Just to rub salt in the wound of Mr Tony Blair’s hostile reception in Lebanon (and also to promote Mitch Benn to a US audience) I’m reposting this YouTube earwormer from a week a or so ago:
Everybody sing!
Read more: Mitch Benn, LebanonBlair
We aren’t no thin red ‘eroes, nor we aren’t no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An’ if sometimes our conduck isn’t all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don’t grow into plaster saints;While it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, fall be’ind,”
But it’s “Please to walk in front, sir,” when there’s trouble in the wind,
There’s trouble in the wind, my boys, there’s trouble in the wind,
O it’s “Please to walk in front, sir,” when there’s trouble in the wind.
British soldiers risking death in Afghanistan and Iraq are being paid about half the national minimum wage. The troops, facing daily attacks in Helmand and Basra, and suffering a rising toll of dead and injured, are among Britain’s lowest paid workers.
In the midst of a recruitment crisis, with soldiers being sent to highly dangerous conflicts with little monetary reward, commanders believe an improvement in wages is essential to maintain morale. General Sir Richard Dannett, the recently appointed head of the Army, said: “There are issues like basic pay. A Para with a year’s training at Catterick, engaged in Helmand, is taking home ?1,150 a month. Is that enough? Is that fair?”
The discontent over pay comes amid growing concern about casualties being suffered, especially in Afghanistan from a resurgent Taliban. Doubts have been expressed about the tactics being pursued. The former aide-de-camp to the British task force in Afghanistan, Captain Leo Docherty, of the Scots Guards, who has just left the Army, said the campaign in Helmand was ” a textbook case of how to screw up a counter-insurgency”.
The average salary of a newly qualified soldier is ?14,300 before tax – compared with about ?20,000 for a police officer. In a combat zone, being on duty for a minimum of 16 hours gives the troops an hourly rate of ?2.45. There is also a longer service separation allowance of about ?6 a day, but this only applies to those who have served at least 12 months away from home.
[…]
The armed forces were to be brought into the minimum wage structure by the incoming Labour Government in 1997. But the idea was dropped after pressure from the then Defence Secretary, George Robertson, who claimed it would put the military into a financial and legal straitjacket.
Would that be this George Robertson by any chance? Why yes, it would. Fancy that.
From Brussels to the boardroom: what George Robertson did next
? Documents reveal new roles of former minister
? More than ?500,000 paid for business posts
David Leigh and Rob Evans
Thursday February 9, 2006
The Guardian
It has been more than two years since George Robertson bowed out as secretary-general of Nato, leaving its Brussels headquarters and a reported tax-free salary of ?140,000 a year. But rather than settle into a quiet retirement, he has taken on a series of boardroom roles, making the son of a Scottish village policeman more money than he earned as a politician – in excess of ?500,000 a year.
[…]
Lord Robertson says: “I am not a lobbyist”. He says he was hired two years ago to improve the company’s relations with British and foreign governments. He got ?421,601, including a ?200,000 bonus, last year for working two days a week.
[…]
Lord Robertson has capitalised on his friendship with William Cohen, the defence secretary in Bill Clinton’s administration, who pays him for help with lobbying. The Washington-based Cohen Group says it has won military contracts from the MoD and other European countries for commercial clients, but refused to say how Lord Robertson had been involved.
[…]
Lord Robertson denies he was getting ?250,000 a year from Mr Cohen. “It’s a fraction of that,” he says.
Last year, Lord Robertson did receive ?40,000 from the military aerospace company Smiths Group, and ?32,000 from Weir Group, which sells weapons systems to the Royal Navy. Weir is facing a possible Serious Fraud Office investigation for allegedly paying bribes in Iraq.
[…]
Lord Robertson is paid an undisclosed sum by London-based financiers Englefield Capital. The firm says he advises on global trends and specific areas where the firm wants to do business. Englefield has interests in Slovakia, which Lord Robertson visited last autumn, funded by the US-based Friends of Slovakia. Englefield says he did no work for it on that trip.
Lord Robertson is also a “strategic adviser” to the European arm of the Royal Bank of Canada, which reportedly pays him ?100,000 a year. The bank said yesterday his advice was on “infrastructure finance”. “Lord Robertson has strong connections in Scotland, and also has in-depth knowledge of the public sector,” it said.
Nice to see our labour lords and masters aren’t suffering from ‘War on Terror’. That’s what the little people, the poor old bloody privates, are for.
You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country,” when the guns begin to shoot;
An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
But Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool – you bet that Tommy sees!
Read More: Afghanistan, War On Terror, UK, Nato, British Army, Army Pay, Lord George Robertson, New Labour, Lobbying, Corruption.
It’s Avedon Carol Week At Prog Gold and here’s another great Sideshow catch:
President George W. Bush has rightly pointed out that America is addicted to oil, but he fails to note the predictable consequences.
Addicts break into houses, steal stuff and shoot people. America is breaking into countries, stealing stuff and shooting people. Why is anyone surprised that those homeowners object to our addictive behavior?
– Sheila Stoll Morcote, Switzerland
Read more: USA, Oil, Pre-emptive War, Iraq Invasion.
Is the BBC really so stupid not to have noticed that the dramatised ABC/Disney miniseries about 9/11, due to air on BBC2 tonight and tomorrow, is potentially libellous of an ex-president, a major US airline and several former eminent government figures; not only that, that it was financed and produced by people with ties to evangelical Church groups and the Republican party?
Oh dear, how embarassing. I bet, being so web-savvy and media-literate and all, the bods at the Beeb are on it like white on rice and damage control exercises’re already under way.
But no. Apparently they are that stupid.
They’re still trailing the fallacious and fraudulent miniseries at every opportunity and this is the email reply sent to complaining licensepayers (you know, those boring little people whose money will be used to pay off the massive damages the court could award) –
“Thank you for your e-mail.
‘The Path to 9/11’, to be transmitted over September 10 & 11 is a drama based on real events and, as with any drama, the writer’s perspective will be brought to bear on those events. A statement at the beginning of the programme is clear about the sources and methods which have been used:
” The following dramatization is based on the 9/11 Commission Report and other published sources and personal interviews. Composite and representative characters and incidents, and time compression have been used for dramatic purposes”.
It is not our practice to engage in public debate about the contents of programmes before they’ve been transmitted, but what we will say is that this subject matter is always going to be politically controversial. Most of the events take place when the Clinton administration was in power so naturally it will feature heavily.
The programme has been reviewed by the Editorial Policy team and we are confident it lives up to high standards of fairness and accuracy.
With this in mind, we hope you will enjoy the drama.
Regards,
BBC Information”
Jeus wept, doesn’t anyone at the BBC use the bloody internet? This show isn’t just politically controversial”, it’s outright lies and the proof’s all over the blogs like a rash.
I don’t know if, in the deal struck with ABC/Disney and their fundy backers whether the BBC has final editorial control over the broadcast version. I hope for their sake that whichever lawyer drafted the contract insisted on it. Seeing how inept they’ve been so far, their continued blind hurtle into a potentially massive defamation suit does not surprise me at all.
And I haven’t even mentioned the political implications yet.
This ABC/Disney production attempts to rewrite history in favour of the Bush administration and by so doing to influence the upcoming congressional elections. The whole exercise reeks to high heaven of partisanship and of Rove desperately calling in media industry favours . There are to be no ads other than a 20 minute break in the US broadcast for Bush to address the nation. It’s a primetime campaign gift, and also a demonstration of blatant partisanship and a clear misuse of the publicly- regulated airwaves.
So unfortunately for the BBC, it’s not just the libel. The show could even potentially fall foul of US campaign finance laws, as constituting in-kind Republican campaign support. Such contributions from overseas interests are illegal. Ooops.
Is that really what the BBC want to do? More to the point, is that what we the license payers want the BBC to do?
Contact the BBC here. Maybe volume of complaints might give them a clue.
Read more: BBC, ABC, Disney, 9/11, Anniversary, Miniseries, Defamation, Libel
Via Boingboing, comes the McDonalds Sign-O-Matic. Here’s my very own creation:
Have fun.
Read more: Internet, Widgets, Food Politics, Fast Food, Agitprop