The “Spokesperson” for the Whalers Issues a demand – Don’t take pictures.
By Captain Paul Watson Jógvan Á Høvdanum Junior – remember him from last week He’s the one who wants to debate me. And ever since I accepted his challenge he’s been posting juvenile insults and personal attack trying to provoke me into participating in his silliness. Of course I have no intention of slinging mud back at him on such an Neanderthal level. However I will have one rule for this debate. The moment he insults my wife again is when this debate is terminated. There are limits of tolerance and that is where I have drawn the line. So if he does insult her we can interpret that as his way of slithering back out of the debate because he has been officially warned. So Junior, if you want your debate, keep your ignorant, sexist and asinine opinions about my wife to yourself. Savvy? Junior has appointed himself as the “spokesman” for the Grind and claims to be representing all the Faroese people (although I hear there is some dispute about that). Yesterday he posted about the bloody slaughter of 150 Pilot whales. making the demand: “Don't take pictures of the grind! Now the Faroe Islands are on the map, and perhaps especially because of the grind, Nordoya Portalurin will not be posting pictures of the kill. We are happy to hear about whales having been spotted, and that the pod is big, but at the same time we encourage people not to take pictures, since the pictures will be used against us.” Well it seems Junior was ignored. Plenty of pictures were taken and plenty of pictures were posted. But I’m puzzled. Junior says that the Faroese are proud of the Grind so why the demand to not take pictures? And by the way Junior this is 2016 and every one, and I mean everyone, has a cell phone that takes pictures. Trying to tell hundreds of people to not take pictures is like trying to bail out a sinking boat with a pasta strainer. I must confess however, I kind of like Junior as the official (even if self appointed) spokesperson for the Grindadrap. He captures our idea of what an advocate for sadistic slaughter should look and sound like. He’s predictable, hot headed, delusional and has a vocabulary as incomprehensible as Hodar. Damn, I did say I would not return the mud-slinging but he is such a tempting target. Ok putting on the brakes on the mud catapult. Remember Junior, no Insults to my wife but do feel free to unload on me. You have my permission to call me names and to hurl insults. I understand your need to psych yourself up, so go for it. Meanwhile we are pushing our legal case in Europe against Denmark and our economic strategies in the marketplace, not as fun as a debate but much more effective. Oh and by the way your football team can say good-by to Adidas sponsorship after that little spectacle of two of the team wading in blood, not the kind of image a company like Adidas wishes to be associated with. Photo: Picture taken in defiance of Junior's orders. By Seaspiracy.
0 Comments
July 25 - So tonight we held our Newark Labour leadership nomination meeting.
It was a comradely, good natured affair and Corbyn won the CLP nomination 42 votes to Owen Smith’s 11. We had many members speak for their preferred candidate. And I could see the merit in both Owen and Jeremy. But I spoke and voted for Corbyn. Now I was proud to be part of Andy Burnham’s campaign team last year. And you could argue that my politics have more in common with Smith. But I spoke for Jeremy because in my opinion nine months is far too short a period for him to be judged as a leader. We didn’t expect it of Ed or Gordon. We shouldn’t for Corbyn. And I have to respect someone who has single handedly doubled the party membership. From speaking to friends who’ve joined or rejoined in the last year, the big attractions are his values and beliefs. As one mate said to me: “I’d run through walls for Corbyn. I’ve never felt that way about any political figure before.” For many, the turning point was seeing the Shadow Cabinet initially consider supporting tax credit cuts before eventually abstaining. Jeremy rightly opposed it. And from that moment, his campaign took off. As Benn said, you’re either a weather vane or a signpost. In these turbulent times, people want to see us set a political direction that’s truer to their own moral compass. However, as I said in my speech, I don’t want Jeremy to continue as he is. I want to see a much sharper operation in Corbyn’s office and an increased level of professionalism in being a Leader inside and outside the Commons. It will mean managing some people out and bringing more experienced people in. Those who can build a consensus not a barrier. It would also involve Jeremy and his team accepting some of the constructive criticisms made by certain MPs. Likewise, the PLP must accept the result. I genuinely believe the majority of MPs who voted no confidence in Jeremy did so in haste after the brutal shock of Brexit. The fear of an impending snap election in October with Boris as PM drove most of them to do it. But I sense the mood is slowly changing. Sarah Champion returning to the front bench will hopefully be the first of many shadow ministers. Because forcing another leadership election next year will only end up with the same result and an even more fractious relationship between the leader and the PLP. I reckon most members would agree we can’t allow that to happen. I’m neither a Corbynista or a ‘moderate.’ I’m Labour. And hopefully after this leadership election, we’ll all be Labour again. No cliques or factions. Just Labour. Both sides will have to listen and work together. There will have to be some form of Truth and Reconcilliaton. Trust will need to be earned. Concerns must be acknowledged and acted upon. If Labour can do that, it’ll become the effective opposition and Government-in-waiting this country desperately needs. If not, Labour we’ll be out of power for at least decade. David Prescott Find out more about David Prescott here https://davidprescott.wordpress.com/about/ I remember the first time I read the Daily Mail. It was a Saturday afternoon. I was 16, in the middle of my first ever shift in our local supermarket, and I’d just walked into the staff canteen. There was, as is customary for staff canteens, a rack of newspapers on the wall.
'I’ll read the paper’, I thought. All grown up. ‘But which one? Not The Sun, that’s just a comic. The Times? Mmm, too big. Oh look, what’s this? It looks important, like the Telegraph, but smaller. That’ll do. From the moment I sat down I had this funny feeling that something was not quite right. Sixteen years later I find my first major public art project, a crowd-funded campaign to manufacture 1,000 t-shirts emblazoned with Jeremy Corbyn’s name in a Superman-style, is the catalyst for yet another smear campaign against the very person the project was intended to celebrate. I’m angry, I’m embarrassed, and I need to get a few things straight. Firstly, the emotive images of the two Bangladeshi women holding my shirts clearly imply that Jeremy Corbyn branded items are coming directly off a production line in Bangladesh. I would expect every person who saw them has assumed as much, however, this is not true. In reality, the shirts have only ever been printed right here in London. If the photos were taken in Dhaka, then the photographer must have purchased them here and travelled out with them. Secondly, the initial decision to use Gildan shirts was made by me and me alone. Jeremy Corbyn had, contrary to the implication of the headline, absolutely nothing to do with it. Why did I chose Gildan? I’ve designed t-shirts in the past, for my music and other projects, and I always used them simply because that’s what every other band used. They are, by far, the most popular brand of t-shirt for this type of activity in the UK. When I realised this project would be on a much bigger scale than my previous, I did some more research and saw they were accredited by the Fair Labor Association as a socially responsible employer. I suppose at the time I felt like that was good enough for me, which in hindsight was a mistake. Momentum’s decision to order Gildan from the same London-based printer is likely to have been simply a matter of them following my lead. I would suggest, if the conditions really are as described in the Mail on Sunday‘s article, then the Fair Labor Association, who are supposedly a reputable authority, should seriously reconsider Gildan’s stamp of approval. It infuriates me that the Mail can and will continue to use Corbyn’s admirable position on absolutely anything as constant fodder for accusations of hypocrisy. It’s a sad fact that products made with cheap labour are everywhere. Anyone who has ever bought anything from Apple, H&M, GAP, Primark, Nestle, Nike, Adidas or any one of the long list of retailers and brands that use cheap labour is complicit. This is clearly not the result of Jeremy Corbyn, or Momentum, or my stupid t-shirts, but is indicative of and perpetuated by this mutant form of capitalism that we are so enthusiastically encouraged to embrace under economic neoliberalism - the ideology behind privatisation, deregulation and austerity. Ironically, these are precisely the same ideals that drive the agenda of the Mail. Surely that’s the very definition of hypocrisy. Angry Dan is an artist, musician and poet He has shared the above with us which is also published by the Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/angry-dan/jeremy-corbyn-t-shirts_b_11219802.html?1469635746& Mail Online allegations - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3705087/How-low-Corbyn-new-slave-labour-T-shirt-scandal-poverty-stricken-workers-paid-pitiful-30-PENCE-hour-make-10-tops-fund-leadership-campaign.html Crowdfunder - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/style/this-man-is-crowdfunding-a-jeremy-corbyn-superman-t-shirt/ The following concerns one man's fight, Anthony Roberts, with bureaucracy detrimentally affecting his business.
[It can also be found at http://www.bullyboys.co.uk ] THE TRUTH This blog is about a major issue I have with PDC and LCC, a developer and two multi nationals - Lidl and T K Maxx. Not one of them have considered my long standing business, they appear not to care less! LCC illegally sited the traffic signals opposite the entrance to my business some years ago (see Sanderson’s Highway Consultants letter) during the development of North Valley Retail Park. The only excuse they could offer was that my gate must have been closed when the road was surveyed and they failed to notice the entrance. I did not and do not accept this excuse and believe to be untrue. After much correspondence and getting no satisfactory answers, I asked via the Freedom of Information Act to see the Road Safety Audit for the North Valley Retail Park development - a legal requirement for any development such as this. LCC replied saying that they had either lost or misplaced the document in question! Very convenient! Later they finally admitted they were out of order and promised to remedy the problem during the expected development of Glen Mill (see e-mail from Simon Bucknel - Highways Engineer and LCC representative). I took LCC at their word but they have reneged on their promise and totally betrayed my trust. LCC regularly refuse to answer my correspondence, the reason being, in my opinion, that they have no answers - only excuses! PDC were desperate for the development of Glen Mill at any cost. They went ahead and passed the planning application with no consideration at all for my 30 year established business. PDC Planning Dept misinformed the Planning Committee in their report despite the fact that I had pointed out to them a number of inaccuracies in same. They replied to me in their usual political type letter but refused to address their inaccuracies. A Planning Lawyer I employed also brought to their attention a number of illegalities which they completely ignored (see C Lord, Planning Lawyer letter). The Planning Lawyer’s advice to me was that the application could only fail as it was littered with errors and irregularities and was not legal. Most of the Councillors on the Planning Committee ignored my request for help. The only concession made to me by the Planning Committee was a condition for the moving of the entrance to my business which was to be positioned further away from the traffic signal’s stop line. The planning committee recognised that there was a real issue with the position of the traffic signals in relation to my entrance and made a democratic decision to place a condition on the approval, requiring the developer to provide a dropped kerb and move the entrance accordingly. I waited for the alterations to commence but nothing happened. I asked Pendle Planning when I could expect the works to begin only to be told that they had removed the committee’s democratic condition! I enquired for what reason but they refused to give me an answer. As the condition was not going to cost either PDC or LCC a single penny piece, it leads me to believe in my opinion that their actions were purely vindictive. When my situation was brought to the developer’s attention (Giles Saint John Berry - Citypark) and he was informed of the history of my case, he said it was ‘criminal’ but not his concern, even though it was HIS development that was making things much, much worse for my 30 year established business. Lidl representative Paul Mason came to see the situation for himself. He acknowledged there was a problem and said he would investigate it further and come back to me with a solution. I am still waiting! LITTLE SURPRISES! EVERY LITTLE DOESN’T HELP! LIDL APPEAR NOT TO CARE LESS! T K MAXX, WHOM ARE SOON TO OPEN A STORE ON THE SITE ARE ALSO AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND THEY ALSO APPEAR NOT TO CARE LESS!!!!!!!!!!!! The process of developing the site was a nightmare for me and my business causing major disruption, particularly through the summer of 2015. Allegedly, it was entirely at Lidl and the developer’s request that Hanover Street was completely closed off for a period of 8 days in August (see pictures). In that time we did not see one single customer. LCC gave permission for this without so much as a thought for my business and knowing that it would be a real problem for me, but I feel they just don’t care! LCC refused to communicate with me at all during this time. Is it fair that a small family business should be forcibly shut down so a large multi-national can progress with it’s development and mass global expansion? UPDATE: Pendle Council have blocked us from their twitter feed. Wonder why??? They have also refused to answer a ‘Freedom of Information’ request !!! Is this what they call democracy? http://www.pendle.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/16475/item_6a_planning_applications_update http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/business/local-business/mill-plans-will-kill-my-business-1-6668114 As the mainstream media and too many within the Labour Party label Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters anything from trots to dogs to rabble we are sharing the following to slightly redress the balance:
Exposé on Owen Smith MP Owen Smith MP, who is challenging Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party, has a lot of dirty linen that he does not want washed in public. Luckily, I have brought my own box of Daz. I have it on very good authority (from someone within the Blarite Labour camp, who is disgusted by the behind-the-scenes secret-deals, funny handshakes, and distain for the voters), of the following: 1. Owen Smith is actually the original perpetrator of the challenge to Jeremy Corbyn (and has been for a very time). The agenda for the leadership challenge was set up in April! Yes, that’s right, April and not July. Angela Eagle was brought in as a ruse, to make Owen look good. Eagle actually believed that she had a chance. She had none. This was a coup d'état with only a few of the players in the know. Angela Eagle was not one of them. She was deliberately led down the garden path to make mistakes and look foolish (and didn’t she rise to the challenge). Owen Smith’s agenda during the interview with Eagle on the recent BBC news show is obvious for all to see. When Owen indicated that: “He would withdraw from the contest if Ms Eagle won more support among Labour MPs”, you could almost see him snigger. Smith already knew the agenda was set. He already knew who his supporters were and also those of Eagle. So, the interview was merely play-acting on his part. 2. Owen Smith had always intended to split the Labour Party (right from the beginning). Apparently, Owen Smith believes he can head Jeremy Corbyn off at the pass. It goes something like this: should Corbyn win, none of the MP’s will take cabinet positions (this has already been decided by those in the know). Smith believes that by doing this, it will split the party in two. This is what he wants. Smith realises that Jeremy has so much grass-roots support, that he is unable to successfully win in that quarter. However, a split party is a weakened party and he intends to take full advantage of it. 3. Many of the Blairite MP’s have been offered powerful positions and sweetheart deals, should they vote against Corbyn. It is extremely hush-hush and it does explain why so many MP’s suddenly went against Corbyn. Those who sat on the fence eventually decided to support ANYBODY other than Corbyn. I would suggest that once Jeremy Corbyn gets in, that the bank accounts and behind-the-scene deals of these MP’s are investigated. The whole system that they are involved in is so incredibly corrupt. 4. As many of you know, Smith was a lobbyist for Pfizer. As Head of Policy and Government Relations for Pfizer, Owen Smith was also directly involved in Pfizer’s funding of Blairite right-wing entryist group Progress. Pfizer gave Progress £53,000. Progress has actively pursued the agenda of PFI and privatisation of NHS services. Pfizer is among the world's largest pharmaceutical companies. Big Pharma seeks enormous profits over the health and well-being of the humans it serves, and these drug companies invasively corrupt the way that the healthcare industry delivers its vital services. Corrupt being the operative word. So, why was Owen involved with an American company? Well, Owen Smith is on record as saying that: “.... Pfizer had been “extremely supportive” of his aspirations to public office”. Make of that what you will. Well, I am sure that Pfizer would love to get their toe in the door of the British NHS and Owen is their man to do just that! During his time as chief lobbyist for Pfizer, Owen Smith actively pushed for privatisation of NHS services. Therefore, we know that the NHS will definitely not be safe in his hands. Should he become leader of the Labour Party, it will only be a matter of time before he will use his influence to start the process for privatisation of the NHS. What we will end up with is something akin to the American system, where you will need to show your credit card (or insurance papers), before receiving treatment. Americans (rich and poor), have to find ways of paying for their very expensive treatments, should they get sick. This is our future, should Owen Smith become leader of the Labour Party. And, if you think things could not get dirtier, Owen Smith is a strong supporter of Trident and assiduously courts the arms industry. He is a regular at defence industry events. This is dirty dealing, folks. THIS is what we will get should Smith rise to power. If you value your future and well-being of your family, then you must do everything you can to ensure that he cannot continue his corrupt agenda. If he gains leadership, we really can say goodbye to the NHS and a whole lot more. Please share this message as far and wide as you can, since the people need to know what is going on. Thanks to Maureen Anne Fitzsimmons Len McCluskey adds context to his comments on MI5 posting the following in the Guardian Monday evening July 25, 2016.
"I think your readers are owed a bit of context behind the comments I made to Decca Aitkenhead when she interviewed me (23 July). I have been around long enough to see the 30-year rule reveal a few uncomfortable truths, including, as I mentioned to Ms Aitkenhead, that the chairman of my former union, the Transport and General Workers’ Union, had been found to be a paid state informant during the period of an important strike in the 1970s. Consider, too, the long fights for truth and justice in this country, begun by many as young men and women which only see resolution decades later. In the blacklisting of hundreds of construction workers; in the fathering of children by undercover police officers; in the collusion of the police and the government in the denial of responsibility and the smearing of the innocent at Hillsborough, the state acted in secrecy and with malign intentions. In the case of the misuse of police force against the miners at Orgreave and the jailing of the Shrewsbury 24, the fight to shine a light on reality goes on. It is also a pity that my unequivocal condemnation of the threats and intimidation emerging as a sorry feature of present day political discourse did not find its way into the article. 7So while my comments to Ms Aitkenhead were a wry observation, not a direct allegation, as subsequent headlines claimed, when power and authority face challenge, as many will consider Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership does to the prevailing political and economic orthodoxy, they do not sit idle. Len McCluskey General secretary, Unite the union" https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/25/len-mccluskey-adds-context-to-his-comments-on-mi5 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mi5-out-jeremy-corbyn-posing-8475063 |
Yourvoice
This blog will include a range of reports and opinion pieces covering many issues. It will be YOUR Voice. Archives
April 2017
Categories
All
|