HELP THE AGED ROCK SINGER [COMMENT]

A lot of people are slagging off Axl Rose: joking his voice is in no way good enough to be performing with Guns N'Roses these days, let alone fronting AC/DC as well.

Please guys, don't condemn an aging rock singer for having a lesser vocal range than he used to, bad dress sense, a "dad bod", and an increasing propensity for personal injury.

Ahem. Just a thought.

If anything, take the piss for the fact:
1) he's a colossal bell-end, and split up a great band that should've had countless more albums over the past twenty years, and
2) he wasn't the greatest singer in the first place - just distinctive. Much as a chainsaw slicing through a live goat sounds distinctive.

I do frickin' love G'N'R though.

THE COURAGE OF CONVICTION [OPINION]

https://www.facebook.com/itvnews/videos/10153687093977672/?pnref=story

Dennis Skinner, you are an absolute hero.

I was genuinely moved to see this: an old man from the generation that saved this country from fascism, defying the angry fools and bullies chanting around him; risking his own career and defying a tyrant, all in the name of justice. I cannot applaud the man enough. What courage and conviction, how amazing.

Compare that to the snivelling subterfuge of our Prime Minister. (I certainly know which of them I believe the more decent, honourable man.)

I'd also like to point out the absolute vomit-stained hypocrisy of Skinner's ejection. John Bercow has sat back for almost a year, allowing the Tories to behave like jeering idiots: rambling on with their filibusters, shouting down and insulting those who would challenge them (most notably Jeremy Corbyn and the SNP), belittling them, and behaving in a way inconceivably inappropriate and unfit for leadership of this nation. But one seasoned politician dares to speak his mind (in his allotted speaking time), and he is literally thrown out of the House of Commons - for no more than use of a word that is neither particularly offensive, or in any way obscene.

Now that IS obscene.

Apparently it's ok for our PM to label an entire political party as "terrorist sympathisers" though. It's ok for guffawing Tories to shout over the leader of the opposition, constantly interrupt him, making jibes such as "who are you?", "wear a tie" etc; it's also alright for John Bercow to actively belittle and insult a junior minister (as he does in this clip around 1:06), implying no less vitriolic a slur than Dennis Skinner has just been reprimanded for?!? It's utterly preposterous, and hypocritical to outlandish proportions.

‪#‎ResignDavidCameron‬

SOCIALISM'S PITFALL: IDENTIFYING WITH THE HIPPIES? [OPINION]

"Parliament under a Corbyn government, May 2020"

Today it was announced that Jeremy Corbyn has accepted an invitation to speak at this year's Glastonbury Festival.

It's an interesting move, but I'm not convinced it's the most tactically sound.

Whilst it's great he's embracing youth culture and stirring those who might typically be disenfranchised from politics, it's also the Left's stereotyped association with artists/hippies/druggies and general bohemian-types that makes half the country vote Right!

There's really nothing in this world as synonymous with that bohemian spirit as Glastonbury. So when those voters see inevitable footage of thousands upon thousands of people (fitting that exact description) soaked to the skin in a concoction of mud, rain, sweat and their own excrement chanting Jeremy Corbyn's name and going bat-shit crazy in a mosh-pit, make no mistake - it will terrify them to their very core.

The Right wing media will use it to crippling effect. I can predict the headlines now: certainly there'll be pictures of revellers in highly compromising and inebriated states, dancing around like idiots or behaving recklessly (a bit like the one I've posted), splashed on a front page with a tag-line to the effect of "these are the people who vote for Jeremy Corbyn, you don't want to put them in charge, do you????"

Worse still, it will be quite effective.

The Labour Party should perhaps be careful that in the process of pursuing new voters, they don't totally alienate those who already do, or mainstream Britain as a whole. Even a traditional Tory voter finally wising up to the evils of this government might be very put off by the decision, and swayed back to the Conservative camp. (My late mum, an educated woman born in the era of WWII, would certainly have been one of them.)

Matters as personal as cultural taste and musical identity should perhaps be avoided in politics for that very reason. Picture an upper class politician, addressing the more privileged audiences who might attend something like the English National Opera or Ascot: would that not be equally loathsome for some? By showing specific allegiance to a particular group, you alienate those at the other end of the spectrum. At least, that's what happens when politics become irrevocably tribal. Effectively we're forced to support one of 2-4 competing football teams, and as with football, voters usually pick their team according to where they live, who their family/friends support, and who they more identify with. They'll then stick with that team, even if they consistently lose - or take on weak and unpopular players/managers. The last thing it's usually to do with is competence of the men on that particular team, or a genuine admiration of footballing skill.

In the same way, political identity is influenced almost entirely by instinct and social convention - as opposed to pesky concerns such as what's morally correct or prudent in any given situation. True democracy would be voting on governmental policy on a case-by-case basis, decided by a populous and politicians unencumbered of the title either "Montague or Capulet". Back in the real world though, Jeremy Corbyn will be construed as identifying with one against the other.

Not to mention of course, there may be a good many attending Glastonbury who have no interest or political stance whatsoever; people who actively want to escape tedious complications of the real world. That is their right. There might even be the odd Tory voter present - they're liable to be found in a VIP area somewhere away from the commoners, wearing a monocle and scoffing on pheasant pate. And one could possibly argue even misguided/pitiless agents of the damned have the right to not have politics forced down their throat at a music festival.

Therefore, maybe we should just keep it simple, and leave music festivals for music fans. They're one of the few sacred things left. I say that as both a devoted music fan, and a self-confessed Left-leaning political ranter.

THE IMBALANCE OF WESTERN MEDIA [OPINION]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jGRgI-b_c4

This link is to a news report from "Russia Today". Russia, eg: the supposed "great enemy", the war-mongering militant nation that allegedly bullies its smaller neighbours, threatens world peace, and persecutes minorities (including LGBT people).

Some, or all of these may be true - and yet RT often demonstrates a frankness and basic humanity I'm yet to see in Western mainstream news media. I've seen several examples of it, this particular report is not just a flash in the pan. Also in stark contrast, RT welcome journalists of extremely varied backgrounds and opinions, and unlike Western media (certainly the more Right-wing stations, and more so in America) those journalists are actually allowed to speak at length without the constant interruptions of a host who wishes to aggrandise him/herself, or steer the programme in the direction demanded by producers. Eg: say something they don't like on Fox News, they will simply talk over you, or cut you off. I for one was brought up to believe that only wrong-doers need fear or suppress the truth; ergo a news service that censors its guests or picks and chooses which arguments are put forward, has a clear agenda, and is almost certainly unreliable.

Whatever your thoughts, I hope most of us would agree there is something fundamentally wrong with terrorist atrocities in the West being considered important/newsworthy, but the lives of those lost in the Middle East and Africa (every single day) somehow matter less. And if you agree with that much, the next question is obviously "why do our news channels not cover those stories?" The reason is simply the Right-wing press WANT you to feel that way. They want Westerners to feel we are more important and somehow higher up the evolutionary scale, even if only on a very subtle/subconscious level. And it's worked! In fact, it's worked so well, and we've become so insular and selfish within our capitalist/celebrity driven cultures, we no longer give a crap what's happening to people up the road or in the next borough, let alone people from another continent. Those who do care are usually powerless to enact any change whatsoever any way.

Of course, the single greatest cause of the imbalance is our media's desire to inspire fear, with tragic news closer to home. Fear is the singular best friend to austere and unpopular, warlike governments. After all, a populous in fear needs strong, unapologetic "leadership" to take "decisive" and often objectionable action, whereas a calm/relaxed populous will naturally begin to lean more Left-wing. Happiness paves the way for tolerance, but fear can be wheeled out to justify just about any oppressive action, at any given time. In essence, it really is as simple as that.

Pointing out this imbalance doesn't diminish the significance of horrific terror attacks such as those in Brussels or Paris last year; it only illustrates how and why we are reminded of certain tragedies every single day, whilst others are omitted. The answers to such simple questions can often make analysis of complex/shadowy geopolitics a lot more straightforward - you find yourself less easily distracted.

BREXIT AND BORIS JOHNSON: THE AFFABLE FACE OF AMBITION

Amid the vast collection of political and social catastrophes thrust upon us by this Conservative government in what's unbelievably been only ten months, I admit I wasn't concerned about Britain exiting the European Union. Much like the issue of Scottish independence, I simply never believed it would happen. Whatever sham of democracy was held up and dangled before the Scottish people, I simply knew the government of Great Britain (and the former British Empire) would not just "give back" virtually half its territory and resources, least of all under a Tory led government. If you think of it through the eyes of a cold shrewd tactician playing a board-game like Risk, it's the equivalent of deliberately losing, throwing away your cards. And that is how they see it, make no mistake.

Similarly, I never really believed Britain would exit the E.U; I thought even its discussion was merely to satisfy the emerging xenophobic element within our country. Those poor fools who cling to ridiculous belief that all our problems are caused by foreigners, benefit cheats and lazy people (nothing at all to do with the elites who've stolen all the wealth), and that life would be so much better without the oppressive "dictatorial" voice of Brussels ruining our quintessentially British society. I cannot hide my contempt for such naivety. In what way have our government not got enough power? David Cameron's government have broken every promise they ever made, sold off half the state, and destroyed the lives of thousands upon thousands of the most vulnerable in our country, all in less than a year. What on Earth could possibly make anyone honestly believe these Tory tycoons will make life better for us, or fairer? If ever there was a government already believing it's accountable to no-one, who can throw any pre-conceived rule-book out the window, it's these guys. Thank heavens they are still currently accountable to another political body; certainly with regard to pesky issues like human rights, workers' rights, religious freedoms, and environmental/economic policies. The political coup by this Conservative party has been swifter, bolder, and more ruthless than anyone could have predicted, so God help us all if they're truly left to do as they like. In fact, in a Tory Britain of the future, I'm not sure I'd even be fee to share these thoughts and opinions.

However, it's not the pros and cons of "Brexit" I'd like to discuss - it's that I believe yet another carefully planned political manipulation and borderline subterfuge has taken place, one I'm convinced will reverse everything predicted. In the same way the political media machine went into overdrive in the eleventh hour to manipulate the 2015 General Election, the likelihood of Brexit has now dramatically increased virtually overnight, and not because of newly revealed information or a tide of anti European sentiment, national pride etc. No, I believe it's quite possible we will exit from Europe - but mostly down to the astute political aspirations and machinations of one man: Boris Johnson.

This jumping aboard the Brexit bandwagon is little more than a clear bid by the affable blonde buffoon to be the next leader of the Conservative party, and in all probability, our next Prime Minister. It is well known that a good majority of hard-line Tories are in favour of us leaving the E.U, and David Cameron's vested interest in seeing big business/finance get their way (and Britain staying in) is rumoured to be splitting the party in two. Normally I would welcome such news, but whereas the Tories would also be typically closing ranks to present a united front, even a decisive split in the party doesn't phase them now - not in the new age of "one-horse-race" UK politics. Boris Johnson has stepped up to lead this rebellion having shown little advocacy for the Brexit campaign until now; on the contrary, having championed the multiculturalism of London, the importance of our economy and trade ties, our love of freedom... yadah yadah yadah. In other words, he's practically u-turned at a time of critical weakness for David Cameron simply to make a name for himself, and to be seen as the viable "alternative".

That timing is of great significance. Osborne and Cameron are deeply unpopular (with good reason), and if there's one thing the men behind the curtain know, it's that when cracks in an old wall start to show, a new lick of paint will temporarily disguise them. Putting a new face on the Tory party to publicly "relent" on the most deplorable of their recent legislations would actually be a pretty smart move right now. Boris Johnson is a (somewhat) beloved clown, and as the U.S have shown us in recent months - there's really no limit to how far a blonde fop famous for making a twerp of himself on telly can go. Such is the world we live in. The popularity of celebrity culture and reality TV is far greater than that of politics, so merging of the two makes the latter far more palatable for the gormless/easily led in society.

The truth is, even I like Boris Johnson. Well, I say "like", what I mean is he amuses me. I even read his book on Winston Churchill recently, and he's quite an entertaining writer. First and foremost, he's a man who became famous not for political skill, but for being the veritable bumbling buffoon of the established political/gentry class. It was endearing, and he certainly seemed harmless enough. I still maintain it was his hosting of the BBC's "Have I Got News For You" that actually catapulted him to becoming Mayor of London: an office I doubt in his wildest dreams he'd ever thought he'd realistically occupy. Again, that is the new way of things. A well-known recognisable face and character the population feel they know personally are far more effectual tools than ethics or genuine ability - that sure worked for Boris.

However, that is why I believe the man to be so dangerous. I've said it for some time. He is the affable/friendly face of a deeply oppressive regime, able to distract the masses from the horrors his party enforce - with tomfoolery and a bumbling, Hugh Grant-like Britishness. In short, he's one of the best weapons and propaganda machines an inhumanly boring and uninspiring Conservative party currently have at their disposal. Worse still, he doesn't really stand for anything other than his own ambition and being in the spotlight - he'll be very easily manoeuvred by the "Dark Lords" and Tory heavyweights, simply to retain their favour in his climb to power.

Some of history's most inhumane leaders are said to have been kind, warm and charming in person (Adolf Hitler being the first that springs to mind). Of course, that's exactly how they get to where they are, and is how they're able to manipulate populations to close their eyes and ears to evil done in their name. I really can't imagine anyone better than Boris Johnson with that aim in mind. (If Mr Bean tells us we're off to invade another country, it couldn't possibly be for ignoble reasons, right?)

One particular detail really sticks in my craw. In a recent article in The Guardian by Michael White (that echoes many of these sentiments), the author flippantly mentions that Boris Johnson currently earns a yearly salary of £275,000 for his column in The Telegraph. That is of course before his salary as Mayor of London, or before any of the fees brought in by public appearances and endorsements (for which he will have an agent, like any other "celebrity"). Also before the great wealth and "old money" his family are already blessed to have. That just disgusts me. We have a country and economy falling apart, where all but the elite are squeezed, and the least fortunate are literally being starved and killed off. The average citizen only earns about £25,000 for working full-time as a slave to the system, just to survive, and here's a guy who earns over ten times that for his less important, "part-time" job, peddling Tory propaganda. Eg: he's about as out of touch with real issues facing real people as you will ever find, and lacks any notion of empathy whatsoever (like the rest of his ilk).

For all the many many Tory slights, I wonder what Jeremy Corbyn would do with such extravagant wealth? For God's sake, his followers clubbed together to reimburse him for a push-bike, and he donated the money to charity! Perhaps he'd see to it so the grotesquely wealthy are made to "make do" for a little bit, and not continue fleecing average people? Perhaps he'd demand that the pot be distributed a little more fairly?

That is of course, why he terrifies them so much.

ONE MINUTE TO MIDNIGHT [OPINION]

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/02/13/isis-sideshow-really/

It's no exaggeration to say this article by Carlyn Harvey made me feel sick to my stomach, perhaps more than any other I've ever read (and I read a fair bit of alarming stuff). This is not a struggle half the world away: this could be war coming to our very doorstep. Recent actions by NATO explicitly fit a narrative that supposed "left-wing conspiracy theorists" have been shouting for a long time now: that the conflict in the Middle East is as much about Western encirclement of Russia as anything else, and we've actually been on the road to a new Cold War (or worse still WWIII) for some time.

People may not want to believe it, but Western portrayal of the Syria crisis is nothing more than propaganda. Our involvement is for financial/economic and strategic benefit, nothing to do with humanity or democracy, and first and foremost it was an attack on a regime firmly allied to Russia. Isis/Daesh are (or at least originated) as Western funded/trained insurgents intended to cripple the Assad regime from within - there's more than enough evidence of this. Knowing that full-well, Russia joined the conflict to actually take down Daesh (not pretend to, like everyone else). Faced with that, Western stratagem became to destroy the region entirely - leaving it useless and insignificant. That's why the EU suddenly rushed in guns blazing, and why citizens were not consulted by their supposed democratic representatives: Russian involvement demanded a different and immediate response.

The Ukraine crisis was/is essentially the same Western/NATO mission to destabilise/threaten Russia, but on a different front. Same technique though, almost exactly. And all of it was predicted years ago. I wrote something back in December that included a YouTube video interview with academic Sam Ramidani in 2012 (http://macs-mouth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/a-prediction-from-three-years-ago.html); please watch it and see for yourself how every single domino is falling exactly as forecast.

When I recently heard of the reignition of the Alexander Litvinenko story, and the UK government's "out of the blue" condemnation of an assassination that pretty much the rest of us accepted was a Russian political assassination almost a decade ago, I became edgy. Why now after all?

But the real warning light I've been waiting for with baited breath is early-stage forecast of U.S aggression towards Iran: the last of Russia's allies in the region, sharing its border - being also the gateway to India and the Far East. I've been praying to hear nothing, then a few days ago I read how Iran have announced they intend to no longer trade oil in U.S dollars, but Euros. Eg: EXACTLY what Saddam Hussein did, and what some say was the real cause of the Iraq war. It should be a huge news story, but media coverage has unsurprisingly been extremely thin.

Then a few days later, this? It's not coincidence. I really hope I'm wrong, but it genuinely seems to be approaching one minute to midnight.

TORIES WILL NOT BOW TO DEMOCRACY [OPINION]

About as symbolic an image as you'll find

Within the last month, this government have (again) made even the machinations of Margaret Thatcher seem tame - and this week, the Tories have firmly put an end to any notion of democracy in this country whatsoever.

Fracking is going full-steam ahead. These monsters are very literally risking the ground we walk upon and the water we drink, just to make themselves richer. Meanwhile, they've also just quietly removed the universal right of infants to receive free daily meals at school, having already glossed over the fact that the poor and disabled in this country are now likely to just wither and die. Just as they're simultaneously selling off state assets to their mates, and allowing banks and companies like Google massive tax breaks. It's grotesque.

However in the last 24hrs, Jeremy Hunt has essentially admitted this government will not bow to democracy - they will force doctors to adhere to conditions the entire profession has unilaterally rejected. WE HAVE NO RIGHTS, ANY OF US: NOT IN THE MINDS OF THESE PEOPLE. This is the bell tolling for our NHS, make no mistake. It will now crumble, and privatisation will be construed as the only remedy - which is of course what they wanted all along.

If this government are not removed from power at the earliest opportunity, our children's children will inhabit a corporate-run police state, with no voice, no guaranteed human rights and no prospects. They will simply be mice on a wheel (even more so than we already are).

I so wish people in this country would take stock of what is happening. Sometimes I want to run down the street screaming it at the top of my lungs... sadly I'm not convinced it would help much.