The Leveson Inquiry into the British press - oh, what a lovely game
By John Pilger June 02, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- Rupert Murdoch is a bad man. His son James is also bad. Rebekah Brooks is allegedly bad. The News of the World was very bad; it hacked phones and pilloried people. British prime ministers grovelled before this iniquity. David Cameron even sent text messages to Brooks signed "LOL", and they all had parties in the Cotswolds with Jeremy Clarkson. Nods and winks were duly exchanged on the BSkyB deal. Shock, horror. Offering glimpses of the power and petty gangsterism of the British tabloid press, the inquiry conducted by Lord Leveson has, I suspect, shocked few people. As the soap has rolled on, bemusement has given way to boredom. Tony Blair was allowed to whine about the Daily Mail's treatment of his wife until he and the inquiry's amoral smugness protecting him were exposed by a member of the public, David Lawley-Wakelin, who shouted, "Excuse me, this man should be arrested for war crimes." His Lordship duly apologised to the war criminal and the truth-teller was seen off. Why Murdoch should complain about the British establishment has always mystified me. His interrogation, if that is the word, by Robert Jay QC, was a series of verbal marshmallows that Murdoch promptly spat out. When he described one of his own rambling, self-satisfied questions as "subtle", Jay received this deft dismissal from Murdoch: "I'm afraid I don't have much subtlety in me." As the theatre critic Michael Billington reminded us recently, it was in the Spectator in 1955 that Henry Fairlie coined the term "the establishment", defining it as "the matrix of official and social relations within which power in Britain is exercised". For most of my career as a journalist, Murdoch has been an influential and admired member of this club: even a mentor to many of those now casting him as a "bad apple". His deeply cynical mantra, "I'm only giving the public what they want", was echoed by journalists and broadcasters as they lined up to dumb down their work and embrace the propaganda of corporatism that followed Murdoch's bloody move to Wapping in 1986. More than 5,000 men and women were sacked, and countless families destroyed and suicides committed; and Murdoch could not have got away with it had Margaret Thatcher and the Metropolitan Police not given him total, often secret support, and journalists not lain face down on the floors of buses that drove perilously through the picket lines of their former, principled colleagues. Cheering him on, if discreetly, were those now running what Max Hastings has called the "new establishment": the media's managerial middle class, often liberal to a fault, that was later to fall at the feet of Murdoch's man Blair, the future war criminal, whose election as prime minister was celebrated in the Guardian with: "Few now sang England Arise, but England has risen all the same." Leveson has asked nothing about how the respectable media complemented the Murdoch press in systematically promoting corrupt, mendacious, often violent political power whose crimes make phone-hacking barely a misdemeanour. The Leveson inquiry is a club matter, in which a member has caused such extraordinary public embarrassment he must be black-balled, so that nothing changes. What jolly fun to hear Jeremy Paxman grass on Piers Morgan who, he gossiped, described to him how to hack phones. Paxman was asked nothing by Jay about the essential role of the BBC and its leading lights as state propagandists for illegal wars that have killed, maimed and dispossessed millions. How ironic that the lunch Paxman attended at the Daily Mirror appears to have been in 2002 when the Mirror, edited by Morgan, was the only Fleet Street newspaper uncompromisingly opposed to the coming invasion of Iraq: thus reflecting the wishes of the majority of the British public. And what a wheeze it was to hear from the clubbable Andrew Marr, the BBC's ubiquitous voice: he of the super-injunction. Just as Murdoch's Sun declared in 1995 that it shared the rising Blair's "high moral values", so Marr, writing in the Observer in 1999, lauded the new prime minister's "substantial moral courage". What impressed Marr was Blair's "utter lack of cynicism", along with his bombing of Yugoslavia which would "save lives". By March 2003, Marr was the BBC's political editor. Standing in Downing Street on the night of the assault on Iraq, he rejoiced at the vindication of Blair who, he said, had promised "to take Baghdad without a bloodbath". The diametric opposite was true. In hawking his self-serving book in 2010, Blair selected Marr for his "exclusive TV interview". During their convivial encounter they discussed an attack on Iran, the country Hillary Clinton once said she was prepared to "obliterate". In the text messages disclosed by Leveson between Murdoch lobbyist Frederic Michel and Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, there is this one from Michel: "Very good on Marr as always". In a cable leaked to WikiLeaks, the US embassy in London urged Hillary Clinton to be interviewed by the "congenial" Marr because he often "sets the political agenda for the nation" and "will offer maximum impact for your investment of time". Inquisitor Jay showed no interest. When Alastair Campbell "gave evidence", Jay waved a copy of Blair's A Journey and quoted Blair's view of his chief collaborator as "a genius". "Sweet," responded Campbell. "And with great clunking balls as well," continued Jay QC, awaiting the laughter. The silence of 780,000 Iraqi widows was a presence. Not a single opponent of the institutional power of the media has been called by Leveson, though farce is welcomed. Richard Desmond, who owns the Daily Express and a section of the British porn industry, during his appearance damned the Daily Mail as "Britain's worst enemy" and said the Press Complaints Commission "hated our guts". Shock, horror. Or just sweet. www.johnpilger.com |
Monday, 4 June 2012
LONDON 2012 : OH ! WHAT LOVELY GAMES !
Sunday, 3 June 2012
NEVERMIND THE BOLLOCKS ! HERE'S THE OLYMPICS !
The Sex Pistols turned down an invitation to perform at the Olympics’ opening ceremony because the organisers wanted to censor one of their most famous songs, John Lydon has revealed.
The Pistols were asked to perform their 1977 single Pretty Vacant but Lydon, formerly Johnny Rotten, would not have been allowed to sing “vacant”, with his provocative emphasis on the final syllable.
“They tried to get us involved in the Olympics,” Lydon confirmed. “What they wanted was, they’re going to do this thing where celebrities go around the stadium on the back of flat-top lorries.
“So there will be Naomi Campbell in a Vivienne Westwood dress, followed by Madness doing ‘Baggy Trousers’, and then the Pistols doing ‘Pretty Vacant’. But without the ‘vay-cunt’, just ‘pretty’ and the word ‘censored’.
Lydon’s answer to the organising committee was “‘no fucking way.’ Don’t need it, don’t want it,” .
The punk star will play no part in the Summer’s festivities after this week saying that he wants no part in a web campaign to get a 35th anniversary re-release of The Sex Pistols’ God Save The Queen to number one during the week of the Diamond Jubilee.
SEX PISTOLS LYRICS
"Pretty Vacant"
Oh just remember I don't decide
I got no reason it's all too much
You'll always find us out to lunch
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty
we're vacant
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty
A vacant
Don't ask us to attend 'cos we're not all there
Oh don't pretend 'cos I don't care
I don't believe illusions 'cos too much is real
So stop you're cheap comment 'cos we know what we feel
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty
we're vacant
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty
we're vacant ah
But now and we don't care
There's no point in asking you'll get no reply
Oh just remember a don't decide
I got no reason it's all too much
You'll always find me out to lunch
We're out on lunch
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty
we're vacant
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty
we're vacant
Oh we're so pretty
Oh so pretty ah
But now and we don't care
We're pretty
A pretty vacant
We're pretty
A pretty vacant
We're pretty
A pretty vacant
We're pretty
A pretty vacant
And we don't care
Lovers Night
Author: Jeff VerStraete
A special dinner,
That's what he set out to do.
To show her how special she was,
To show her his love was true.
A candle light dinner,
He made for them to eat.
Looking deep into her eyes,
Their souls did meet.
After they ate dinner,
To the couch they did retire.
Curled up together with a movie,
And the sweet glow of a fire.
So relaxed and content,
A feeling of heavenly bliss.
On the back of her neck,
He placed a sweet soft kiss.
It sent a shiver down her spine,
And she turned and held him tight.
Whispering softly in his ear,
Make love to me all night.
He said I'll be right back,
As he got up off the couch.
Into his bedroom he went,
Then pulled out a pouch.
He pulled out rose pedals,
And laid them all over the bed.
Hundreds of rose pedals,
White, yellow, pink and red.
Around the room,
Candle after candle he did light.
Making a soft glow in the room,
That flicked in the night.
He went to the couch,
And took her by the hand.
She glowed like the full moon,
As she got off the couch to stand.
He walked behind her down the hall,
With his hands he covered her eyes.
So she couldnt see anything,
Especially the candle and rose pedal surprise.
When they got to the door,
He let her see the surprise.
It took away her breath,
She just couldnt believe her eyes.
He took her by the hand,
And softly kissed her lips.
He pulled her close to him,
And up her arm he ran his fingertips.
The two made love all night,
The two became one.
Desire and passion so hot,
As hot as a noon sun.
The sweat of their bodies,
Glistened in the candle light.
Collapsing in each others arms,
Somewhere in the middle of the night.
They curled up together,
Holding her all so tight.
With the glow of the candles,
As the lovers nightlight.
Laying next to her,
He rubbed her back with his hand.
Just laying there looking at her,
As she drifted off to dream land.
He woke her the next morning,
With coffee for her in his hand.
His beautiful sweet lover,
The Princess of his land.
A special dinner,
That's what he set out to do.
To show her how special she was,
To show her his love was true.
A candle light dinner,
He made for them to eat.
Looking deep into her eyes,
Their souls did meet.
After they ate dinner,
To the couch they did retire.
Curled up together with a movie,
And the sweet glow of a fire.
So relaxed and content,
A feeling of heavenly bliss.
On the back of her neck,
He placed a sweet soft kiss.
It sent a shiver down her spine,
And she turned and held him tight.
Whispering softly in his ear,
Make love to me all night.
He said I'll be right back,
As he got up off the couch.
Into his bedroom he went,
Then pulled out a pouch.
He pulled out rose pedals,
And laid them all over the bed.
Hundreds of rose pedals,
White, yellow, pink and red.
Around the room,
Candle after candle he did light.
Making a soft glow in the room,
That flicked in the night.
He went to the couch,
And took her by the hand.
She glowed like the full moon,
As she got off the couch to stand.
He walked behind her down the hall,
With his hands he covered her eyes.
So she couldnt see anything,
Especially the candle and rose pedal surprise.
When they got to the door,
He let her see the surprise.
It took away her breath,
She just couldnt believe her eyes.
He took her by the hand,
And softly kissed her lips.
He pulled her close to him,
And up her arm he ran his fingertips.
The two made love all night,
The two became one.
Desire and passion so hot,
As hot as a noon sun.
The sweat of their bodies,
Glistened in the candle light.
Collapsing in each others arms,
Somewhere in the middle of the night.
They curled up together,
Holding her all so tight.
With the glow of the candles,
As the lovers nightlight.
Laying next to her,
He rubbed her back with his hand.
Just laying there looking at her,
As she drifted off to dream land.
He woke her the next morning,
With coffee for her in his hand.
His beautiful sweet lover,
The Princess of his land.
Saturday, 2 June 2012
London 2012 Olympic Hunger Striker Tortured
The Irish Times - Saturday, June 2, 2012
Scots crowned chief Brit haters after Ireland cedes throne
DONALD CLARKE
A YEAR has passed since some posh lady in a hat caused a commotion by staggering her way through a few words of the national language. In the late spring of 2011, columnists (quite properly) made much of Queen Elizabeth’s visit to the Republic of Ireland.
A million years of discord had been put behind us. Ned Flanders embraces Homer Simpson. The Road Runner shares Acme Brand cordial with Wile E Coyote. You remember how it was.
Pop-cultural boffins had been aware of the thaw for many years. Consider a peculiar incident that occurred last weekend. Poor old Engelbert Humperdinck – the singer from Leicester, not the composer from Siegburg – did not cover himself with glory at the Eurovision Song Contest.
As the counting moved into its later stages, it looked increasingly likely that the great man representing the United Kingdom would finish dead last. In the end, only four countries delivered votes for Engelbert: Belgium, Estonia, Latvia and, yes, Ireland.
Nothing remarkable in that, you might say. The United Kingdom is our nearest neighbour. All those made-up east European countries vote for one another. The Greeks stand up for Cyprus and that island nation always returns the compliment.
But, until relatively recently, the Irish jury (such a thing existed in the days before public voting) made it its business to offer two fingers to the UK entry. Heck, we only gave three votes to Save Your Kisses for Me, and that was a Eurovision classic. The following year, 1977, offered a classic example of the feud’s lopsided dynamics. The Irish entry, which finished third, took the full 12 points from the UK. The British tune, which grabbed the silver medal, was awarded null points by the Irish jury.
Fans of “sport” tell me anecdotes about English friends who complain that, whereas they always support Ireland when that team are playing any nation other than England, their Irish pals insist upon urging anybody (even the Germans) to defeat the supposed old enemy.
Until the current defrosting, a similar rule applied during the Eurovision.
We hardly need to list the reasons behind the antagonism. I dimly remember history lessons concerning some sort of forced occupation (still going on, according to some commentators). By turning our backs on the likes of Lynsey De Paul and Mike Moran – whose contribution to the colonial atrocities was limited at worst – we reasserted our independence and put the brakes on one, relatively insignificant school of British hegemony.
Football fans will continue to wish England ill. But the volume of the booing has declined. Meanwhile, the Eurovision freeze-out has been entirely reversed: the British can now count on a sympathy vote from their new pals across the Irish Sea. It’s not a big thing. But the change does – in spite of recent economic reversals – speak of confidence and maturity.
So, we are landed with an interesting question. Who has taken over our role as chief Brit haters? Former colonies such as India, Canada and New Zealand seem reasonably tolerant of their erstwhile rulers. The Australians can, however, certainly make a claim to the title. The Antipodean nation has constructed an entire persona – jolly, drunk, fanatically unpretentious larrikin – in opposition to the caricature of Englishmen as bowler-hat- wearing fops with a passion for cucumber sandwiches.
Most Australian cricketers would rather lose a kidney than see their off stump deposed by an English googly. Yet every second British person seems to long for a life in the land of Vegemite. They love the bloody place.
No, the Aussies don’t quite qualify.
Your current correspondent is spending much of this week in lovely Scotland. Today it is Glasgow. Tomorrow we progress to Edinburgh. Before moving on to crown the Scottish champions (it’s time they won something, after all), we should clarify the argument somewhat. When the Irish Eurovision jury contemplated the effects of their psychological parsimony, they did not imagine men in kilts flinging cans of Irn-Bru at their deep-fried televisions; nor did they much ponder the effects on the Rhondda Valley. Hatred of Britain invariably means hatred of the English. Nobody, but nobody, engages in Anglophobia with greater relish than the Scots.
We offer all the usual provisos. Most Scottish people get on perfectly well with their lower neighbours. But the belief that Scotland and England are “old enemies” stubbornly persists. Once again, it’s largely a one-sided feud. English football fans regard their chief rivals as Argentina or Germany. You can’t get the bleeding royal family out of the Highlands. The English have consistently voted for political parties whose front benches are packed with Caledonians. This is akin to watching the progress of a tragically unrequited love affair.
Well, it looks as if the Scots will soon get a chance to vote for real independence. Give it a go. You may like it. If nothing else, a
Yes vote should give you the opportunity to snub your nose at the 2020 British Eurovision entry.
- Email Us
- |
Login
You must be logged in to comment
The Lark
and the Freedom Fighter
By Bobby Sands, MP
My grandfather once said that the imprisonment of the lark is a crime of the greatest cruelty because the lark is one of the greatest symbols of freedom and happiness. He often spoke of the spirit of the lark relating to a story of a man who incarcerated one of his loved friends in a small cage.
The lark, having suffered the loss of her liberty, no longer sung her little heart out, she no longer had anything to be happy about. The man who had committed the atrocity, as my grandfather called it, demanded that the lark should do as he wished: that was to sing her heart out, to comply to his wishes and change herself to suit his pleasure or benefit.
The lark refused, and the man became angry and violent. He began to pressurise the lark to sing, but inevitably he received no result. so, he took more drastic steps. He covered the cage with a black cloth, depriving the bird of sunlight. He starved it and left it to rot in a dirty cage, but the bird still refused to yield. The man murdered it.
As my grandfather rightly stated, the lark had spirit--the spirit of freedom and resistance. It longed to be free, and died before it would conform to the tyrant who tried to change it with torture and imprisonment. I feel I have something in common with that bird and her torture, imprisonment and final murder. She had a spirit which is not commonly found, even among us so-called superior beings, humans.
Take an ordinary prisoner. His main aim is to make his period of imprisonment as easy and as comfortable as possible. The ordinary prisoner will in no way jeopardise a single day of his remission. Some will even grovel, crawl and inform on other prisoners to safeguard themselves or to speed up their release. They will comply to the wishes of their captors, and unlike the lark, they will sing when told to and jump high when told to move.
Although the ordinary prisoner has lost his liberty he is not prepared to go to extremes to regain it, nor to protect his humanity. He settles for a short date of release. Eventually, if incarcerated long enough, he becomes institutionalised, becoming a type of machine, not thinking for himself, his captors dominating and controlling him. That was the intended fate of the lark in my grandfather's story; but the lark needed no changing, nor did it wish to change, and died making that point.
This brings me directly back to my own situation: I feel something in common with that poor bird. My position is in total contrast to that of an ordinary conforming prisoner: I too am a political prisoner, a freedom fighter. Like the lark, I too have fought for my freedom, not only in captivity, where I now languish, but also while on the outside, where my country is held captive. I have been captured and imprisoned, but, like the lark, I too have seen the outside of the wire cage.
I am now in H-Block, where I refuse to change to suit the people who oppress, torture and imprison me, and who wish to dehumanize me. Like the lark I need no changing. It is my political ideology and principles that my captors wish to change. They have suppressed my body and attacked my dignity. If I were an ordinary prisoner they would pay little, if any, attention to me, knowing that I would conform to their insitutional whims.
I have lost over two years' remission. I care not. I have been stripped of my clothes and locked in a dirty, empty cell, where I have been starved, beaten, and tortured, and like the lark I fear I may eventually be murdered. But, dare I say it, similar to my little firend, I have the spirit of freedom that cannot be quenched by even the most horrendous treatment. Of course I can be murdered, but while I remain alive, I remain what I am, a political prisoner of war, and no one can change that.
Haven't we plenty of larks to prove that? Our history is heart-breakingly littered with them: the MacSwineys, the Gaughans, and the Staggs. Will there be more in H-Block?
I dare not conclude without finishing my grandfather's story. I once asked him whatever happened to the wicked man who imprisoned, tortured and murdered the lark?
'Son," he said, "one day he caught himself on one of his own traps, and no one would assist him to get free. His own people scorned him, and turned their backs on him. He grew weaker and weaker, and finally topled over to die upon the land which he had marred with such blood. The birds came and extracted their revenge by picking his eyes out, and the larks sang like they never sang before.'
'Grandfather,' I said, 'could that man's name have been John Bull?'
Source: Originally published in An Phoblacht/Republican News, Feburary 3rd, 1979, page 2. Contributed to this website by "Patrizia" from Italy. Patrizia can be contacted through this website.
Written by Bobby Sands, MP, while on the blanket protest in the H-Blocks,Long Kesh, Northern Ireland. Because protesting prisoners were not allowed books or writing materials, this essay was composed on a square of toilet paper and smuggled out of the prison.
Bobby Sands embarked on a hunger strike on March 1st, 1981 and dies 66 days later on May 5th, 1981. He was protesting the "criminal" status imposed on Republican prisoners from 1976 onward, and was fighting to regain the right to wear his own clothes, have free association with other prisoners, and other rights given to political prisoners.
London 2012, 2012 Olympics, Olympics 2012, Boycott Olympics, Internment, london 2012, London Olympics, London 2012 Olympics, OlympicGames, OlympicLondon, Olympic, London Twenty-Twelve, Olympics Twenty-Twelve, OlympicGames, LondonOlympics,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Get a grip, Clarke, we only gave Humperdinck four points and you've spun an entire column out of it. You should run along and be a spin doctor. You're like a shaman with a penis gourd who's been at the sherry bottle.
Sometimes you are forced to wince when, without warning, a reporter inadvertently exposes his inner workings like this. What has been seen cannot be unseen. For his sins, Clarke will be made to endure ten minutes of watching Martin Lee smiling and "dancing".