourite 'historical socialist figures' of the 20th century- Sidney and Beatrice Webb] promotion of Crossrail is as follows: " Where is the evidence that in transport economics, the so-called Crossrail is the key priority? Where in any of the web sites you refer to, as backing 'Crossrail' in the context of your reference to the UK Con party’s 'Manifesto' is there any acknowledgement of the full framework of transport that must be identified, recognised and then physically put in place? In the SIX years and two months [January 2004 to date 13 April 2010] of daily examination of the contents of the propaganda by the Big Business agenda Crossrail scam-peddlers, I have not come across any of the evidence that must otherwise be present if the peddlers’ claims for CrossRail are to be believable. I am always willing to review my previous findings and assertions if compelling evidence is shown to me from the appropriate sources. Warranting an objective review of earlier conclusions. Where are those sources, if they actually exist? As of now, 1128 Hrs GMT Tuesday 13 April 2010, I have not seen or found any evidence whatsoever for the promotion of the 'Crossrail' scam. What I have found is the propensity on the part of career-seekers to throw in Crossrail as part of a package of 'PROJECTS' THEY WANT TO flaunt as constituting their 'suitability' to voters and to others in the ordinary community who are targets of the zombifying propaganda. In the UK Houses of Commons and 'Peers' in the years 2006-2008 when the 'Crossrail Bill' was being allegedly scrutinised’ the objectors, represented by my own umbrella campaign organisation Khoodeelaar! representing thousands of signatories ready to put forward clear grounds showing that 'Crossrail' was not either a priority nor the panacea that some of its post-holding touts have been peddling it to be, the 'Parliamentary' 'committees' obstructed the presentation of the evidence. And they did so quite blatantly. Their lying was put on HANSARD [the 'official' record of proceedings in the UK Parliament] of their obstructions and obfuscation. As a student of universally definable economics, I am open to resources being put to the appropriate use. Crossrail does not meet the arduously listed criteria. And I here cite Rod Eddington, who had been appointed by the Gordon Brown - Alistair Darling 'team' to look at the future of railways in the UK. As the USA business journal FORBES reported, Rod Eddington had refused to endorse Crossrail! And as if that were not telling enough, Channel 4 News in October 2007 reported that Gordon Brown had just given his backing to Crossrail AGAINST the advice of Rod Eddington. So what is your evidence for saying that the UK Con Cameron is taking a gamble by being ambivalent on the 'Crossrail' scam? What part of which London Parliamentary constituency have you in mind when you make such an unfounded claim? Muhammad Haque, Organiser, Khoodeelaar! The campaign against Big Business agenda scam Crossrail. London. UK"


1240 [1128] Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday

13 April 2010


KHOODEELAAR! challenges latest 'journalist' to carry plugs for Big Business cam Crossrail to produce evidence-justifying Crossrail. This challenge has been published on the New Statesman magazine’s web site. They had carried a plug in their reporting of this morning’s launch of the UK Con party's Election 2010 Manifesto. They said that the UK Con party were being ambivalent on Crossrail.  What they meant was that the David Cameron-fronted UK Con party ‘Election Team’ has refused to go OTT in hyping the CRASSrail scam.. And that that was taking a political gamble. They meant that Crossrail would carry votes. Khoodeelaar! rebuttal so far to the New Statesman [the London-based journal which has been often hyped because it was linked with the trendies' favourite 'historical socialist figures' of the 20th century- Sidney and Beatrice Webb] promotion of Crossrail is as follows: " Where is the evidence that in transport economics, the so-called Crossrail is the key priority? Where in any of the web sites you refer to, as backing 'Crossrail' in the context of your reference to the UK Con party’s 'Manifesto' is there any acknowledgement of the full framework of transport that must be identified, recognised and then physically put in place? In the SIX years and two months [January 2004 to date 13 April 2010] of daily examination of the contents of the propaganda by the Big Business agenda Crossrail scam-peddlers, I have not come across any of the evidence that must otherwise be present if the peddlers’ claims for CrossRail are to be believable. I am always willing to review my previous findings and assertions if compelling evidence is shown to me from the appropriate sources. Warranting an objective review of earlier conclusions. Where are those sources, if they actually exist? As of now, 1128 Hrs GMT Tuesday 13 April 2010, I have not seen or found any evidence whatsoever for the promotion of the 'Crossrail' scam. What I have found is the propensity on the part of career-seekers to throw in Crossrail as part of a package of 'PROJECTS' THEY WANT TO flaunt as constituting their 'suitability' to voters and to others in the ordinary community who are targets of the zombifying propaganda. In the UK Houses of Commons and 'Peers' in the years 2006-2008 when the 'Crossrail Bill' was being allegedly scrutinised’ the objectors, represented by my own umbrella campaign organisation Khoodeelaar! representing thousands of signatories ready to put forward clear grounds showing that 'Crossrail' was not either a priority nor the panacea that some of its post-holding touts have been peddling it to be, the 'Parliamentary' 'committees' obstructed the presentation of the evidence. And they did so quite blatantly. Their lying was put on HANSARD [the 'official' record of proceedings in the UK Parliament] of their obstructions and obfuscation. As a student of universally definable economics, I am open to resources being put to the appropriate use. Crossrail does not meet the arduously listed criteria. And I here cite Rod Eddington, who had been appointed by the Gordon Brown - Alistair Darling 'team' to look at the future of railways in the UK. As the USA business journal FORBES reported, Rod Eddington had refused to endorse Crossrail! And as if that were not telling enough, Channel 4 News in October 2007 reported that Gordon Brown had just given his backing to Crossrail AGAINST the advice of Rod Eddington. So what is your evidence for saying that the UK Con Cameron is taking a gamble by being ambivalent on the 'Crossrail' scam? What part of which London Parliamentary constituency have you in mind when you make such an unfounded claim? Muhammad Haque, Organiser, Khoodeelaar! The campaign against Big Business agenda scam Crossrail. London. UK"