Blunkett Commits Political Suicide!

by radical jonny Thu Dec 16, 2004 09:48 radicaljonny at yahoo dot ie

I'd love to believe that David Blunkett was desperately looking for a way to voice his secret opposition to Blair's Iraq policy, and resigned at the first opportunity that presented itself, but sorry...

Who are we kidding? He got caught doing what every cabinet minister probably does when they think no one's looking: he used his office and position for a personal perk.

Actually, wouldn't it have been great if he'd been thrown out of office for overseeing the illegal detention without trial of so many in British prisons for 'anti terror' issues?

Ah, to dream...

by Ali H. Thu Dec 16, 2004 09:50

It's a rather fitting end for the political career of the architect of the Blair Nanny-state that he fall on the sword of having fast-tracked the visa application of a nanny.

It's rather satisfying to see there is justice after all. The news has made my day!

by Brian Vernon Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:18

It's just the timing is a bit odd with the Law Lords ruling on the illegal detention of "foreign nationals" with links to un-named terrorist organistaions kicking off later today. Britain has recently been acused of Torture and Absue of Human Rights by the UN.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR450292004

by o as if Thu Dec 16, 2004 13:36

the resignation of David Blunkett will not immediately change the style of British interior policy.
Mr Blunkett, was appointed Home Secretary on 8 June 2001.
He resigned on December 15th 2004.
He was the first minister of a british cabinet who entered and left office blind. As such he didn't have to deal with the problems associated with VDU use and the modern age. He held "the line".

He thinks Mr Blair is one the greatest international politicians of the age.

He has resigned after the public furore caused by the attention thrown on what appears to have been an abusive relationship with a woman who did not share his power, resources or ability to talk.

I think they're all Great wankers.
Do us all a favour, & tell kids not to be politicians.
Councils, Public Bodies
Councillor, Sheffield City Council 1970-1988,
Chair, Social Services Committee 1976-80,
Seconded as Leader 1980-87;
Councillor, South Yorkshire County Council 1973-77;
Chair, Race Relations Forum
Electoral Notes
Contested Sheffield Hallam February 1974 general election. Member for Sheffield Brightside since 11 June 1987 general election
Spokesman
Opposition Spokesperson for Environment (Local Government) 1988-92
Parliamentary Career
Shadow Secretary of State for:
Health 1992-94,
Education 1994-95,
Education and Employment 1995-97;
Secretary of State for Education and Employment 1997-2001;
Home Secretary 2001-04
Backbench Committees
Member, Labour Party Departmental Committee for Education and Employment 1997-2001
Party groups
Member, Labour Party National Executive Committee 1983-98;
Labour Party: Vice-Chair 1992-93, Chair 1993-94
Special interests
Local and Regional Government, Education, Economic and Democratic Planning
Countries of Interest
France, USA
Region (GNN)
Yorkshire & Humbersid

by Michael Hennigan Thu Dec 16, 2004 16:35

So Ali H. and the Daily Mail are having a good day on the news of the downfall of David Blunkett.

One can disagree with some of the policies which Blunkett espoused but admire a rarity in modern public life - an individual who overcame both a serious physical disability and grinding poverty, following his father's death in an industrial accident.

by Barry Thu Dec 16, 2004 18:10

One would think this unfortunate set of circumstances and undoubted hardship faced by Blunkett would have given him some empathy with other people from similar backgrounds. Instead it seems to have left him a very bitter individual The man seems to have prided himself on outdoing even the likes of Michel Howard in the right-wing-loony stakes.

Im afraid I have no sympathy for his plight whatsoever. The man seems to have been intent on creating a police state as well as a nanny one. Something tells me hell not exactly end up on the dole.

As well as this his cabinets role in the illegal war and slaughter in Iraq makes him a war criminal, so no sympathy there either. To lose ones father at an early age, as well as to be disabled would, youd hope, make you think twice about other peoples plight. Blunkett obviously couldnt care less.

The only shame is he could help start an illegal war and not get in trouble, now hes caught out for something pretty minor, although corrupt, and hes in deep doo-doo. Sad state of affairs.

Plus he was a member of the British government which occupies part of this country, which makes him a scumbag any way so, tough.

by iosaf & the Guardian - (a former resident of the UK) Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:47

It is difficult to recall when a minister received such an unenviable baptism as Charles Clarke, in his first day as home secretary yesterday. The ferocity of the law lords' judgment against the catch-all 2001 Anti-terrorism Act - the government's "Guantánamo Bay" law, under which foreign terrorist suspects can be detained without charge or trial - was unprecedented. Remember this was only the second occasion in recent times that the law lords have sat as a panel of nine, rather than the usual five, because of the importance of the issue. They voted eight to one in declaring that detaining people indefinitely on suspicion alone contravened democratic rights and international obligations.

As Lord Hoffman noted, the case called into question "the very existence of an ancient liberty of which this country has until now been very proud: freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention". His conclusion could not have been more unequivocal or blunt: the act was a bigger threat to the nation than terrorism. We agree.

-------- Four suspects - including two in Broadmoor - have already, according to their lawyers, been made mad by the indeterminate nature of their detention and four more are seriously affected.--------

It is not just the law lords who have called for the scrapping of this law's draconian powers, but a joint parliamentary committee of privy counsellors set up by David Blunkett last year. It is time the suspects were prosecuted, or released and kept under strict surveillance.

Britain faced two decades of Irish terrorism without resorting to such oppressive powers. There is much greater technological capacity today for keeping people under surveillance than 20 years ago. Let us use it.

[read it all and other articles related to the ending of one of the most peculiar minister of the interior yet in our neighbouring collection of statelets quaintly named the UK. You might wonder does all that champagne popping air-traffic lead to any local influence on the Irish minister of the interior Mc Do Well]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1375479,00.html

If that whets your appetite you may like to read an account of the "Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001" which was the UK's equivalent to the "Patriot Act" (you remember the one nice Michael Moore megaphoned from the ice cream van).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1375732,00.html

If you're wondering why we in Ireland don't have "law Lords" it's because they left under suspicious circumstances a long time ago, probably as economic refugees, they're occassionally spotted being ineffectual at inquiries up north, or boating around the blaskets. You'll probably want to know how they made their decision that the UK (of which some people unkindly think Ireland is a satelite) was

- "the only country to opt out of the European human rights convention to allow foreign nationals to be locked up indefinitely without charge or trial, and with no right to be told of the evidence against them."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1375706,00.html
***********************

If you want to read the European Convention on Human Rights, go here-
http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html
http://www.europarl.eu.int/charter/default_en.htm
If you want to rent a video on Britian's record on Human rights, and it's use of terrorist laws, you could start with "The name of the Father".

If you want to rub salt into the wound.
you could send a copy of "The Name of The Father"
to
Rt. Hon. David Blunkett MP.
House of Commons,
London
SW1 1AA

.:. we do ancient stuff .:.

by identified - counted and weighed. Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:52

"Oh Englishman why do you never apologise to us?"
Apologies to Mr Blunkett for the vulgarity of some of the comments passed on your demise which referred to your disability. We cherish disability, and the diversity of Human Life and uphold equality for all regardless of Genome, Race, Creed, Age, Sex et cetera...

You long engaged in a project to introduce a DNA database in the UK and its possessions, shrouding such as an attempt to introduce "identity cards" and "make Britian more secure".

The UK has not respected international convention and European resolutions on genetic research.
We do not accept that the UK may be trusted with the colation and secure keeping of such information.
Mainstream opinion in Europe, where ID cards are ubiqitous and Genomic ethical convention is to be enshrined in the Constitution is against the *full and true* scope of the Blunkett / Clarke plans-

Español:

http://www.elperiodico.com/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=5&idioma=CAS&idnoticia_PK=173516&idseccio_PK=5&h=041221

Français:

http://www.humanite.presse.fr/journal/2004-12-20/2004-12-20-453317

Germany:

http://www.berlinonline.de/berliner-zeitung/politik/405764.html

Italy:

http://www.cdt.ch/interna.asp?idarticolo=56304

It has been revealed that Jack Straw HMG Minister of Foreign affairs, opposed in cabinet meetings the ID card introduction. Blunkett held a line, as long as the braile was true, he was less influenced by the VDU then the others. But in the end he did not see the wood for the dark dark forest.

Our methods of identification are sufficient to the needs of civil society, we must not endanger our future generations any more.

Goto the link below "get the point" then add an "i" to the main address word and "get another point".
Keep collecting points, and all your bar codes and proofs of purchase, and with your NI number, personal details and economic profile, internet cookie records, school reports, taped telephone calls, pillow chat, medical records, and so on go onto your God and say a big sorry for not counting sparrows and what you did to sheep.

the first such tattoo I saw like this, is worn (permanently) by a German Jew born in 1978. I got the point.

by iosaf Tue Dec 21, 2004 13:49

The British parliament which historically has caused us so much grief, has passed the Blunkett bill this morning. And the British public appear to wish Mr Blunkett to return to office in polls.

This is what the commons have passed-

* Setting up the national identity register - the key database of personal information that will underpin the ID card scheme - and defining what information can be stored on the database.
* Establishing privacy safeguards in order to limit the disclosure and use of personal information.
* Establishing new criminal offences and penalties for the possession of false identity documents, as well as for tampering with the contents of the national identity register.
* Enabling a future decision on making the scheme compulsory for all citizens. This provision could be brought in only following a vote in Parliament, and could only make it mandatory for all citizens to hold a card. The draft Bill, however, specifically prohibits making it compulsory to carry the card at all times.
* Enabling regulations to be made, once the ID card scheme is compulsory, to make the use of an ID card mandatory in order to provide proof of identity to access public services.

Meanwhile lots of ordinary people in the UK feel terrified by this, because its in their books and literature courses and science fiction movies, and not being a well balanced lot, they sort of worry.
Like jewish families in France who still pay the fine annually to the state rather than declare the amount of rooms they have in their home on the census report. Of course these fears are irrational, because modern politics has given us such nice people who will never never allow abuse of science, law or state like there was in the past.
But all the same these people worry, they feel "less secure" because of "more security".

Over in Eire, Mammy harney, who has invested quite a bit in biometric related research, is seeing the Pressie of Ireland today to explain why market forces alone in one of the EU richest economies are to care for our old, she may suggest just euthanasing them. After all they obviously failed the tests. They didn't fuck off, they didn't save, they weren't "elect" they probably lived like spongers off the state all their lives.

Hopefully the Irish will realise that they have the cash to give pensioners dignity and (ahem) they have a responsibility to give a good example to other states where state retirement homes are often little more than cheap hospices.

Tomorrow I'm joing the local grannies and grand-das of popular with tourists barcelona as they campaign for more than 290€ a month state pension, coz like the tourists pay that much to get a "really basic room and slog it" for the month and see all those memories of the war, and think about those brave people who survived the beginning of the conflict against the Nazis in Europe, and smile and think "it will never happen again". Thank you good people of that generation.