AIRSTRIP ONE

MAY NEWS SURF:

• EU SET TO REGULATE BRITISH BANKS
• BRITISH COMPANIES FORCED INTO EURO
• FEDERALISTS TEST THE WATER
• VOTING FOR DUMMIES?
• RIGGING ELECTIONS

Hi, I'm Jim...
Know me as Gemineye Jim or Jim Gemineye. Anything, as long as it's not Jim Gemineye chéri !

On the other hand, Eric is a nice name..

BLAIR'S MILLENNIUM

Eric Blair wrote the book 1984 using the pen name GEORGE ORWELL. Like all good science fiction 1984 dealt not so much with fanciful illusions about the future, but about his own perceptions of his time (1948). Writers sometimes have to use outlandish contexts in order to break the barriers of preconceptions that readers put up. However, in creating this new context, he explored several ideas that we could apply to other eras and also see come to fruition in this new millennium.

• Telescreen - we thought this was his view of the new medium of TV being used to brainwash the masses. That was before digital TV came along. Digital TV will evolve - it will be on all the time, it will be two way - the TV in the bedroom will have to go.
• Newspeak - Didn't quiet get this right. The idea was destroy the ability to express unorthodox ideas by destroying the language required to communicate them. This was done by simplification. Well, if anything, language has become even more complex. But some might argue that corruption of words like cool and wicked accomplish the same thing as Newspeak. On the other hand with the creation of a ‘drug culture' do you need Newspeak? If you're on the right drugs you can drivel on for hours without saying anything meaningful - let alone radical.
• Chocolate rations - Not quite sure why chocolate rations figured so much in Orwell's vision. It was used as a kind of reward or punishment. If news was bad, chocolate rations were reduced - if news was good, chocolate rations were increased. It was as if the people were held to blame for events in Airstrip One, We don't have chocolate rations now - but we do have interest rates.

Airstrip One was the new name for England or Britain under the regime of Big Brother.

Welcome to a different kind of spin... it's less gassy and leaves no bitter after-taste.

You are listening to
Brazil Samba

I ask questions like that when it's one of those 'morning after' months.

FREE TRADE or SLAVE TRADE?

WILL HE EVER BECOME A REAL PRIME MINISTER

The answer is a firm NO. It's nothing personal, no one who follows in Blair's footsteps can become a real Prime Minister. The Maastricht Treaty has seen to that.

The Maastricht Treaty and subsequent amendments have all laid down the law on what needs to be done, all the Prime Minister has to do is follow orders. No wonder Tony Blair avoids question time in the commons and rides roughshod over Parliamentary procedure. It must all seem a bit pointless to poor old Tony.

A problem arises when trying to prove the above proposition.
Picture this...

A well known mobster, Geppetto Bruges, requires a dirty deed done. Does he do this himself? No, he turns to an expendable underling, Toni Baloney, and say's something like "I think a certain problem needs solving, know what I mean?". And Mr Baloney says "Yeah boss!".
If Toni Baloney ever gets caught, it's his head on the block. Geppetto Bruges knows nothing about it. At least that's what he tells the reporters.

And that's the way the Maastricht Treaty works - it states what European States must aim for, it leaves the the dirty work of creating the Bills that implement those aims to the various European Governments.

Trying to prove an 'EU' motive for a particular bill or amendment to a bill is not easy. You can be sure everyone knows it's a 'rubber stamped' Euro bill that MUST pass through Parliament, but getting MP's to admit it is something else.

A sense of perspective: the word MUNICIPAL in the Maastricht Treaty means local to EU government - NOT local to National Governments. The British Parliament - the Mother of Parliaments - has become a municipal council.

THE MORNING AFTER!

It was Ken this, Ken that, Ken everything in the British press last month. May 4 was going to be an exciting date, no time to think about what to wear! All that democracy - intoxicating stuff. But it seems to have gone straight to my head. Sober bystanders tried to warn me, but would I listen? No. Charisma and newts had swayed me - that and the opportunity to make that Tony jealous...

Then I wake up in the morning and cry "what have I done!!!"

You've probably guessed that I made that up. But Ken Livingstone's remarks on Euro just two days before the election must have had much the same effect on Euro sceptics and anti-globalists who supported him - at least for those who noticed the remarks.

How does Ken square his anti-globalist feelings with Euro Federalism? - For to pledge support to the Euro is to pledge support to globalism.

Robert DeNiro as Harry Tuttle prepares to strike terror in those tiny pumps you get at the bottom of refrigerators.

HARMONISATION WITH BRAZIL

Tony Blair has stated that what happened on May 1st would never happen again. It's a promise he can keep, the new Prevention of Terrorism Act will see to it.

In Terry Gilliam's film ‘Brazil' we found a world where heating engineers who ignored Health & Safety regulations were branded terrorists and those arrested had to pay for their own interrogation. I guess Gilliam thought it surreal and funny at the time. Now it just looks a bit too scary.

The new Act will see to a lot of things.
Here are a few extracts of the Bill as it was in May:

Clause 1, The definition of terrorism - "means the use of violence for political, religious or ideological ends, and includes any use of violence for the purpose of putting the public or any section of the public in fear" - the EXPLANATORY notes also imply that this not only includes threatening behaviour or vandalism, but also non-violent actions or expression of ideas that simply make people feel threatened.

Clause 3, Allows government to proscribe any organisation as a terrorist one if the government decides it merits the definition in clause 1.

Clause 15 - 17, covers fund raising and using money for proscribed organisations - better cancel that subscription to Greenpeace or FoE, before anyone starts to feel threatened by them (like the bio-tech corporations).

There are many other clauses covering powers of arrest, seizure of property and funds (payment for the interrogation?), procedures for appeals etc. However, many of the clauses in this bill seem quite reasonable - until you remember that all important definition of terrorism in clause 1.

When you put this into context with other proposed legislation like abolition of right to trial by jury and double jeopardy - you just have to wonder why so many powerful people think harmonisation with the rest of Europe is such a wonderful thing

From the Amsterdam amendments to the Maastricht Treaty: "...the Union's objective shall be to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an area of freedom, security and justice by developing common action among the Member States in the fields of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters...". This also covers terrorism (they don't define it). But let it not be said that the EU dictates what bills are pushed through our parliament.

The fragmented nature of the Treaty, there is yet another piece to be added in Nice this year, means it's easy to miss the fact that even xenophobia is labelled a crime now - I assume offenders will be dragged into Room 101 to be confronted with their worst fears - spiders, rats, foreigners - that sort of thing.

If there's anyone called Archibald Buttle out there, be afraid... be very afraid.