PJC Journal – Original

In the ever
growing scandal exclusively broken by blogger Guido Fawkes, regarding the Smith Institute and its relationship with Gordon Brown,
The Treasury and other elements of Governement, and bearing in mind the ongoing
investigation by the Charity Commissioners, what do you think.

 

The Smith
Institute, a secretive organisation that claims to be a charity, yet appears to
be setting government policy, which is just not on, where members of its board
of trustees also own the Limited Company SI Events that organises its meetings
with and in No.11, over 200 times to date, that also shares the same office and
has the same staff.   

The Offices (and
most of the staff)
are leased to the Smith Institute and SI Events by The New Statesman, owned by
Geoffrey Robinson, the ex paymaster general who lent all that money to Peter Mandleson,
and allegedly put his own fortune into ‘trusts’ in Jersey to avoid tax.

Companies House
tells us that SI Events ltd last filed accounts on 31/03/2006, are ‘small’, but highlighted documents
are not yet ready for inspection. Do I smell tax fiddles as well here? You can
learn more Guido Fawkes here
and a video report from  Ian Dale here. 

Is there a
conflict of interest, are the people involved with the Smith Institute involved
in forming UK Government policy.

Well, bearing in
mind that many of the directors and members of the Board of Governers at
present sit in the Lords, and sit on key committee’s, I think that it would be
hard to argue that they don’t. 

In recent years
they have had over 200 meetings and seminars held at No11 Downing St. 
It is known that Gordon Brown has attended some, but not all of
them.  That’s a lot of meetings.

But you
decide.  All of the information below is
available on the Internet, but perhaps you would like to do a little more digging
yourself.

 

 

Shareholders of SI Events Ltd. 

 

Baroness Rendell of Babergh
sits in the House of
Lords for Labour.
 

Better know under
the pseudonym Barbara Vine, she is a mystery
and psychological crime writer,

Specialising in
misperceived communication, chance and the humanness of criminal.

 

 

Baroness
Ramsay of Cartvale sits in the House of Lords for Labour.
 

Since 2005 she
has been a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, which provides
parliamentary oversight of the Secret Intelligence Service. Annual Reports for 2005 which are currently being suppressed are those
of the Intelligence Services Commissioner and the Interception of
Communications Commissioner, under the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000.

 

 

Lord
Haskell (Simon Haskell)
sits in the House of Lords for Labour.

Also on the LFIG
Executive Committee.(see below).  He was
Chairman of the Perrotts Group from 1973-97. He gave £6,000 to the Labour Party
in 2001.  Given life peerage 1993. His
profile on DODS is not available yet?. A member of the Labour Finance and
Industry group, is now the Liaison Peer with the Department of Trade &
Industry and serves on several committees and subcommittees., such as the
sub-committees looking at Science & Society.

 

Baron
Joffe (Joel Goodman Joffe) sits in the House of Lords as a Crossbench peer. 

Joel Joffe,
former Deputy Chairman (and one of the founders) of Allied Dunbar Assurance,
gave more than £5,000 to the Labour Party in 1997 and £10,000 in march 2001. He
served on the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care and along with David (now also
Lord) Lipsey, produced a minority report which enabled the Government to ignore
the expensive provision of care recommended by the majority of Commission
members. He was given his peerage in the 1999 New Years Honours list.

 

 

Directors of SI Events Ltd

Robert
Wilfred Stevenson
also a director of The Smith Institute as Wilf Stevenson.
 

Wilf
has overall responsibility for the Institute's programme of research and
events.

Very
little background is available for Stevenson, although his registration at
companies house indicates that he holds 27 other directorships.

 

Konrad Caulkett

Konrad
is responsible for the development of the Smith Institute’s programme of events.
Also works for the Smith Institute.

 

 

Board of Trustees of The Smith
Institute

 

 

The Lord Haskel of Higher Broughton (Chairman) sits in the House of Lords for Labour. 

Also on the LFIG
Executive Committee.(see below). He was Chairman of the Perrotts Group from
1973-97. He gave £6,000 to the Labour Party in 2001.  Given life peerage 1993. His profile on DODS
is not available yet?. A member of the Labour Finance and Industry group, is
now the Liaison Peer with the Department of Trade & Industry and serves on
several committees and subcommittees., such as the sub-committees looking at
Science & Society.

 

Baron
Joffe (Joel Goodman Joffe) sits in the House of Lords as a Crossbench peer.

Joel Joffe,
former Deputy Chairman (and one of the founders) of Allied Dunbar Assurance,
gave more than £5,000 to the Labour Party in 1997 and £10,000 in march 2001. He
served on the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care and along with David (now also
Lord) Lipsey, produced a minority report which enabled the Government to ignore
the expensive provision of care recommended by the majority of Commission
members. He was given his peerage in the 1999 New Years Honours list.

 

Baroness Rendell of Babergh
sits in the House of
Lords for Labour.

Better know under
the pseudonym Barbara Vine, she is a mystery
and psychological crime writer,

Specialising in
misperceived communication, chance and the humanness of criminal.

 

Baroness
Ramsay of Cartvale sits in the House of Lords for Labour.
 

Since 2005 she
has been a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, which provides
parliamentary oversight of the Secret Intelligence Service. Annual Reports for 2005 which are currently being suppressed are those
of the Intelligence Services Commissioner and the Interception of
Communications Commissioner, under the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000.

 

 

John Robert Milligan
 

The Director and
major shareholder Ballathie Estates Ltd gave £25,000 to the Labour Party in May
2001. A month after the donation he was appointed as the Chairman of the
Scottish New Deal Advisory Task Force.

He was previously
Chairman of Aberdeen Enterprise Trust and Head Start Aberdeen.

John Milligan
formed Strathclyde Process Engineering in 1973 and Atlantic Power and Gas in
1982, where he remained Chairman until 1998. made about £44m before tax for his
stake in Atlantic Power that he sold in 1998. He is a non-executive Director of
Petroleum Geo-Services (a company floated on the New York Stock Exchange) which
merged with Atlantic Power in 1998. He is also a non-executive Director of
Aberdeen Development Capital. He is a Visiting Professor of Entrepreneurial
Studies at The Robert Gordon University and a long-standing member (including
three years as Chairman) of their Board of Governors, and a sponsor of an
Industry/Education Partnership with Kincorth Academy.

 

Paul Myners  He is a member of the Court of the Bank of England (director) and a
Trustee of Glyndebourne.

He is a respected
authority on corporate governance. He has compiled influential reports on institutional
investment, pension funds and governance for H.M. Treasury and the Department
of Trade and Industry.  Chairman of the
Guardian Media Group, publisher of the Guardian and Observer newspapers, and
Land Securities Group.

Married to Alison
Myners, a Trustee of The Royal Academy Trust.

 
 

The
Archbishop of York, the Right Rev. Dr John Sentamu
 

John Sentamu b. Kampala, Uganda, read law at Makerere University, Kampala, and practised as an advocate of the High
Court of Uganda. Sentamu was appointed a High Court judge in 1973 at the age of
24 by Idi Amin.

He read theology
at Selwyn College, Cambridge (BA 1976, MA MPhil 1979, PhD 1984), and
trained for the priesthood at Ridley Hall, Cambridge, being ordained a priest in 1979.  On 17 June 2005 the Prime Minister's office announced his
translation to York as the 97th Archbishop.

A week before his
enthronement he called for a rediscovery of English pride and
cultural identity.

One of Sentamu's favourite
references is to the “Chocolate Trinity” of God-fearing Quaker
capitalists who were involved in developing the chocolate industry.

George Cadbury: “More
than just a sweet man”,  Joseph Rowntree:
…an adventurer to the end of life, forever peering forward, never content
with what had been achieved“, and Joseph Storrs Fry II (J.S. Fry):
“…the very model of the pre-1860 Quaker, with his plain dress a relic
of the past and a reflection of his narrow conservative approach to both
religion and business.“

 

Advisory Committee members 2006 –
Smith Institute 

 

Rob Allen,
International Centre for Prison Studies, Kings College London

Professor Linda Colley, University of Princeton

Professor Christopher Hood, All Souls College, Oxford

Amanda Jordan, The SMART Company

Professor Heather Joshi, Bedford Group for Lifecourse Studies

Professor Ruth Lister, Loughborough University & Donald Dewar Visiting
Professor, Glasgow University

Professor Sheldon Leader, University of Essex (Chair)

Abigail McKnight, CASE, London School of Economics

Deborah Mattinson, Opinion Leader Research

Jenny Smith, Catalyst

Sarah Smith, Channel 4 News

Polly Toynbee, The Guardian

Lord Larry Whitty, National Consumer Council

Alf Young, Glasgow Herald

 

So, the big question is Does the
Smith Institue have an unbias political view, in order to keep their Charitable
status they must.
 

In November 03 a
meeting was held in London, with British government officials,
German Government officials, Smith Institute officials, Friedrich Ebert
Stiftung officials and Big Business representatives to set Regional
Policy.

The list of attendees
is laid out below.

 

Regional
economic policy

Lokale und
regionale Wirtschafts- und Strukturpolitik

London, 27 November 2003

 

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS / TEILNEHMERLISTE

Organisers / Organisatoren

 

Dr. Gero Maass

Director, London Office

Friedrich Ebert Stiftung

 

Wilf Stevenson

Director

Smith Institute

 

German
Delegation / Deutsche Delegation

 

Heinrich Aller

Mitglied des Landtages von
Niedersachsen

Finanzminister a.D. des Landes
Niedersachsen

Vorsitzender des Ausschusses für
Haushalt und Finanzen

(Member of the Land Parliament of
Lower-Saxony)

 

Friedhelm
Bertelsmeier

Verkehrsreferent in der Deutschen
Botschaft

(Transport Officer, German Embassy)

 

Tilo Braune

Staatssekretär im BMVBW

(State secretary, Federal Ministry
of Transport, Building and

Housing)

 

Angelika Ehmler

Dolmetscherin (Interpreter)

BMVBW

 

Dr. Katharina Erdmenger

Leiterin des Referates „Aufbau Ost, Struktur- und

Regionalpolitik, Unternehmens- und Industriepolitik“

DGB Bundesvorstand

(Head of the Regional and Structural Policy Department,

German Trade Union Federation)

 

Dr. Herbert Jakoby

Leiter der Abteilung für Europa und Internationales,

Staatskanzlei des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen

(Head of the European and International
Department in the

Office of the Minister-President of Nordrhein-Westfalen)

 

Dr. Utz Ingo Küpper

Geschäftsführer

Wirtschafts- und Beschäftigungsförderung

der Stadt Dortmund

(Managing Director of city development agency, Dortmund)

 

Jens Lattmann

Beigeordneter des Deutschen Städtetages, Köln

(Councillor, German Association of Cities and Towns)

 

Dr. Hartmut Mangold

Unterabteilungsleiter: Aufbau Ost, Raumentwicklung &

Strukturplanung

(Deputy of Department, Reconstruction East, Regional

Planning and Structural Policy)

BMVBW

 

Thomas Matussek

Botschafter der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

(Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany )

 

Catherine McDowell

Wirtschaftsreferentin in der Deutsche Botschaft

(Commercial Officer, German Embassy)

 

Dr. Dieter Rehfeld

Direktor des Forschungsschwerpunktes Innovative Räume

Institut Arbeit und Technik

(Institute for Work & Technology, Consultancy within the

Wissenschaftszentrum North-Rhine Westphalia)

 

Dieter Schlimmer

Stv. Geschäftsführer, Landes-Gewerbeförderungsstelle des

NRW-Handwerks
(LGH)

(Deputy Director of agency promoting small trades &

businesses, affiliated to Chamber of Industry & Commerce of

North-Rhine Westphalia)

 

Esther Zimmermann

Freie Universität Berlin, Intern FES London

 

British Delegation / Britische Delegation

 

Kate Alexander

HMT

 

Ed Balls

Chief Economic Adviser

HM Treasury

 

Ken Bodfish

SEEDA

 

Abby Johnson Brennan

EMDA

 

Konrad Caulkett

Smith Institute

 

Philip Cox

ODPM

 

Ros Dunn

HM Treasury

 

Karl Eddy

KPMG

 

Mike Emmerich

Institute for Political and Economic Governance

 

Bryan Gray

NWRDA

 

Karen Harris

ONE

 

Pat Hayes

LB Lewisham

 

Professor Mark Hepworth

Local Futures Group

 

John Healey MP

Economic Secretary to the Treasury

 

Rachel Jones

National Assembly for Wales

 

Rt.Hon. Rhodri Morgan AM

National Assembly for Wales

 

John Neve

DTI

 

Tony Pilch

Smith Institute

 

Richard Samuda

KPMG

 

Neil Sherlock

KPMG

 

Ben Shimshon

Smith Institute

 

Cllr David Sparks

Dudley MBC and LGA Economic Regeneration

 

Tom Wilson

TUC

 

Stewart Wood

Council of Economic Advisers

HM Treasury

 

Sam Woods

HM Treasury

 

 

Interpreters / Übersetzer

Brigitte Puhl

Dr. Winfried Haag

 

Are
these the people who are shaping our lives, are these millionaires and business
chiefs making millions at our expense deciding and shaping government policy. 

Or
is it the members of the Labour
Finance and Industry Group, (LFIG), and its offshoots the Industry Forum and the business unit at
Millbank, are another
group of millionaires and businessmen who according to their web site ‘Have a major
policy input into the development of the manifesto, in particular on local
government best value, tourism, the city, corporate governance, the need to
invest in science and R&D etc’ .

LFIG members include Ministers, MPs, Lords and MEPs, as well as many
senior figures from business. 

 

Policy input produced by this group includes ;

Local Transport Plans that Work, Report of Fringe Meeting, Labour
Spring Conference, Manchester, 13/3/04 - download.

PLP
Transport Cmtee and LFIG Submission:  Towards a new Labour Transport
Strategy – download

Company
Law Reform Director & Auditor Liability Consultation Response - download.

Company
Law Reform Threshold Responses - download.

Response
to Raising the Thresholds, Consultation Document – download

Address by Simon Bartley of CBI to Hong Kong
Trade Dev. Council conference, 11 November 2003 – download here

SME:
Facts and Issues - download.

 

Together
with the Smith Institute these are the guys making the rules, government just
implements them with legislation, some of the most stupid and punitive
legislation this country has ever seen.

The
companies of these guys get the best of the government contracts, and you and I
pay for it all with ever increasing stealth taxes. 

Awash
with money for business and PFI deals, nothing for services,
this government stinks of corruption and needs investigation.

Britain is now run by businessmen
for the benefit of businessmen.

Its almost like putting the
prisoners in charge of the prisons.

 

Time
I think for the Charitiy Commissioners, the Bloggers, Parliamentary committee’s
and investigative journalists to keep digging.

 

 

  

In the ever
growing scandal exclusively broken by blogger Guido Fawkes, regarding the Smith Institute and its relationship with Gordon Brown,
The Treasury and other elements of Governement, and bearing in mind the ongoing
investigation by the Charity Commissioners, what do you think.

 

The Smith
Institute, a secretive organisation that claims to be a charity, yet appears to
be setting government policy, which is just not on, where members of its board
of trustees also own the Limited Company SI Events that organises its meetings
with and in No.11, over 200 times to date, that also shares the same office and
has the same staff.   

The Offices (and
most of the staff)
are leased to the Smith Institute and SI Events by The New Statesman, owned by
Geoffrey Robinson, the ex paymaster general who lent all that money to Peter Mandleson,
and allegedly put his own fortune into ‘trusts’ in Jersey to avoid tax.

Companies House
tells us that SI Events ltd last filed accounts on 31/03/2006, are ‘small’, but highlighted documents
are not yet ready for inspection. Do I smell tax fiddles as well here? You can
learn more Guido Fawkes here
and a video report from  Ian Dale here. 

Is there a
conflict of interest, are the people involved with the Smith Institute involved
in forming UK Government policy.

Well, bearing in
mind that many of the directors and members of the Board of Governers at
present sit in the Lords, and sit on key committee’s, I think that it would be
hard to argue that they don’t. 

In recent years
they have had over 200 meetings and seminars held at No11 Downing St. 
It is known that Gordon Brown has attended some, but not all of
them.  That’s a lot of meetings.

But you
decide.  All of the information below is
available on the Internet, but perhaps you would like to do a little more digging
yourself.

 

 

Shareholders of SI Events Ltd. 

 

Baroness Rendell of Babergh
sits in the House of
Lords for Labour.
 

Better know under
the pseudonym Barbara Vine, she is a mystery
and psychological crime writer,

Specialising in
misperceived communication, chance and the humanness of criminal.

 

 

Baroness
Ramsay of Cartvale sits in the House of Lords for Labour.
 

Since 2005 she
has been a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, which provides
parliamentary oversight of the Secret Intelligence Service. Annual Reports for 2005 which are currently being suppressed are those
of the Intelligence Services Commissioner and the Interception of
Communications Commissioner, under the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000.

 

 

Lord
Haskell (Simon Haskell)
sits in the House of Lords for Labour.

Also on the LFIG
Executive Committee.(see below).  He was
Chairman of the Perrotts Group from 1973-97. He gave £6,000 to the Labour Party
in 2001.  Given life peerage 1993. His
profile on DODS is not available yet?. A member of the Labour Finance and
Industry group, is now the Liaison Peer with the Department of Trade &
Industry and serves on several committees and subcommittees., such as the
sub-committees looking at Science & Society.

 

Baron
Joffe (Joel Goodman Joffe) sits in the House of Lords as a Crossbench peer. 

Joel Joffe,
former Deputy Chairman (and one of the founders) of Allied Dunbar Assurance,
gave more than £5,000 to the Labour Party in 1997 and £10,000 in march 2001. He
served on the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care and along with David (now also
Lord) Lipsey, produced a minority report which enabled the Government to ignore
the expensive provision of care recommended by the majority of Commission
members. He was given his peerage in the 1999 New Years Honours list.

 

 

Directors of SI Events Ltd

Robert
Wilfred Stevenson
also a director of The Smith Institute as Wilf Stevenson.
 

Wilf
has overall responsibility for the Institute's programme of research and
events.

Very
little background is available for Stevenson, although his registration at
companies house indicates that he holds 27 other directorships.

 

Konrad Caulkett

Konrad
is responsible for the development of the Smith Institute’s programme of events.
Also works for the Smith Institute.

 

 

Board of Trustees of The Smith
Institute

 

 

The Lord Haskel of Higher Broughton (Chairman) sits in the House of Lords for Labour. 

Also on the LFIG
Executive Committee.(see below). He was Chairman of the Perrotts Group from
1973-97. He gave £6,000 to the Labour Party in 2001.  Given life peerage 1993. His profile on DODS
is not available yet?. A member of the Labour Finance and Industry group, is
now the Liaison Peer with the Department of Trade & Industry and serves on
several committees and subcommittees., such as the sub-committees looking at
Science & Society.

 

Baron
Joffe (Joel Goodman Joffe) sits in the House of Lords as a Crossbench peer.

Joel Joffe,
former Deputy Chairman (and one of the founders) of Allied Dunbar Assurance,
gave more than £5,000 to the Labour Party in 1997 and £10,000 in march 2001. He
served on the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care and along with David (now also
Lord) Lipsey, produced a minority report which enabled the Government to ignore
the expensive provision of care recommended by the majority of Commission
members. He was given his peerage in the 1999 New Years Honours list.

 

Baroness Rendell of Babergh
sits in the House of
Lords for Labour.

Better know under
the pseudonym Barbara Vine, she is a mystery
and psychological crime writer,

Specialising in
misperceived communication, chance and the humanness of criminal.

 

Baroness
Ramsay of Cartvale sits in the House of Lords for Labour.
 

Since 2005 she
has been a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, which provides
parliamentary oversight of the Secret Intelligence Service. Annual Reports for 2005 which are currently being suppressed are those
of the Intelligence Services Commissioner and the Interception of
Communications Commissioner, under the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000.

 

 

John Robert Milligan
 

The Director and
major shareholder Ballathie Estates Ltd gave £25,000 to the Labour Party in May
2001. A month after the donation he was appointed as the Chairman of the
Scottish New Deal Advisory Task Force.

He was previously
Chairman of Aberdeen Enterprise Trust and Head Start Aberdeen.

John Milligan
formed Strathclyde Process Engineering in 1973 and Atlantic Power and Gas in
1982, where he remained Chairman until 1998. made about £44m before tax for his
stake in Atlantic Power that he sold in 1998. He is a non-executive Director of
Petroleum Geo-Services (a company floated on the New York Stock Exchange) which
merged with Atlantic Power in 1998. He is also a non-executive Director of
Aberdeen Development Capital. He is a Visiting Professor of Entrepreneurial
Studies at The Robert Gordon University and a long-standing member (including
three years as Chairman) of their Board of Governors, and a sponsor of an
Industry/Education Partnership with Kincorth Academy.

 

Paul Myners  He is a member of the Court of the Bank of England (director) and a
Trustee of Glyndebourne.

He is a respected
authority on corporate governance. He has compiled influential reports on institutional
investment, pension funds and governance for H.M. Treasury and the Department
of Trade and Industry.  Chairman of the
Guardian Media Group, publisher of the Guardian and Observer newspapers, and
Land Securities Group.

Married to Alison
Myners, a Trustee of The Royal Academy Trust.

 
 

The
Archbishop of York, the Right Rev. Dr John Sentamu
 

John Sentamu b. Kampala, Uganda, read law at Makerere University, Kampala, and practised as an advocate of the High
Court of Uganda. Sentamu was appointed a High Court judge in 1973 at the age of
24 by Idi Amin.

He read theology
at Selwyn College, Cambridge (BA 1976, MA MPhil 1979, PhD 1984), and
trained for the priesthood at Ridley Hall, Cambridge, being ordained a priest in 1979.  On 17 June 2005 the Prime Minister's office announced his
translation to York as the 97th Archbishop.

A week before his
enthronement he called for a rediscovery of English pride and
cultural identity.

One of Sentamu's favourite
references is to the “Chocolate Trinity” of God-fearing Quaker
capitalists who were involved in developing the chocolate industry.

George Cadbury: “More
than just a sweet man”,  Joseph Rowntree:
…an adventurer to the end of life, forever peering forward, never content
with what had been achieved“, and Joseph Storrs Fry II (J.S. Fry):
“…the very model of the pre-1860 Quaker, with his plain dress a relic
of the past and a reflection of his narrow conservative approach to both
religion and business.“

 

Advisory Committee members 2006 –
Smith Institute 

 

Rob Allen,
International Centre for Prison Studies, Kings College London

Professor Linda Colley, University of Princeton

Professor Christopher Hood, All Souls College, Oxford

Amanda Jordan, The SMART Company

Professor Heather Joshi, Bedford Group for Lifecourse Studies

Professor Ruth Lister, Loughborough University & Donald Dewar Visiting
Professor, Glasgow University

Professor Sheldon Leader, University of Essex (Chair)

Abigail McKnight, CASE, London School of Economics

Deborah Mattinson, Opinion Leader Research

Jenny Smith, Catalyst

Sarah Smith, Channel 4 News

Polly Toynbee, The Guardian

Lord Larry Whitty, National Consumer Council

Alf Young, Glasgow Herald

 

So, the big question is Does the
Smith Institue have an unbias political view, in order to keep their Charitable
status they must.
 

In November 03 a
meeting was held in London, with British government officials,
German Government officials, Smith Institute officials, Friedrich Ebert
Stiftung officials and Big Business representatives to set Regional
Policy.

The list of attendees
is laid out below.

 

Regional
economic policy

Lokale und
regionale Wirtschafts- und Strukturpolitik

London, 27 November 2003

 

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS / TEILNEHMERLISTE

Organisers / Organisatoren

 

Dr. Gero Maass

Director, London Office

Friedrich Ebert Stiftung

 

Wilf Stevenson

Director

Smith Institute

 

German
Delegation / Deutsche Delegation

 

Heinrich Aller

Mitglied des Landtages von
Niedersachsen

Finanzminister a.D. des Landes
Niedersachsen

Vorsitzender des Ausschusses für
Haushalt und Finanzen

(Member of the Land Parliament of
Lower-Saxony)

 

Friedhelm
Bertelsmeier

Verkehrsreferent in der Deutschen
Botschaft

(Transport Officer, German Embassy)

 

Tilo Braune

Staatssekretär im BMVBW

(State secretary, Federal Ministry
of Transport, Building and

Housing)

 

Angelika Ehmler

Dolmetscherin (Interpreter)

BMVBW

 

Dr. Katharina Erdmenger

Leiterin des Referates „Aufbau Ost, Struktur- und

Regionalpolitik, Unternehmens- und Industriepolitik“

DGB Bundesvorstand

(Head of the Regional and Structural Policy Department,

German Trade Union Federation)

 

Dr. Herbert Jakoby

Leiter der Abteilung für Europa und Internationales,

Staatskanzlei des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen

(Head of the European and International
Department in the

Office of the Minister-President of Nordrhein-Westfalen)

 

Dr. Utz Ingo Küpper

Geschäftsführer

Wirtschafts- und Beschäftigungsförderung

der Stadt Dortmund

(Managing Director of city development agency, Dortmund)

 

Jens Lattmann

Beigeordneter des Deutschen Städtetages, Köln

(Councillor, German Association of Cities and Towns)

 

Dr. Hartmut Mangold

Unterabteilungsleiter: Aufbau Ost, Raumentwicklung &

Strukturplanung

(Deputy of Department, Reconstruction East, Regional

Planning and Structural Policy)

BMVBW

 

Thomas Matussek

Botschafter der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

(Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany )

 

Catherine McDowell

Wirtschaftsreferentin in der Deutsche Botschaft

(Commercial Officer, German Embassy)

 

Dr. Dieter Rehfeld

Direktor des Forschungsschwerpunktes Innovative Räume

Institut Arbeit und Technik

(Institute for Work & Technology, Consultancy within the

Wissenschaftszentrum North-Rhine Westphalia)

 

Dieter Schlimmer

Stv. Geschäftsführer, Landes-Gewerbeförderungsstelle des

NRW-Handwerks
(LGH)

(Deputy Director of agency promoting small trades &

businesses, affiliated to Chamber of Industry & Commerce of

North-Rhine Westphalia)

 

Esther Zimmermann

Freie Universität Berlin, Intern FES London

 

British Delegation / Britische Delegation

 

Kate Alexander

HMT

 

Ed Balls

Chief Economic Adviser

HM Treasury

 

Ken Bodfish

SEEDA

 

Abby Johnson Brennan

EMDA

 

Konrad Caulkett

Smith Institute

 

Philip Cox

ODPM

 

Ros Dunn

HM Treasury

 

Karl Eddy

KPMG

 

Mike Emmerich

Institute for Political and Economic Governance

 

Bryan Gray

NWRDA

 

Karen Harris

ONE

 

Pat Hayes

LB Lewisham

 

Professor Mark Hepworth

Local Futures Group

 

John Healey MP

Economic Secretary to the Treasury

 

Rachel Jones

National Assembly for Wales

 

Rt.Hon. Rhodri Morgan AM

National Assembly for Wales

 

John Neve

DTI

 

Tony Pilch

Smith Institute

 

Richard Samuda

KPMG

 

Neil Sherlock

KPMG

 

Ben Shimshon

Smith Institute

 

Cllr David Sparks

Dudley MBC and LGA Economic Regeneration

 

Tom Wilson

TUC

 

Stewart Wood

Council of Economic Advisers

HM Treasury

 

Sam Woods

HM Treasury

 

 

Interpreters / Übersetzer

Brigitte Puhl

Dr. Winfried Haag

 

Are
these the people who are shaping our lives, are these millionaires and business
chiefs making millions at our expense deciding and shaping government policy. 

Or
is it the members of the Labour
Finance and Industry Group, (LFIG), and its offshoots the Industry Forum and the business unit at
Millbank, are another
group of millionaires and businessmen who according to their web site ‘Have a major
policy input into the development of the manifesto, in particular on local
government best value, tourism, the city, corporate governance, the need to
invest in science and R&D etc’ .

LFIG members include Ministers, MPs, Lords and MEPs, as well as many
senior figures from business. 

 

Policy input produced by this group includes ;

Local Transport Plans that Work, Report of Fringe Meeting, Labour
Spring Conference, Manchester, 13/3/04 - download.

PLP
Transport Cmtee and LFIG Submission:  Towards a new Labour Transport
Strategy – download

Company
Law Reform Director & Auditor Liability Consultation Response - download.

Company
Law Reform Threshold Responses - download.

Response
to Raising the Thresholds, Consultation Document – download

Address by Simon Bartley of CBI to Hong Kong
Trade Dev. Council conference, 11 November 2003 – download here

SME:
Facts and Issues - download.

 

Together
with the Smith Institute these are the guys making the rules, government just
implements them with legislation, some of the most stupid and punitive
legislation this country has ever seen.

The
companies of these guys get the best of the government contracts, and you and I
pay for it all with ever increasing stealth taxes. 

Awash
with money for business and PFI deals, nothing for services,
this government stinks of corruption and needs investigation.

Britain is now run by businessmen
for the benefit of businessmen.

Its almost like putting the
prisoners in charge of the prisons.

 

Time
I think for the Charitiy Commissioners, the Bloggers, Parliamentary committee’s
and investigative journalists to keep digging.

 

 

  

That was the
message from Downing St this evening as Tony Blair’s official spokesman boasted
that over a million people who had signed petitions have changed nothing,
according to the Guido
Fawkes blog. 

Confirming that
over a million people had used the No.10 online petitions website the Prime
Ministers Official Spokesman said

“even
when hundreds of thousands of people signed up it did not automatically guarantee was a change in policy, as
sometimes, there were issues such as road pricing where people had strong
views, but strong views did not necessarily equal a solution to congestion.“ 

Over 600,000 have
signed the petition against road pricing so far, with the figure rising on a
daily basis, and we think that its fairly obvious that they don’t think that
road pricing is the answer to congestion, they think you just want more tax
money.

As Guido Fawkes
explained, ‘Not one single petition has been acted upon so far, Guido thinks
you are wasting your time people. Downing Street is boasting it
has ignored the views of a million people.’ 

The people who put the database together mySociety.org said at the time
of the launch last November, ‘mySociety
exists partly to spread good practice in the public sector, and we think this
is a nice example of that in action.’

It is a shame
that their good efforts have become such a huge exercise in futility. 

Mr Blair, if you
are determined not to listen to the will of the people, get rid of it, and save
our money.

Another
Labour database not worth our tax money being spent on it.

 

 

 

I said yesterday
in my Blog that now it all made sense. 
Well here’s my take on how it could all fit together, the cause, the
reasoning and the likely effects. 

I may be
completely totally wrong, but I think that my explanation is probably more
watertight than the police report on the 7/7 bombings. If I am wrong on either
count, then I will apologise unreservedly at the appropriate time.

I try wherever possible not to look at populist views because they are populist views, but for objectivity where I can find it.

What we are
seeing today, at both a political and a military level in the US, the UK and across Europe is our politicians taking decisions that
will affect the globe forever.  They have
decided that this course of action is too big and too important to discuss with
us, the voters, and anyway, it would tell everyone else what they were up to. 

It comes down to 4
things.

Peak Oil

Petro Dollars
against Euro's

Food production

Economics

 

“Peak
Oil” – the point at which half of global oil production has been consumed,
and beyond which extraction goes into irreversible decline, and prices rise
accordingly.

The US reached its peak oil point in 1976, the UK in 2002, most other industrialised oil
producers have already reached their peak oil point.  They are therefore now net importers of oil. 

 

Petro Dollars.

Since the Sheik Yamane
oil crisis in the 60’s, all oil has been bought and sold in Dollars. 

This means that
the US govt can keep increasing its money supply,
increasing its credit around the world, keep spending dollars on its military
and overseas adventures knowing that the mighty dollar is backed up by oil.

However, in the
last 10-15 years a few oil producing countries have begun to sell in Euros
rather than Dollars.  This has had an
impact on the US economy, as its international black credit
card has began to dry up. It’s a situation it cannot let continue, the US deficit is just too big.

Food Production

Most food in the
western world is mass produced. In order to sustain the level of production
required to feed its populations more and more fertilisers, pesticides,
packaging and transportation are required and used. They all use Oil or oil
derivatives. 

Future oil price
rises will have a massive impact on food production. World grain stocks are already
at their lowest level in 34 years. In China, the most populous nation on earth, the
grain harvest fell by 9% between 1998 and 2005, with the country now an
ever-larger presence in global food markets as a result, adding yet more strain.

The US has tried to counter this with massive
investments in the world of GM food production, but has hit resistance from around
the world in its production, and organic farming has little impact on the
market overall. 

The increased
demands for oil for food
production puts further pressure on the predicted dates for Oil Peak on
those oil producers that have not yet reached that point, and current thinking
is that globally there will be a convergence of supply vs demand in 2020.  Beyond that point the needs of the importers
outstrips the capacity to supply.

The increased
popularity in Bio Fuel also increases the demand to grow more food, and in its
turn adds further pressure on the need for oil. 

Escalating food
prices in this context are likely to lead to political instability on a global
scale, as more people chase fewer food resources.  The UK dependence on imported food in recent
decades has been phenomenal: half of all vegetables and 95% of all fruit
consumed in the UK now come from overseas.
 

Economics.

I will come on
the economics later in the blog.

I spoke last week
of a conspiracy to strip the UK population of its rights, the same is
happening in the US, and somewhat more quietly across Europe.  I
also wrote yesterday
how using the information above as outlined in yesterday’s attached video, all
the measures being put in place by the US and UK governments now make sense. 

So lets take it a
step further.  Lets add in the current
conflicts that we are involved in, the military activities going on in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the build up to them.

What we have seen
is potentially one of the biggest conspiracies the world has ever seen, but at
least now I think I understand why. That is to say that I am not condoning, but
understand. 

Our governments
are faced with choices about our near future, and possibly see this as a better
option than fighting unrest at home as oil, food, power, heat and light become
so expensive and scarce.

For a government
to contemplate killing 3000 of its own people in order to promote a political
ideal is not unheard of, but we would have hoped for better from our own
leaders, the ones who tell us that we live in free and democratic lands, but
not unheard of.

So think for a
moment, that perhaps the attack on the twin towers was ‘arranged’ by the US
government, and there is lots of evidence appearing to suggest that this was
the case, followed shortly afterwards by the invasion of Afghanistan.  This had a popular following, but evidence is
also there that says that 9/11 was the work of a small but well funded group, funded
by Saudi Arabia on behalf of the US government, not a global terror network. 

It could be that Al-Qaeda is a
figment of the fertile imagination of the Whitehouse, and has been promoted vigorously
to justify not just the invasion of Afghanistan, but also to set in train the mountain of
legislation across the western world for anti-terror activities. 

It has long been
known that Afghanistan has been used as a training ground for
terror groups, but they have always been small, and their only ambition was to
fight their own governments in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and the like.  They were not joined up groups and had
neither the will or the ambition to fight with the west.  But in order to promote the big lie, it was
easy to suggest that they were, and to use the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan to go hunt them down.

Historically when
invaded, Afghans fight back, the Russians knew that, but the propaganda machine
tells us that these are not Afghans fighting for their own land, they are part
of Al-Qaeda, and so perpetuating the need for our presence.  The readily available and detailed knowledge
needed to distinguish between the two is just not present in western general
knowledge, so the propaganda machine puts out what we think we want to hear. 

Britain on the
other hand having bought into the bigger plan, now needed to scare its own
population into compliance, so, were the 7/7 London bombings arranged?. There
is enough evidence around on the internet now to suggest that it was. The
effects were to generate anti Muslim feeling, legislation and to justify
sending our troops into battle, so if we are to follow this theory through it
would make sense. The 4 lads accused of making it happen were perhaps just in
the wrong place at the wrong time. Its not beyond the capability of our
security services to fabricate someone’s involvement, the NI police ombudsmen
proved that.

Part 2 of the
plan, was to secure the oil fields in Iraq, because at the end of the day this is
what all of this is about, securing the oil producing facilities that will
guarantee the supply to the western world over the next decade.    

As I said
earlier, our governments see this as a better option than fighting unrest at
home as oil, food, power, heat and light become expensive and scarce.

So, generate
enough fictional proof to launch a war against Iraq. 
Launch an invasion. 

Why people keep
asking was there no exit strategy? The answer is, there isn’t one because were
not leaving. In fact, the Americans are building no less than 15 permanent
bases in Iraq now.

The Oil, now
secured for western use, needs to be allocated, and we saw this happen under
long term contracts offered to US and UK oil companies only 2 weeks ago. 

 

So what’s next?.

First on the
agenda, as we are all aware of by the build up of rhetoric is Iran. 

Again the
propaganda machine is at work, Iran wants to wipe out Israel, Iran wants nuclear power, Iran is funding terrorism.

America has been
funding and training anti Iranian groups within Iraq as outlined by the Iran Policy Committee which is run by
Dick Cheney and made up of former White House, State Department, Pentagon and CIA officials, and the separate Iran
Syria Operations Group that was established to plot a more aggressive
democracy promotion strategy for those two “rogue” states. Funding is $75m that
Condoleezza Rice requested from Congress last year, plus some $10m already in
the budget.. 

US officials said British input was
important because of the Bush administration’s lack of experts on Iran, the legacy of 25 years of frozen
diplomatic relations.
 

Israel will attack Iran first, under the guise of protecting
itself from a nuclear Iran. 

Following Israel’s attack, US, UK and Nato troops and airpower will attack
from Iraq on the western side, Afghanistan on the eastern side, by allied warships
and aircraft from the Gulf in the south, and from US bases established in Turkmenistan to the north.  We have already seen the build up, a new
carrier group in the gulf, 22,000 more troops in Iraq, and a further 20,000 on the way to Afghanistan. 

Simultaneous
attacks from all sides will ensure than Iran is overwhelmed at a speed that will not
allow the Iranians to fully retaliate, and will secure the oil installations
with the minimum of damage.

There is the
possibility that during this process or shortly thereafter, Pakistan will have second thoughts about
supporting what is no longer a war on terror, or its people will revolt and
overthrow the government in Islamabad.  

One of the
reasons that the British government have been carefully fostering the business,
economic and military relationship with India over the past 6 years, coupled
with Gordon Browns visit there 2 weeks ago, is to ensure India will be a
counter balance to Pakistan in the event of them faltering. Only one of the pressure
points could be that there are over half a million Indians working in the UK on work permits.

At this point, Saudi Arabia will guarantee its oil to the west, in
return for being left alone amongst the Arab states to continue as it is. Its
first move in getting closer ties is the appointment as ambassador to the US of
Adel al-Jubeir, a US educated aide to King Abdullah, who will
replace Prince Turki al-Faisal  It is
thought that Prince Turki will return to his old job of Intelligence chief.

It may even take
the opportunity to settle some old scores and find itself amongst the invaders,
with many of the gulf states in its gaze, and in particular Kuwait.

It may even find
time to deal with Yemen, long a thorn in its side, whilst Oman which is virtually a British protectorate
should survive. 

Turkey, which has been very bellicose this past
week, may find that this is the right time to deal with the Kurdish problem and
invade northern Iraq, whilst guaranteeing the oil in the north
Iraqi province to the west in return for EU membership, whilst Syria would be dealt with by Israel and Turkey.  Jordan could possibly become the capital of a
federation of newly pro-westernised Arab states.

 

How would Russia and China react to all this turmoil. A possible
deal may already been done with these two giants. 

China is experiencing a massive growth rate of
30-40 pct, which is fuelled by oil.  China’s own needs are greater than its own oil
fields, but it has had its eye on the fields in the South China Sea for some time, and those of Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and the Philippines. 

Has China been told that the west would look the
other way if it felt the need to ‘expand’, and deal with North Korea at the same time.  Would the west sacrifice South Korea or Taiwan as part of that deal, a huge drain to the US on its
existing military resources.

Then there is Japan. Japan has recently upgraded its defence force
to full military status, and would I feel align itself to the US and the west. Japan is also a net importer of oil, and every
other raw material it uses, so it would need the good offices of the west to
ensure its own survival. 

Russia on the
other hand, is a net producer of oil, but has always had hegemonistic views,
and since the break up of the soviet union has wanted most of it back under its
control, the recent Gas problems with its neighbours have shown how much it wants to control events, and again the
west would probably look the other way. 

The only fly in
the ointment would be Azerbaijan, the historical home of the Rockefellers Standard Oil Company, which was forced to
split in 1911 under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Rockefeller just
bought a share of the new companies and carried on. The split off  companies are now
known as Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Amoco, Atlantic Richfield, Marathon and BP North America, and these oilfields
I think the Americans would just love to have back.

There you have
it. The Military bloc’s pretty much as predicted by George Orwell have just been formed. 

It would probably
be an opportune moment in the eyes of the Spanish, French and Italians at this
juncture to try their own bit of luck, and launch invasions of north Africa, in
particular the oil rich states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Mali, Niger, Chad and also Egypt to secure the Suez canal, if Israel hasn’t already done so.

 

Now we look at
the Economics

In order for this
to work, the entire way in which we do business would have to change, and
change dramatically. 

For months now I
have heard Gordon Brown banging on about the New World Order, but there has
never been a cohesive explanation as to what that is. 

Over the past 2
years, I believe that the process for New World Order has already been defined at the
economic level. Firstly at the G8 conference in Gleneagles, by Brown in Bangalore, and more recently at The World Economic Forum in Davos where the
final business contracts were agreed, and this will be played out at the WTO
talks over the next few months.

The 3 new blocs
will decide on how to view the remaining worlds resources, those of Africa and South America. The raw commodities that we all need, Iron, Copper,
Coffee etc.

They will be
discussing how they will be trading those commodities and finished product,
and how the worlds currencies can be cut down to 4. The Dollar, the Euro, The Rouble and the Yuan. All trade with the 3rd world will be using one of the 4, there will be no need for any other currencies. 

A New World
Order. Politically, Militarily and Economically. The primary industrial and technology players are already so close to
governments that the transition will be a lot smoother than imagined, and it
will be the large multinational companies that will take the lead. Microsoft
for instance can virtually shut down any country that doesn’t want to play. In Britain we have seen how the secretive Smith
Institute is so close to Gordon Brown that it is beginning to draw a lot of
attention and enquiry.

 

How will this
affect us?.  It is hard to know how much change
will we see at home, how it will affect our jobs, our wages, our shopping
habits, our freedoms. But change it will, and we have already seen the start to
those changes with ID cards, databases, draconian laws, lost rights and
government secrecy. 

Why all the draconian legislation? Any government that is planning such radical changes must as part of its thinking believe that there is likely to be a huge backlash at home, primarily from the communities of the affected nations and faiths, but also from the die-hard anti war protesters and liberal thinkers, and put measures and control mechanisms in place to deal with that should it arise.  I think there’s more to
come, so hang on tight. 

All this, in the
name of Oil and the mighty Dollar?.   Maybe, you decide.

 

 

I said yesterday
in my Blog that now it all made sense. 
Well here’s my take on how it could all fit together, the cause, the
reasoning and the likely effects. 

I may be
completely totally wrong, but I think that my explanation is probably more
watertight than the police report on the 7/7 bombings. If I am wrong on either
count, then I will apologise unreservedly at the appropriate time.

I try wherever possible not to look at populist views because they are populist views, but for objectivity where I can find it.

What we are
seeing today, at both a political and a military level in the US, the UK and across Europe is our politicians taking decisions that
will affect the globe forever.  They have
decided that this course of action is too big and too important to discuss with
us, the voters, and anyway, it would tell everyone else what they were up to. 

It comes down to 4
things.

Peak Oil

Petro Dollars
against Euro's

Food production

Economics

 

“Peak
Oil” – the point at which half of global oil production has been consumed,
and beyond which extraction goes into irreversible decline, and prices rise
accordingly.

The US reached its peak oil point in 1976, the UK in 2002, most other industrialised oil
producers have already reached their peak oil point.  They are therefore now net importers of oil. 

 

Petro Dollars.

Since the Sheik Yamane
oil crisis in the 60’s, all oil has been bought and sold in Dollars. 

This means that
the US govt can keep increasing its money supply,
increasing its credit around the world, keep spending dollars on its military
and overseas adventures knowing that the mighty dollar is backed up by oil.

However, in the
last 10-15 years a few oil producing countries have begun to sell in Euros
rather than Dollars.  This has had an
impact on the US economy, as its international black credit
card has began to dry up. It’s a situation it cannot let continue, the US deficit is just too big.

Food Production

Most food in the
western world is mass produced. In order to sustain the level of production
required to feed its populations more and more fertilisers, pesticides,
packaging and transportation are required and used. They all use Oil or oil
derivatives. 

Future oil price
rises will have a massive impact on food production. World grain stocks are already
at their lowest level in 34 years. In China, the most populous nation on earth, the
grain harvest fell by 9% between 1998 and 2005, with the country now an
ever-larger presence in global food markets as a result, adding yet more strain.

The US has tried to counter this with massive
investments in the world of GM food production, but has hit resistance from around
the world in its production, and organic farming has little impact on the
market overall. 

The increased
demands for oil for food
production puts further pressure on the predicted dates for Oil Peak on
those oil producers that have not yet reached that point, and current thinking
is that globally there will be a convergence of supply vs demand in 2020.  Beyond that point the needs of the importers
outstrips the capacity to supply.

The increased
popularity in Bio Fuel also increases the demand to grow more food, and in its
turn adds further pressure on the need for oil. 

Escalating food
prices in this context are likely to lead to political instability on a global
scale, as more people chase fewer food resources.  The UK dependence on imported food in recent
decades has been phenomenal: half of all vegetables and 95% of all fruit
consumed in the UK now come from overseas.
 

Economics.

I will come on
the economics later in the blog.

I spoke last week
of a conspiracy to strip the UK population of its rights, the same is
happening in the US, and somewhat more quietly across Europe.  I
also wrote yesterday
how using the information above as outlined in yesterday’s attached video, all
the measures being put in place by the US and UK governments now make sense. 

So lets take it a
step further.  Lets add in the current
conflicts that we are involved in, the military activities going on in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the build up to them.

What we have seen
is potentially one of the biggest conspiracies the world has ever seen, but at
least now I think I understand why. That is to say that I am not condoning, but
understand. 

Our governments
are faced with choices about our near future, and possibly see this as a better
option than fighting unrest at home as oil, food, power, heat and light become
so expensive and scarce.

For a government
to contemplate killing 3000 of its own people in order to promote a political
ideal is not unheard of, but we would have hoped for better from our own
leaders, the ones who tell us that we live in free and democratic lands, but
not unheard of.

So think for a
moment, that perhaps the attack on the twin towers was ‘arranged’ by the US
government, and there is lots of evidence appearing to suggest that this was
the case, followed shortly afterwards by the invasion of Afghanistan.  This had a popular following, but evidence is
also there that says that 9/11 was the work of a small but well funded group, funded
by Saudi Arabia on behalf of the US government, not a global terror network. 

It could be that Al-Qaeda is a
figment of the fertile imagination of the Whitehouse, and has been promoted vigorously
to justify not just the invasion of Afghanistan, but also to set in train the mountain of
legislation across the western world for anti-terror activities. 

It has long been
known that Afghanistan has been used as a training ground for
terror groups, but they have always been small, and their only ambition was to
fight their own governments in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and the like.  They were not joined up groups and had
neither the will or the ambition to fight with the west.  But in order to promote the big lie, it was
easy to suggest that they were, and to use the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan to go hunt them down.

Historically when
invaded, Afghans fight back, the Russians knew that, but the propaganda machine
tells us that these are not Afghans fighting for their own land, they are part
of Al-Qaeda, and so perpetuating the need for our presence.  The readily available and detailed knowledge
needed to distinguish between the two is just not present in western general
knowledge, so the propaganda machine puts out what we think we want to hear. 

Britain on the
other hand having bought into the bigger plan, now needed to scare its own
population into compliance, so, were the 7/7 London bombings arranged?. There
is enough evidence around on the internet now to suggest that it was. The
effects were to generate anti Muslim feeling, legislation and to justify
sending our troops into battle, so if we are to follow this theory through it
would make sense. The 4 lads accused of making it happen were perhaps just in
the wrong place at the wrong time. Its not beyond the capability of our
security services to fabricate someone’s involvement, the NI police ombudsmen
proved that.

Part 2 of the
plan, was to secure the oil fields in Iraq, because at the end of the day this is
what all of this is about, securing the oil producing facilities that will
guarantee the supply to the western world over the next decade.    

As I said
earlier, our governments see this as a better option than fighting unrest at
home as oil, food, power, heat and light become expensive and scarce.

So, generate
enough fictional proof to launch a war against Iraq. 
Launch an invasion. 

Why people keep
asking was there no exit strategy? The answer is, there isn’t one because were
not leaving. In fact, the Americans are building no less than 15 permanent
bases in Iraq now.

The Oil, now
secured for western use, needs to be allocated, and we saw this happen under
long term contracts offered to US and UK oil companies only 2 weeks ago. 

 

So what’s next?.

First on the
agenda, as we are all aware of by the build up of rhetoric is Iran. 

Again the
propaganda machine is at work, Iran wants to wipe out Israel, Iran wants nuclear power, Iran is funding terrorism.

America has been
funding and training anti Iranian groups within Iraq as outlined by the Iran Policy Committee which is run by
Dick Cheney and made up of former White House, State Department, Pentagon and CIA officials, and the separate Iran
Syria Operations Group that was established to plot a more aggressive
democracy promotion strategy for those two “rogue” states. Funding is $75m that
Condoleezza Rice requested from Congress last year, plus some $10m already in
the budget.. 

US officials said British input was
important because of the Bush administration’s lack of experts on Iran, the legacy of 25 years of frozen
diplomatic relations.
 

Israel will attack Iran first, under the guise of protecting
itself from a nuclear Iran. 

Following Israel’s attack, US, UK and Nato troops and airpower will attack
from Iraq on the western side, Afghanistan on the eastern side, by allied warships
and aircraft from the Gulf in the south, and from US bases established in Turkmenistan to the north.  We have already seen the build up, a new
carrier group in the gulf, 22,000 more troops in Iraq, and a further 20,000 on the way to Afghanistan. 

Simultaneous
attacks from all sides will ensure than Iran is overwhelmed at a speed that will not
allow the Iranians to fully retaliate, and will secure the oil installations
with the minimum of damage.

There is the
possibility that during this process or shortly thereafter, Pakistan will have second thoughts about
supporting what is no longer a war on terror, or its people will revolt and
overthrow the government in Islamabad.  

One of the
reasons that the British government have been carefully fostering the business,
economic and military relationship with India over the past 6 years, coupled
with Gordon Browns visit there 2 weeks ago, is to ensure India will be a
counter balance to Pakistan in the event of them faltering. Only one of the pressure
points could be that there are over half a million Indians working in the UK on work permits.

At this point, Saudi Arabia will guarantee its oil to the west, in
return for being left alone amongst the Arab states to continue as it is. Its
first move in getting closer ties is the appointment as ambassador to the US of
Adel al-Jubeir, a US educated aide to King Abdullah, who will
replace Prince Turki al-Faisal  It is
thought that Prince Turki will return to his old job of Intelligence chief.

It may even take
the opportunity to settle some old scores and find itself amongst the invaders,
with many of the gulf states in its gaze, and in particular Kuwait.

It may even find
time to deal with Yemen, long a thorn in its side, whilst Oman which is virtually a British protectorate
should survive. 

Turkey, which has been very bellicose this past
week, may find that this is the right time to deal with the Kurdish problem and
invade northern Iraq, whilst guaranteeing the oil in the north
Iraqi province to the west in return for EU membership, whilst Syria would be dealt with by Israel and Turkey.  Jordan could possibly become the capital of a
federation of newly pro-westernised Arab states.

 

How would Russia and China react to all this turmoil. A possible
deal may already been done with these two giants. 

China is experiencing a massive growth rate of
30-40 pct, which is fuelled by oil.  China’s own needs are greater than its own oil
fields, but it has had its eye on the fields in the South China Sea for some time, and those of Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and the Philippines. 

Has China been told that the west would look the
other way if it felt the need to ‘expand’, and deal with North Korea at the same time.  Would the west sacrifice South Korea or Taiwan as part of that deal, a huge drain to the US on its
existing military resources.

Then there is Japan. Japan has recently upgraded its defence force
to full military status, and would I feel align itself to the US and the west. Japan is also a net importer of oil, and every
other raw material it uses, so it would need the good offices of the west to
ensure its own survival. 

Russia on the
other hand, is a net producer of oil, but has always had hegemonistic views,
and since the break up of the soviet union has wanted most of it back under its
control, the recent Gas problems with its neighbours have shown how much it wants to control events, and again the
west would probably look the other way. 

The only fly in
the ointment would be Azerbaijan, the historical home of the Rockefellers Standard Oil Company, which was forced to
split in 1911 under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Rockefeller just
bought a share of the new companies and carried on. The split off  companies are now
known as Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Amoco, Atlantic Richfield, Marathon and BP North America, and these oilfields
I think the Americans would just love to have back.

There you have
it. The Military bloc’s pretty much as predicted by George Orwell have just been formed. 

It would probably
be an opportune moment in the eyes of the Spanish, French and Italians at this
juncture to try their own bit of luck, and launch invasions of north Africa, in
particular the oil rich states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Mali, Niger, Chad and also Egypt to secure the Suez canal, if Israel hasn’t already done so.

 

Now we look at
the Economics

In order for this
to work, the entire way in which we do business would have to change, and
change dramatically. 

For months now I
have heard Gordon Brown banging on about the New World Order, but there has
never been a cohesive explanation as to what that is. 

Over the past 2
years, I believe that the process for New World Order has already been defined at the
economic level. Firstly at the G8 conference in Gleneagles, by Brown in Bangalore, and more recently at The World Economic Forum in Davos where the
final business contracts were agreed, and this will be played out at the WTO
talks over the next few months.

The 3 new blocs
will decide on how to view the remaining worlds resources, those of Africa and South America. The raw commodities that we all need, Iron, Copper,
Coffee etc.

They will be
discussing how they will be trading those commodities and finished product,
and how the worlds currencies can be cut down to 4. The Dollar, the Euro, The Rouble and the Yuan. All trade with the 3rd world will be using one of the 4, there will be no need for any other currencies. 

A New World
Order. Politically, Militarily and Economically. The primary industrial and technology players are already so close to
governments that the transition will be a lot smoother than imagined, and it
will be the large multinational companies that will take the lead. Microsoft
for instance can virtually shut down any country that doesn’t want to play. In Britain we have seen how the secretive Smith
Institute is so close to Gordon Brown that it is beginning to draw a lot of
attention and enquiry.

 

How will this
affect us?.  It is hard to know how much change
will we see at home, how it will affect our jobs, our wages, our shopping
habits, our freedoms. But change it will, and we have already seen the start to
those changes with ID cards, databases, draconian laws, lost rights and
government secrecy. 

Why all the draconian legislation? Any government that is planning such radical changes must as part of its thinking believe that there is likely to be a huge backlash at home, primarily from the communities of the affected nations and faiths, but also from the die-hard anti war protesters and liberal thinkers, and put measures and control mechanisms in place to deal with that should it arise.  I think there’s more to
come, so hang on tight. 

All this, in the
name of Oil and the mighty Dollar?.   Maybe, you decide.