Crosspost: Nishaat Ismail
“I may have fallen but I am not broken.” These words of former Tower Hamlets Mayor Lutfur Rahman, who was removed from office last week after being found “guilty” of electoral fraud, were followed by fervent cheers and applauds from a room full of his supporters at a rally titled “Defend Democracy in Tower Hamlets” on Thursday night.
The event attracted an array of speakers from various organisations, who expressed their solidarity with ousted Rahman and the people of Tower Hamlets, with many of them describing the recent events in the east London borough as an “anti-democratic coup”.
Len McCluskey, the leader of Britain’s largest trade union and Labour’s biggest donor, also showed his support to Rahman.
This was conveyed through the union’s chief of staff, Andrew Murray, who described Judge Richard Mawrey’s decision as a “work of unabashed megalomania”.
Murray added that the judgement was as an “outrageous travesty of democracy” and an “undemocratic assault on the people of Tower Hamlets which was both racist and Islamophobic.”
Christine Shawcroft, a member of Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee (NEC) described last week’s judgement, and PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (PwC) report as “subjective meaningless drivel”, and pleaded the audience to support an appeal on the verdict for the “future generation.”
“There is a great deal of con in neocon ideology”
I have discussed and expounded the retroviral neoconservative thinking penetrating the heart of Whitehall in several blogs now. I have also discussed elsewhere the practical interplay between Zionists, neocons, corporations and the government. The immoral, deep-rooted neoconservative impact on fiscal policies from a philosophic perspective is a discussion which has thus far eluded me.
With David Cameron continually assuring the good people of Britain that “we” need to stick to an economic plan that “works”, despite the many failures of the current strategy, not to mention scathing criticism of the “trickledown economics” from a leading think-tank, the Conservative party, beneath the shallow, exoteric rhetoric continues to unveil its higher priority: corporations. Peeling back recent happenings reveals the distinct duplicitous traits of neoconservatism, thus allowing me to touch upon the “con” in neocon tactics in the economic context.
Influencing Voting Through Deception
The political dirt of buying influence is well known: some peerages are granted to individuals who in turn scratch the back of the parties when required. Ultimately, party donors and said peers can exert influence on legislation which may ultimately benefit them, or rather, their coffers. The cash for honours scandal of 2006/7 comes to mind.
With elections nigh, Cameron’s party has been using its peerage and donor connections to the full in what seems like a corrupt attempt to “influence” voters through deception.
Sunday evening I received a link to an article in my inbox: “Trojan Horse 2”, it read. I hoped it was a trailer for an unoriginal sequel to the Troy, or even perhaps a remake of the Brad Pitt version, probably starring Michael Gove as Menelaus whose wife gets stolen and Michael Wilshaw as Agamemnon, his warmongering elder brother.
Nope. It was another derogatory reference to Muslims as a fifth column supposedly brainwashing children and another Muslim majority area under “investigation”, as the Times reported:
“Tower Hamlets is expected to be the next Birmingham”
The report also stated,
“According to government sources, officials at the Department for Education (DfE) are concerned that the situation may be worse than that uncovered in the “Trojan Horse” scandal earlier this year”.
I wonder if those sources come from the counter extremism department set up by Michael Gove, whose “expert consultants” with regards to the extremism are the Quilliam Foundation, incidentally supported by Gove?
Richard Kerbaj, Murdoch and Corruption
Another interesting point I have noticed is the Times was amongst the first to peddle the Trojan Hoax lies back in March 2014 and the author of that piece was Richard Kerbaj (and Sian Griffiths). Their articles cited “Whitehall officials” then as they have done now. Michael Gove wrote for the Times, whilst his wife, Sarah Vine, was also a writer for the neocon propaganda outfit and now is a columnist for the Daily Fail. Michael Gove is “close mates” with Rupert Murdoch too and incidentally, Murdoch happened to move Richard Kerbaj to the Times paper. It therefore, doesn’t take a genius to work who that “Whitehall official” may have been. Perhaps Peter Clarke should be called into look into this “orchestrated plot” to continue pushing a neoconservative agenda at the expense of the Muslim minority.