Tag Archive | U.K.

Creating a Better World*

Creating a Better World*

‘When people’s minds are opened up, there is no end to the possibilities,’ says Corbyn

By Jessica Corbett

 

U.K. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who led his party to secure more of the vote share than any party leader since WWII, recently met with The Intercept’s Naomi Klein in London. (Photo: @NaomiAKlein/Twitter)

 

“Social justice isn’t copyrighted,” U.K. Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn told Naomi Klein in an interview published at The Intercept on Thursday.

Klein, a jouranlist and author of the new book No Is Not Enough, asked Corbyn about U.K. conservatives trying to co-opt his policies to appeal to young voters. The pair recently met up in London to discuss Labour’s stunning results in last month’s elections, the Trump administration, Bernie Sanders, the Paris Climate Agreement, the Grenfell Tower fire, and much more.

Corbyn made international headlines in June when he led Labour to secure more of the vote share than any party leader since WWII. The election results—described by journalist and Labour supporter Owen Jones as “the most incredible amazing political upset in British history”—were in part thanks to the mass mobilization of young people who turned out to support the party.

As Jonathan Cook wrote for Common Dreams following the election:

“With Corbyn, the election campaign proved that there is a huge appetite for his honesty, his passion, his commitment to social justice—at least when audiences got a chance to hear from him directly, rather than having his policies and personality mediated and distorted by a biased and self-serving corporate media. Unlike [Tony] Blair, who destroyed Labour to turn it into a Thatcher-lite party, Corbyn is rebuilding Labour into a social movement for progressive politics.”

Despite his personal success in politics, Corbyn said:

“It’s not about me. It’s about a cause, it’s about people…. When people’s minds are opened up, there is no end to the possibilities.”

Although there are still political battles to be fought—in future races, the Labour Party hopes to win the overall majority in Parliament—Corbyn shared with Klein his bold vision for the future:

“The picture of the world is a crucial one. It is about what we do to deal with issues of injustice and inequality and poverty, and above all, hope and opportunity for young people. Hope that they can get to college or university, opportunity they can get a decent job. And it’s also about the contribution we make to the rest of the world and the relationship we have with the rest of the world. I want a foreign policy based on human rights, based on respect for international law, recognizing the causes of the refugee flows, the causes of the injustice around the world.”

Watch The Intercept’s full interview with Corbyn below:

Source*

Related Topics:

‘Rise like lions…’ Corbyn Bares his Soul at Glastonbury and Speaks Directly to the Dispossessed*

The Manifesto of the Awakened*

The Beast of Burden on the Path of Enlightenment*

50 Ways to Starve the Beast*

G20 Leaders Forced to Stay Indoors by Protests*

Mesopotamia Thrived With NO Ruling Elite*

Tens of Thousands Swarm London in Massive Elite Uprising, Media Silence*

 

U.K. Enforce Cash over Digital Currency*

U.K. Enforce Cash over Digital Currency*

By Sean Adl-Tabatabai

A credit card giant has vowed to completely eradicate cash in Britain by forcing shops and restaurants to only accept digital currency. 

Visa says it wants merchants throughout the United Kingdom to begin rejecting notes and coins in order to make transactions “more secure.”

Daily Mail reports: Any switch from coins and notes to credit and debit card payments or services such as Apple Pay would also be of huge benefit to Visa, which makes money from transaction fees.

But consumer groups warned last night that it would put millions of elderly people and others who rely on cash and cheques at a huge disadvantage.

Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg said the firm should be referred to the competition authorities if it tried the move. ‘It is essentially the behaviour of a monopolist and I do not think it should happen,’ he said.

‘People should be entitled to settle their bills using legal tender. The most deprived in society who do not have bank accounts and the elderly will be most affected by this.’

Visa has already begun a trial in the U.S. which offers $10,000 (£8,800) to retailers who are prepared to update their payment terminals.

However, they can only get the deal if they agree to stop accepting cash transactions. A similar trial is expected to be launched in the U.K.

Jack Forestell, Visa’s head of global merchant solutions, told The Daily Telegraph the company had its sights on Britain.

‘We very much hope to bring a similar initiative to the U.K. in the near future,’ he said.

‘The U.K. is a bit further ahead than the U.S. in terms of contactless use and cashlessness, so the initiative may look different but watch this space.’

But James Daley, director of consumer group Fairer Finance, accused Visa of ‘bribing companies to stop using cash more quickly’ to make more money.

Consumer champion Which? said cash was still ‘widely used’ by shoppers. It added: ‘Businesses should be led by how their customers want to pay, and not by the incentives offered by card firms.’

And the Federation for Small Businesses said the proposal could make businesses unattractive to tourists who wanted to use cash and was ‘impractical’ for rural areas with slow broadband speeds.

Its chairman, Mike Cherry, said: ‘The vast majority of our members recognise the importance of offering cashless payment options. However, many have high volumes of customers that still want to pay in cash.’

In 2015 the amount of payments made electronically in Britain surpassed the number using coins and notes for the first time. However, cash was still by far the most popular way of paying in pubs, clubs and newsagents. A Treasury spokesman last night stressed that the Government remained committed to cash.

He added: ‘The U.K. leads the way in financial technology such as contactless and digital payments. It’s important that consumers have choice in how to pay for goods and services, and paying cash remains a legitimate and useful way to pay.’

Last night a spokesman for Visa said it was selecting 50 small businesses to receive $10,000 in ‘incentive funding’.

He added: ‘We hope to offer a similar challenge to those merchants who are interested in other countries, including the U.K. At this time, we do not have a firm plan on when such an initiative would be available in the U.K.’

Source*

Related Topics:

How Greece Became a Guinea Pig for a Cashless and Controlled Society*

Congress Want to make it Illegal to Hold cash, Bitcoin, or Other Assets outside of a Bank*

In the Move towards a Cashless Society India’s GDP Growth Slumps*

IMF Issue Working Paper on Eliminating Cash*

E.U. Picks Up Speed in the War on Cash*

A New Digital Cash System was Just Unveiled at a Secret Meeting for Bankers In New York*

Ban Cash to Help Central Banks stinks of Total Control – NWO’s Cashless Society*

The New Imperial Roman Empire*

Ofsted Attempts to Overturn Court Ruling that Birmingham School Gender Segregation was not Unlawful*

Ofsted Attempts to Overturn Court Ruling that Birmingham School Gender Segregation was not Unlawful*

Al-Hijrah School, in Bordesley Green, Birmingham

 

The schools inspectorate Ofsted is attempting to overturn a November 2016 High Court judgment which found that gender segregation in a Birmingham school did not mean either boys or girls were treated unfavourably.

The Court of Appeal case heard yesterday that a state-funded Islamic school in Birmingham unlawfully discriminated against pupils when it separated them by sex from age nine.

In an inspection in June 2016, Ofsted rated Al-Hijrah with its lowest grade of “inadequate” and said it should enter special measures. It was partly on the grounds that from the age of nine boys and girls were separated for all lessons, breaks, school trips and other activities.

The school challenged the inspection’s findings in a judicial review at the High Court last November. The judge, Mr Justice Jay, found that neither girls nor boys were treated less favourably by being segregated.

“There is no evidence in this case that segregation particularly disadvantages women,” he said.

Jay agreed with a recommendation to put the school in special measures on the basis of other issues raised and disagreed that Ofsted’s inspectors had been biased.

Ofsted’s lead barrister, Helen Mountfield, argued in court that although boys and girls might not receive less favourable treatment generally, “there is discrimination against individual girls and boys at this school, because a girl who wishes to socialise with a particular boy, but can’t, is treated less favourably”.

The segregation deprived girls of the ability to feel “comfortable and natural” around boys, she said.

Equalities legislation allows for entirely single-sex schools, or schools where the opposite sex is only allowed into sixth form. Within mixed-sex schools equality legislation allows some separation of classes.

In the High Court hearings, Al-Hijrah school argued that the gender segregation was one of its defining characteristics, and that the policy was clear to parents who wished to send their children there and to previous Ofsted inspectors, who had never raised it as a concern.

The hearing continues.

Source*

Related Topics:

Single-Sexed Schools vs. Civil Liberties*

Blackburn Muslim Schools Come Top of U.K. Education Progress Table*

Muslim Schools Continue to Surpass National GCSE Average*

East London Muslim Girls’ School Judged Outstanding by Ofsted*

Religious Schools Face Closure if they don’t Promote Homosexuality*

‘Transgender Studies’ to Be Taught in U.K. Primary Schools*

U.K. Public School tried to Punish Teacher who Shared Biblical Marriage Views with Student*

Sweden Bans Prayer to God; Christian Preschool Forced to thank ‘sun and rain’ for Meals Instead*

Latest British Gas Tactics – “You WILL have a Smart Meter”*

Latest British Gas Tactics – “You WILL have a Smart Meter”*

Sadler’s letter – “This isn’t a customer choice… they’re a benefit to our customers … It’s a government initiative…”

Yesterday we received some concerning correspondence from a British Gas customer which suggests that British Gas’s Smart Metering policy has changed and that it will now force customers to have its controversial new Smart Meters.

In a letter sent by British Gas Customer Relations Team representative, Kate Sadler, the customer was told:

“Every single one of our [British Gas] customers is going to have a Smart Meter installed.  This isn’t a customer choice, as we’re replacing all our meters with Smart Meters… We’re installing these meters across our whole customer base as they’re a benefit to our customers… It’s a government initiative… Unfortunately I’m unable to stop this from happening just for you, as as I’ve mentioned above all our customers will be having these installed.”

Sadler’s comments suggest that British Gas is now prepared to force its customers into having Smart Meters irrespective of their wishes, and to ignore the Government’s promises of customers having the right to refuse them.  The letter makes no mention of the fact that all energy consumers (as per the U.K.’s Electricity and Gas Acts*) have the right to have their own, non-Smart Meters installed, and even contradicts assurances given by British Gas’s Smart Metering Managing Director, Stuart Rolland, just two days before this latest letter.

Rolland’s letter – “you do not have to have one if you don’t want one”.

 

Responding to another customer who had served British Gas with formal Notice of Non-Consent for Smart Meter Installation through our website, Rolland explicitly concedes that:

“… you do not have to have a smart meter if you do not want one; we will remove your details from our rollout programme.”

Given the evident contrast in the letters which were sent by two different people within British Gas, we cannot be clear as to whether there is a level of breakdown within British Gas Smart Metering policy enforcement or whether the company is now ready to force customers into accepting Smart Meters irrespective of their wishes.

* Your right to have your own (non-Smart) Energy Meter installed:

In 1986 and then in 1989, the U.K.’s Gas and Electricity Acts were respectively brought into being.  Amongst other provisions, these Acts enshrined statutory provisions allowing energy consumers to have their own gas and electricity meters installed on their property.

To explain specifically in relation to electricity, for example, Schedule 7 of the Electricity Act 1989,ss.1(2) &(2A) outlines the following:

[(2) If the [authorised supplier] agrees, the meter may be provided by the customer [(who may provide a meter which belongs to him or is made available otherwise than in pursuance of arrangements made by the supplier)]; but otherwise it shall be provided by the [authorised supplier] [(who may provide a meter which belongs to him or to any person other than the customer)].
(2A) [An authorised supplier] may refuse to allow one of his customers to provide a meter only if there are reasonable grounds for his refusal.] [You can check the UK Association of Meter Operator’s website for more information.]

Our interpretation of this provision is that, so long as one’s own choice of non-smart/analogue meter complies with regulations and the supplier has no reasonable grounds for saying otherwise, and any in situ Smart Meters can be sent back to the supplier.  The only reasonable grounds for the supplier refusing this request that we can envisage would be if the meter is not compliant with safety or accuracy regulation.  The issue of whether your own meter is “smart” or not seems irrelevant, and would certainly appear to have nothing to do with the Government’s “No Backward Step” policy which we have written about here.

Source*

Related Topics:

New 5G Cell Towers and Smart Meters to Increase Microwave Radiation – Invade Privacy, Destroy Health*

Smart Meters Can Overbill By Up To 582 Percent Higher Than Actual Consumption*

Ontario Pulls Plug on 36,000 Rural ‘Smart’ Meters*

Citizens of Dominican Republic Disconnect and Return Smart Meters*

Smart Grid Deployment Across the U.S.*

Conned into Smart Meters, Conned out of Your Health

Electricity Prices Fall into Negatives as Germany’s Renewable Energy Boom Occurs*

Thousands Set to Die of Fuel Poverty this Winter, while Tories Makes a Killing from U.K.’s Energy Supply*

Armed U.S. immigration Officers to Be Stationed in U.K. Airports*

Armed U.S. immigration Officers to Be Stationed in U.K. Airports*

This latest move by the U.S. is being sold to unwitting British holiday makers and business travelers as a “solution to long immigration queues at U.S. airports.” 

Under the new scheme, airlines would be forced to foot the bill for U.S. security personnel and their families to live in the U.K. They plan to pay for this by simply passing the extra costs onto passengers travelling from Britain to the U.S. In other words: air travel may have become more expensive for Brits heading to the US.

It’s not clear exactly why U.S. officers have to be armed in U.K. airports. Not surprisingly, few U.K. media outlets bothered to even question that aspect of the story.

Will the British government end up accepting this aggressive move by the U.S? If so, will it be a dangerous precedent?

By Chris Pleasance

Armed U.S. immigration officers could be stationed at airports in the U.K. under plans being discussed between the White House and Westminster.

Under the plans British passengers would have their visa paperwork checked before boarding flights, allowing them to skip some queues after arriving in America.

But there are fears it could drive up the price of tickets as it remains unclear who will foot the bill for immigration officers to live in this country.

Both Manchester and Edinburgh Airport are said to be eager to join the scheme.

Heathrow bosses are believed to have turned the idea down because the obstacles involved in bringing immigration officers to this country are insurmountable.

Meanwhile Gatwick declared that it has ‘no plans’ to participate in the scheme.

Home Office officials confirmed that the plans were being discussed. While it would be up to each airport to negotiate a different process with US authorities, the scheme would need overall approval by the government.

The U.S. already has special immigration checks in six countries around the world, with more than 600 law enforcement officers are stationed at 15 locations.

Pre-clearance operations in Dublin and Shannon in Ireland opened in 2008.

An industry insider told the Press Association that the U.S. was very keen for pre-clearing and it is unlikely that the question of whether officers are armed would be a deal-breaker.

The source said: ‘They are much more concerned about having pre-clearing granted than they are about having their officers walking around like in the U.S.

‘The real challenge is who’s going to pay. The U.S. wants airports to pay for it; airports will say ‘that’s fine’ but then increase charges to airlines.

‘I would imagine airlines would pass on some of that additional cost to flight users,’ he added.

He said if airlines were not prepared to foot the bill then the plan may not happen.

Source*

Related Topics:

At these 3 British Airports, a U.S. Spy Agency Decides Who can Travel*

#Staygrounded Action In London Makes Airports New Focal Point for Social Justice*

Black Lives Matter U.K; Shut Down ‘Elite’ London Airport*

Former Israeli Intel Operatives Run Security at Brussels Airport*

Muhammad Ali’s Son on Airport Profiling: ‘I’m Not American?’*

U.S.-born NASA Employee Detained at Airport, Forced to Hand over Phone and Pin Code*

 

 

 

U.S. Military Burn Woman, Children Alive in Homes Same Week as Manchester Bombing*

U.S. Military Burn Woman, Children Alive in Homes Same Week as Manchester Bombing*

Do you care about humanity?

A man in Syria is devastated as he looks for his loved ones amongst the rubble

 

Keeping the civilian casualties abstract during war is one tool the government uses to temper down public perceptions of the damage done by the western military.

Western exceptionalism has caused unprecedented misery, trauma and bloodshed. Not accepting the U.S. and other western nations’ roles that have played out in provoking war in the Middle East, and terrorism, only leads to more devastation and zero accountability.

Rafi Ahmed Mahmoud Al Rashidi (Facebook) along with his 2 sisters and grandmother died in 2017 coalition airstrikes in Mosul while they slept in their beds.

 

Zakariah Thahir (Facebook) lost his life in coalition airstrikes in Jan. 2017 after a missile targeted their Mosul home in Iraq

 

Without knowing the back story of a civilian slaughtered in war, the public opinion is forced into neutrality or worse, apathy. In sharp contrast, any terrorist attack on Western soil leads the media to report in vast detail each civilian death, their name, their dreams, their future lost.

The leveling of the media playing field – where the Fourth Estate’s primary responsibility to the public rests – would place the dead Iraqi or Syrian child found bloodied under rubble, post U.S. military or Saudi airstrike, equal to the dead child in Manchester.

And this is what the U.S. government wants to avoid. For if we suddenly sympathize with the family mourning the loss of their loved ones in a Middle Eastern nation, the war is suddenly reduced to more questions than answers. The public will find it difficult to justify any war.

Just recently, one Iraqi journalist reported that U.S. bombings had “caused the deaths of more than twenty civilians who were burned in their homes, mostly women and children.”

Rephrased: Innocent women and children were burned alive in their homes because of the U.S. military bombing campaign.

As The Intercept’s founders’ Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill discuss with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez on Democracy Now! “What if all victims of war received the [same] media attention of the Manchester victims?” Yes, the Manchester victims were gut wrenching. So are the burning of children alive in their homes – no matter where they are. Where is the compassion?

Again, the government doesn’t want us feeling anything. Their job is to keep the western civilian numb.

The Syrian Observatory for Rights, Airwars and the human rights group Reprieve have reported that U.S. air raids alone have killed over 265 civilians, a quarter of them being children in just the last 2 months. The bulk of these deaths happened in the same fortnight as the Manchester bombing.

We don’t know the names of children dying in these provinces in the Middle East. Imagine if the discrepancy between reporting in detail on the civilian in Manchester or any of the victims of violence perpetrated by the western governments and US coalitions stopped, Greenwald argues. Our perception would change.  Casualties of war are continually kept “abstract” and “distant.”

The real image of U.S. air coalition airstrikes in New Mosul, Jan. 2017

 

“If there was just some attention paid to telling the stories of the victims of our own governments violence I think there’d be a radical shift in how we perceive it ourselves, the role we play in the world, and who bears blame in this conflict,” Greenwald explains.

Putting it into context, Trump’s new arms deal with the Saudis (valued at an immediate $110 billion) will see the poorest Middle Eastern nation razed to the ground by proxy. The largest humanitarian crisis isn’t the refugees flooding Europe, it’s those in Yemen caused by a U.S.-backed Saudi coalition.

But where’s the Fourth Estate’s voice when documenting that? Where’s the balance?

Source*

Related Topics:

Manchester attack: Love Conquers Fear as Didsbury Mosque Overwhelmed by Support*

Manchester Terror Attack: Rallying the Youth Around the Occult Elite*

New U.S-backed Rebel Group being formed to further U.S. interests in Syria*

Inside Syria: Father Maes Discusses the True Situation*

U.S. Planes Caught Sneaking ISIS Terrorists Out Of Syria again*

U.S. Amassing Spy Planes Off Syria, Aircraft Carrier to Arrive in Israel*

CIA officer – ‘we have no business being in Syria’*

Iraqi Army Declares Mosul Fully Free*

The U.S. Has Been at War for Over 220 it’s 241 Years*

African Pro-life Activist Schools BBC Anchor for Using ‘colonial talk’ to Push Contraception on Africa*

African Pro-life Activist Schools BBC Anchor for Using ‘colonial talk’ to Push Contraception on Africa*

By Claire Chretien

This morning, an African woman and pro-life activist destroyed a BBC anchor’s claims that African women “need” abortion and contraception in order to get out of poverty.

As the BBC World News host claimed there’s a “basic human right” to contraception, pro-life activist Obianuju Ekeocha retorted that African women are not asking for contraception.

In fact, contraception is a “Western solution” to African poverty, she said, adding that Westerners “better be careful” with such “colonial talk.”

Ekeocha was speaking in a segment dedicated to “World Population Day,” which is marked today.

She was representing the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. She is also the Founder and President of Culture of Life Africa.

“If we’re talking about abortion, well, I don’t think that any Western country has a right to pay for abortions in an African country, especially when the majority of people don’t want abortion…that then becomes a form of ideological colonization,” said Ekeocha.

BBC’s Babita Sharma responded by saying, “the fact remains that hundreds of millions of women don’t have access [to contraception] and should.”

“Well, you’re saying ‘should,’ but who are you to decide, if you don’t mind me saying?” asked Ekeocha. “There isn’t a popular demand.”

“I was born in Africa, I was raised in Africa, I continue to go to Africa many times a year,” she explained. “You just speak to any ordinary [African] woman. I think contraception might be like the tenth thing she says [that she wants], if that.”

Sharma claimed contraception is a “basic human right” and necessary for overcoming the cycle of poverty.

That’s kind of a Western solution, isn’t it?” asked Ekeocha.

“If you speak to the ordinary woman on the streets of Africa, what is she asking for?”

Ekeocha blasted the “Western solution” of thinking contraception is the solution rather than food, water, and basic healthcare.

“Why don’t you listen to the people first?” she asked. “In all this talk about contraception, the one thing that I have never heard of in all my time trying to track all these things is something like the side effects of contraception. No one ever tells the African women, when they come to promote contraception across the different African countries.”

Ekeocha said she recently consoled African women who had IUDs inserted into them without being warned about the side effects.

“These women were crying,” she said.

“No one ever told them” about the terrible side effects of contraceptives.

“But someone from a Western organization…came and put IUDs into them and told them, ‘this is what you need to come out of poverty.'”

Education rather than contraception is what African women need, Ekeocha said.

The BBC journalist then said education can help African women understand their “basic human rights,” like contraception.

“According to you,” Ekeocha responded.

She said Sharma had “better be careful” expressing herself with such “colonial talk.”

“My lifeline out of poverty was education,” Ekeocha continued.

“It was not contraception. And there are so many other women who have walked the same path as I have without ever having to take recourse to some contraception provided by the British government or the United States government.”

Source*

Related Topics:

African Woman Schools U.N. Delegate on Why Pushing Abortion is ‘neo-colonialism’*

Bill Gates: We Must Depopulate Africa to Save Europe*

Vatican tells U.N. to Remove Horrific Abortion Vacuum from Emergency Health Kits*

Bishop Badejo: U.S. won’t fight Boko Haram because of their Eugenics Agenda in Africa*

‘Our future is slavery, West gets everything’ in Mineral-rich, Money-poor Congo*