Think back to 2005 and a world-wide question that resonates today

Think back to 2005 and a world-wide question that resonates today

AADHIKAR DAILY original question about the subservience that the BBC has been fostering [in the minds of the viewers and the listeners] to the USA.

Has Chris Patten, now fronting the “BBC Trust” any clue as to why the BBC has been allowed to brainwash millions of listeners and viewers into forgetting the distinction between the UK as a sovereign country [now that will, open so many cans …] and as an extension of the USA?

And what about David Cameron?

Has he been playing to some secret agenda and hint that has been scripted for him so that to a USA fanatic, he may come across as a “loyal” agent for the idea of “joining” “England” as a 51^st State?

Is that why he has been poising so persistently and making the ritualistic noises “against” the EU?

If so, he must have THAT as another common “interest” that he shares with his “role model” Tony Bliar!

[To be continued]

______________________________________________________

Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011

Is Tower Hamlets Council operating an agenda that compares with the EDL's aims? Question raised via the GUARDIAN

Is Tower Hamlets Council operating an agenda that compares with the EDL's aims? Question raised via the GUARDIAN.

A report coming here shortly

Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011

The latest exhibition of banality by the +ban-begetters' is on display in the British media. Tower Hamlets in the media circus. An update next

The latest exhibition of banality by the +ban-begetters' is on display in the British media. Tower Hamlets in the media circus. An update next

Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011

© Muhammad Haque Daily Economics Commentary: The fraudulent journalism of the Big Biz bankers' agenda peddler Financial Times of London, UK!

1250 Hrs GMT

London

Wednesday

29 June 2011

©Muhammad Haque Daily Economics Commentary:
The FT fakes on for the looters and the robbers…, that is the Biog Biz banks…

That faked, "anti-bankers" graffiti exhibited by the FT on one of their editions today [they appear intercontinentally] being peddled by the fraudulent FT will enhance the argument of the bankers. They will say that their critics are violent and unjust. This is why the "writings" could not have been genuinely done by a genuine thinking and socially responsible opponent of the looters and the robbers...
Not from any thinking opponent of the looters and the robbers that the banks are. The responsible intellectual thing to do would be to expose the tricks that the looters use. One trick is their use of the FT and of the MPs of all parties and shades.
Now exposing THEM would be far more effective than that stupid “slogan” the FT is flogging
[To be continued]


Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011

AADHIKARonline © Muhammad Haque Daily Democracy Deficit and Opposition to CONDEM agenda and assaults on society missing…” Commentary [28]

AADHIKARonline © Muhammad Haque Daily Democracy Deficit and Opposition to CONDEM agenda and assaults on society missing…” Commentary [28]

Here are the words constituting the first of my latest series of updates on the embarrassing state of limbo into which the Official opposition to Brenda's Government has lurched once again: Ed Miliband minimised his minor part even more astonishingly when he uttered those waffling words opining nonchalantly on there being a space for 'talks'!

Where had Anthony Wedgwood Benn [also once furiously known as Viscount Stansgate, no less!] and Kenneth Livingstone, to name only two of the over-cited 'referees' encountered the minor Ed during] presumably] the active time of the late Ralf Miliband?

Whatever might the actual environmental settings have been where the likes of Anthony W Benn and Kenneth Livingstone might have been afforded the luxurious space to observe the signs of evidence that there would be such a leader [or more than one] in that person [or in the pair so persistently promoted as being oh so personable by their preachy introducers to the “Labour” “movement” intra-party vote fodder at that crucial time in “our glorious history” namely Ed being fixed into the slot]?

What does this say about the certifiers concerned including those in addition to and also other than A W Benn and K Livingstone who had lost no time before they uttered those words of unbeatable banality, pre-the-post-G Brown leadership charade that was staged in the name of the "Labour Party"?

And No, I am NOT even remotely suggesting another Minibrand!

What I AM suggesting and advocating is the overdue need for the thinking members of the Labour Party to start among democratic accountable demands on the “leaders” in place now. Let’s start by demanding that Ed Miliband delivers. Can’t be fairer than that!

Let Ed Miliband deliver on the basis principle of setting out his action in accordance with the democratic needs of the country as seen from the perspectives of the democratic, constitutional and the ethical needs of the people.

Let him articulate this and let us see him do it today, Wednesday 29 June 2011.

From the local housing estate and neighbourhood across his “beloved middle class” through to the greediest of the population, let us see Ed Miliband create a picture of society that contrasts that of Iain Duncan Smith [Broken Society, tagged as part of the highly sophisticated psycho-profiling propaganda plot to make the Military agenda man Duncan Smith "come across oh so timid and vulnerable..." so that he could be prepared to smash the poor and destitute the unincomed!]

And of Dave Cameron who IS breaking society…

[To be continued]

Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011

Isle of Dogs, Tower Hamlets family's continuing sorrow: Ian Tomlinson inquest updates below

Isle of Dogs, Tower Hamlets family's continuing sorrow: Ian Tomlinson inquest updates below

The LONDON GUARDIAN web site:

A leading heart specialist appeared to rule out the theory that Ian Tomlinson died of a heart attack at the G20 protests, at the inquest into his death has .

Tomlinson, a newspaper seller, collapsed and died less than three minutes after being hit with a baton and pushed to the ground by apolice officer, PC Simon Harwood, during the demonstrations near the Bank of England.

He had been trying to get home from work at around 7.20pm on 1 April 2009 when he encountered the Metropolitan police officer.

Paramedics were unable to resuscitate Tomlinson, a father of nine, who was pronounced dead more than an hour later.

Prof Kevin Channer, a heart expert at Royal Hallamshire hospital, was asked by the inquest to analyse chart readings from a defibrillator that was used on Tomlinson by paramedics.

Channer's expert evidence, contained in a report to the inquest, was that the electrocardiogram (ECG) data obtained by paramedics as they fought to resuscitate Tomlinson was inconsistent with an arrhythmic heart attack. The heart pulse data was however consistent with the 47-year-old dying of internal bleeding, Channer said.

The medical cause of Tomlinson's death has proved a key area of controversy in his inquest, which is now in its fourth week.

The first pathologist to examine the body, Dr Freddy Patel, said that when he was unable to find a source of the bleeding in Tomlinson's abdomen, he concluded "through a process of elimination" that the newspaper seller must have died of an arrhythmic heart attack.

Patel, who is no longer on an accredited list of pathologists, said the type of heart attack would have resulted from Tomlinson's coronary artery disease and could have occurred at any time.

However, his evidence is contradicted by three forensic pathologists who examined the body and found instead that Tomlinson was likely to have died as a result of internal bleeding.

They include Dr Nat Cary, who also gave evidence at the inquest on Monday. He said Channer's report meant there was now "only one real possibility.

"It doesn't matter how you look at this case, whether you look at the heart and the coronary arteries or heart, you look at the ECG traces and clinical status, you come to the same view," Cary said.

"Mr Tomlinson did not die due to a so-called heart attack, or arrhythmic heart attack, due to coronary artery disease."

Cary previously told the inquest that he believed that Harwood's violent shove of the newspaper seller was likely to have been the cause of his death.

He said video footage showed Tomlinson's elbow was caught between his body and the ground, which would have been sufficient to cause a "blunt force trauma" internal injury, most likely to the liver, which was badly diseased.

When Patel was presented with Channer's findings, he appeared to alter his explanation of a heart attack, indicating that Tomlinson may have suffered a "very transient" form of arrhythmic heart attack and then recovered spontaneously, before then losing consciousness.

He also introduced an previously unmentioned explanation for the death: hypoxia, or the deprivation of adequate oxygen supply. Paramedics previously told the inquest that they had ruled out hypoxia when they went to Tomlinson's aid.

Patel confirmed to the judge that he had made no prior mention of hypoxia as a cause of death in his two official postmortem reports.

When it was suggested the to Patel that he was introducing a entirely new cause of the death in his fourth day of evidence, he momentarily fell silent.

The jury was previously told that Patel has since September been suspended twice by the General Medical Council, including for professional misconduct and dishonesty.

Matthew Ryder, counsel for the inquest, said: "I am sorry to say, Dr Patel, I suggest you are reaching for options because you know, now, or you realise now, the conclusion that you have put forward is not a solid one, and cannot be sustained."

The pathologist replied: "I do not agree with that at all."

Earlier, a consultant liver expert, Dr Graeme Alexander, told the jury his view was that Tomlinson had died of internal bleeding in the abdomen, caused by trauma to his liver after his fall.

He said that Tomlinson's serious liver disease would have made him much more susceptible to collapse from internal bleeding than another person.

Alexander added that Patel's suggestion that an absence of damage to a capsule surrounding the liver indicated it could not have been the source of bleeding was "not a relevant argument at all".

"I have a ward full of patients with liver disease, and if they have a cardiac arrest on the ward it is safe bet that they have bled," Alexander said.

The inquest continues.

Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011

AADHIKAROnline © Muhammad Haque London Commentary: CAMERON IS CAUSING POVERTY and wasting £Billions and defaming the involuntarily impoverished- 1

0315 [0300] [0255] [0245] [0220] Hrs GMT
London
Friday
01 April 2011.

AADHIKAROnline © Muhammad Haque London Commentary.

A special legal disclaimer that applies to this commentary that I am writing below
I am writing this as based on extensive original research carried out contemporaneous as well as contextually. I am very acutely ware that there has been no publication of the diagnosis that I am publishing below by anyone on the internet or elsewhere. I am therefore asking that anyone who is tempted to claim that they too have been thinking along this line or that they too have come to the same conclusion to pause a moment before making such claims and organise their evidence that can universally objectively verifiably substantive anything that they may be tempted to say that may look or read like what I am saying here and what I shall be saying in this series of of updates as part of my London commentary.
Does David Cameron have a clue as to how much fraud goes on in the Government Departments? He must do, mustn’t he? He is, after all, the Prime Minister! As Prime Minister, David Cameron commands the service of all the ‘civil’ servants that he surveys! Or does he? It is evident from these figures, released by the Parliamentary publishing operation itself, that the UK’s daily defamed ‘welfare’ state is the source of £BILLIONS of wasted and or lost money that belongs to the public.
What is blatantly stated but has NOT featured on the front page [or even ion the inside pages] of either the Richard Desmond-ed DAILY EXPRESS or of the Daily Star or of the DAILY MAIL is the staggering amount of £3.1 billion overpaid and £1.3 billion underpaid in 2009-10.

The Parliamentary report comments [italics added]:
“The Department launched a five-year strategy for tackling error in January 2007 which included an emphasis on training and support for staff and informing customers of their responsibilities.[8] Despite this, levels of error have remained constant over the past few years.[9] Figure 2 shows that between 2006-07 and 2009-10, there was no sustained decrease in the level of over or underpayments due to administrative and customer error, taken as a percentage of total benefits spending.[10]”

What the MPs do not admit to and what the DWP will not explain is the real reason behind the errors and the losses of £Billions of public money.
I stress the phrase ‘public money’ as very intentionally distinguished from ‘taxpayers money’.
That reason is IN A BIG WAY the personnel that make and control the key decisions about payments in the name of the DWP.
I have said this for a very long time now and I have yet to find any reference to the ‘welfare state in the context of the multi Billion losses’ through alleged errors every year.
I am asserting that there is a POLICY why this is not discussed either in the news reports or in the comment sections of the old Fleet Street titles. And it is the same prevalence of POLICY which is the reason why there has been no reported or - more to the point in the context of the actual role and record of law reporting - no reportable cases exposing the losses of £Billions of public money every year.
This POLICY must be one of the MANY unwritten agreements among the “main Parties”.
Why am I saying this?
The answer is very easy to find and substantiate:
had there been no POLICY and what is more had there been no unwritten agreements among the “main” [numerically significant] Parties then there would have been rows, scandals and resignations.
Yet there has been no row, no scandal and most emphatically no resignations.
Why?
Because rows, scandals and resignations all take place AS A RESULT of adverse information being leaked or published by OTHERS who want the decision-making person or personnel to suffer embarrassment and or personal humiliation.
For that to happen, there would have to have ben NO AGREEMENT, no contract, no deal.
But there are deals among the Parties concerned.
Hence there is no rows or scandals that could rock the DWP.
Instead, the PERSISTENTLY propagated “idea of scandal” concerning the “welfare state [that is the Department for Work and Pensions = DWP= in the main here] is SEEN as being the fault of the claimants: the main body of the claimants being either not paid or very low paid. The stigma that thus attaches to the un-named but socially stigmatised poor is then very much permeant one that then gets recycled and repeated to damn people in general low income and people in general poverty. I am asserting here that this is one of the INTENDED SOCIAL RESULTS BEHIND THE DE FACTO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES over the over-misrepresented “welfare state”
[To be continued]




The Following has been taken from the UK Houses of Parliament's publishing web site for the sole purpose of reference and commentary substantiation in the context of the writer’s commentary.

The actual URL is:

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/the-tony-collins-blog/2011/03/are-the-big-it-systems-of-state-untouchable-as-some-claim/







Reducing errors in the benefits system - Public Accounts Committee Contents

1 Extent of error

1. The Department for Work and Pensions is responsible for much of the benefits system, and the majority of payments are processed by the Department's agencies, Jobcentre Plus and the Pension, Disability and Carers Service. The benefits system is both large and complex: there are around 30 different types of benefits and pensions, with 900 distinct rates of payment.[2] In 2009-10, some £148 billion of payments were made to 20 million people.[3] We took evidence on two reports from the Comptroller and Auditor General looking at administrative and customer error in the benefits system.[4]

2. The Department estimates that it made a total of £3.1 billion of overpayments and £1.3 billion of underpayments in 2009-10 as a result of fraud, customer error or administrative error (Figure 1).[5] Of these totals, error accounted for £2.2 billion in overpayments and £1.3 billion in underpayments. Administrative error accounted for £1.1 billion of overpayments and £500 million of underpayments in that year.[6] Customer error resulted in overpayments of £1.1 billion, and underpayments of £800 million in 2009-10.[7]

Figure 1: The extent of fraud and error in the benefits system


3. The Department launched a five-year strategy for tackling error in January 2007 which included an emphasis on training and support for staff and informing customers of their responsibilities.[8] Despite this, levels of error have remained constant over the past few years.[9] Figure 2 shows that between 2006-07 and 2009-10, there was no sustained decrease in the level of over or underpayments due to administrative and customer error, taken as a percentage of total benefits spending.[10]

Figure 2: Overpayments and underpayments as a result of error

Administrative error as a percentage of benefit expenditure


Source: A C&AG's report, Figure 2

Customer error as a percentage of benefit expenditure


Source: C C&AG report, Figure 4

4. The extent of fraud and error has resulted in the Department's accounts being qualified for the past 22 years. Sir Leigh Lewis, the Permanent Secretary for the Department until his retirement in December 2010, told us that the failure to lift the qualification was the 'biggest single disappointment' of his five years leading the Department.[11] The new Permanent Secretary, Robert Devereux, told us he was now committed to removing the qualification on the accounts.[12]

5. In conjunction with HM Revenue and Customs, the Department published a new joint strategy in October 2010, entitled Tackling fraud and error in the benefit system. The strategy aims to secure a reduction of 25% in the cost of overpayments due to fraud and error over the next four years.[13]

6. The Government has committed to providing the Department for Work and Pensions and HM Revenue and Customs an extra £425 million over four years for measures to reduce fraud and error, which the Department believes is sufficient to implement its initiatives.[14] However, the Department does not yet have a clear plan of how it will utilise its funding to reduce the cost of fraud and error, or how it will evaluate the initiatives.[15] The Department's last strategy in January 2007 to reduce fraud and error was not supported by an action plan, although the Department has started to compile an action plan to support the 2010 strategy.[16]

7. The Department's focus on reducing overpayments has meant it has not given sufficient attention to tackling underpayments.[17] The average weekly underpayment detected on Income Support because of customer error was nearly £24, equivalent to 29% of the average weekly payment, which can cause significant financial hardship for claimants.[18] However, the Department does not have a target to reduce underpayments.[19]

2 Q 2 Back

3 C&AG's report, Minimising the cost of administrative errors in the benefit system, para 1; C&AG's report; Reducing errors in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 1 Back

4 C&AG's report, Minimising the cost of administrative errors in the benefit system, HC 569, Session 2010-2011; C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, HC 704, Session 2010-2011 Back

5 C&AG's report, Minimising the cost of administrative errors in the benefit system, para 1.3; C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 1 Back

6 C&AG's report, Minimising the cost of administrative errors in the benefit system, paras 2, 4 Back

7 C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 1.4, pg 14 Back

8 Qq 74, 79, 97; Department for Work and Pensions, Getting welfare right: Tackling error in the benefits system, para 3.36; C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 8, pg 6 Back

9 C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 8, pg 6 Back

10 Qq 44-48; C&AG's report, Minimising the cost of administrative errors in the benefit system, para 11; C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 1.6, pg 16 Back

11 Q149 Back

12 Q160 Back

13 Qq 164-166, 168, 176-179; The Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC: Tackling fraud and error in the benefit and tax credit systems, October 2010, para 15, pg 14 Back

14 Qq 20, 23, 141, 173; The Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC: Tackling fraud and error in the benefit system Back


15 Qq 165-174 Back

16 C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 17; Ev 36 Back

17 Qq 227-28 Back

18 C&AG's report, Reducing losses in the benefits system caused by customers' mistakes, para 11 Back

19 Qq 227-245 Back












Launched in the morning of Saturday 12 March 2011