Simon Heffer thinks Al Qaeda Have got guts

Simon doesn't like the idea that we should negotiate with Al Qaeda. You know, he is right about that, but being Simon idiocy will out:

Al-Qa'eda is far more threatening to us than the IRA ever was, for three reasons. First, its network of supporters is vast. Second, and as a consequence, it has better recourse to funding and weaponry. Third, it lacks the IRA's sheer cowardice. No republican was prepared to blow himself up on an aircraft, a Tube train or a bus in order to inflict heavy casualties on the innocent. All too many militant Islamists seem happy to do just that.

It's the 'sheer cowardice' bit that makes no sense. It does not take a suicide bomber to blow up aircraft, tube trains or buses. Al Qaeda's carnage on the Madrid train system in 2004 did not require a suicide bomber, neither did the IRA's massacre in Omagh. Suicide bombing has nothing to do with operational effectiveness and everything to do with a death cult that fixates on self-immolation. The IRA's unwillingness, in most cases, to slaughter civilians in large numbers had nothing to do with a dislike for suicide or 'cowardice', and more with a considered view on the likely political effect of their actions. They knew that wholesale slaughter of men, women and children would be counter-productive. Al Qaeda's mix of religion and politics leads them to think differently; and that's it. Neither have any moral courage and Simon's seeming admiration for the most vicious of our enemies is actually quite disturbing.

Left commentators go mad

Johann Hari is joining a number of others on the Left who have decided that the game is up with Brown, Conservative victory at the next General Election is now inevitable and that the best course of action is to implement a hard left agenda without regard to the consequences.

The reality is that if a Labour government decided, as policy, to ignore the electorate and push up taxes, 'price SUVs off the road' and allow vast new immigration then it would not just lose the next election, it would be the last Labour government ever. What would the campaign slogan be, 'We don't care what you think?' or 'So what?'. As political advice goes this is actually a bit bonkers and it suggests that Hari and is cohorts actually have no clue about, well, anything much. The point of representative politics is to balance the concerns of the electorate with the national interest and a vision for a better society. If you deliberately detach from the electorate then they will vote for someone else. A Labour government that effectively told the voters to shove off would not just lose, it would be obliterated.

Hmm...maybe Hari has a point.

Interesting article by Matthew d'Ancona on Brown

Matthew d'Ancona is not quite as smart as he appears to think he is, at least based on his writings to date. However, his article in today's Telegraph is an excellent analysis of the state of Labour. In particular he hits upon Brown's coronation as the pivotal failing. By not having a leadership contest, Labour put off any debate about its future as a movement and as a government. Instead they let Brown and his cronies bully them into not even putting up another candidate, when the fact that the man was even doing that said volumes about him as a potential leader. In contrast, the effect of Conservative leadership contests has been beneficial, each time moving the Party on in terms of ideas. The last contest arrived at unexpected new thinking from an unexpected new leader, and that has sort of worked out. Now Labour are trying to rethink on the go, with a leader who has never even been tested by his own Party much less the country. How did they get here? Because too many of their MPs rolled over under pressure from the coterie that surround the PM.

They have only themselves to blame.

Basildon Labour bad at maths

I've just noticed that the website for the Labour Group on the Council has the current state of the parties at 27 Conservatives and 12 Labour. Actually it's 29 Conservatives to 10 Labour. Do keep up.

Labour's not funny

Yesterday, the Labour party asked the voters of Crewe and Nantwich to vote for them because they despised some of our fellow citizens and some visitors to our country. To their credit, and Labour's shame, the electors saw through race and class-baiting and deserted Labour in droves. It was a disgusting Labour campaign and many of their own people have been saying so. The only rational explanation is that they knew that they were going to lose, but by running a poisonous 'core-vote' strategy they hoped to limit the damage. It says a lot about how they view their own core vote, but I am glad it not only didn't work, it was a disaster.

Now they are saying that it was all about introducing a note of humour into the election. Well I have news for them. Hate isn't remotely funny.

New Look Council

Full Council last night for the first time in the new St. George's room at the Basildon Centre. This is part of our general refurbishment of the Council offices at the Council staff move out of Church Walk House elsewhere in Basildon Town Centre and I think all would agree that the new room is much better. It has decent air-conditioning for starters, unlike the old sweat-box.

The St. George's name continues the general theme of Britishness and Englishness that we have sought to promote for Basildon. This is quite concious, we have all seen the symbols of our nation hijacked by the far-Right in the past and we are determined to take the back. I do believe that this is one of the things that has helped to keep the BNP down in Basildon. They work by trying to portray themselves as the sole custodians of patriotism, but that argument is difficult to make when the Conservative Council flies the Union Flag and the Cross of St.George from the Council offices every day of the year. So, far there are no BNP Councillors in Basildon, which is very good for community relations, and for the operation of the Council. While I am not a particular fan of Labour and the Liberal Democrats I think that we are all united in our especial detestation of the BNP. Keeping them out means that we can keep an all-party cabinet and that debate in the Council has as its background a basic commitment to equality and respect for all of the groups in our community. Frankly, Basildon District does not need those Nazis.

The meeting itself was pretty routine, except for one Labour Councillor who raised a number of ridiculous points of order about an item that everyone agreed about anyway. Having made his speeches he then voted for the matter, leaving everyone wondering why he had bothered. If there is a real concern about agendas then it is reasonably straightforward to bring these up with the Council officers before the meeting, instead of putting on a show in public. Labour were a bit down though, but I don't blame them for that. While we were talking the Crewe and Nantwich byelection was drawing to a close. This was a disaster for Labour and most of them must realise by now that Brown is simply not up to the job. It also raises the question about the moral responsibility of those MPs who nominated him for the Labour leadership, because they must have known that he couldn't hack it. The only question now is if they have the intelligence to dump him before he destroys their party. I actually hope that they get rid of him. Never mind the politics, Britain should not be led by a such an incompetent, regardless of Party.

I never liked Tony Blair, but I was never embarrassed that he was our Prime Minister.

Brown to face Challenge?

The Labour party is holding its breath waiting for the result of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election. If they lose, and the last poll showed them trailing by 13 points, then a bout of bloodletting is to be expected.

The first issue will be the divisive 'toff' campaign that has seen Labour pushing class war and xenophobia as the main reasons for people to vote for them. This has already caused disquiet among many Labour people because of its small-minded appeal to the worst instincts of voters, but they have been muted by the need to hold things together for the campaign. Do not expect that to continue if Labour fail in Crewe. Then the gloves will come off and the recriminations will be bitter. It is one thing to lose an election, but quite another to lose the moral direction that is meant to characterise your party. One rumour is that it was Stephen Carter, Brown's management consultant, who came up with the 'toff' wheeze. Certainly someone will have to take the fall. As a former parliamentary candidate myself, I can’t help but wonder what Ms. Dunwoody is playing at. Losing is one thing, but losing with this campaign cannot but kill off any sort of political career she may hoped to have had. If she were as independent as her mum then she would have told Labour HQ to shove off when they came up with their poisonous ideas.

The second issue is Brown himself. If Labour lose badly then the rumour is that a coup is planned. However, the buzz on the Internet is not about Charles Clarke, rather Alan Milburn as the assassin. Labour rules make a challenge to a sitting PM very difficult in theory, but in practice a succession of MPs calling on Brown to go could force the issue, especially if any of the cabinet were involved.

Whatever happens the elephant in the room is that the Labour party is broke. Tony Blair mortgaged their future in the 2005 general election campaign and then bowed out leaving Brown with empty coffers. Brown is not a good fundraiser and even if he survives politically, keeping him at the helm may mean the end of the party as a going financial concern. This is serious stuff by the way; Brown's ineptitude has cost the party the broad-based support that it needs to rebuild as a functioning political entity. It is this sort of convergence of events that can do for a political movement: no money, poor leadership and, worst of all, a political narrative that is out of touch with most of the electorate. By ditching the New Labour coalition, Labour could contract back into a party of the working class. Except that the working class, as measured by those people in NRS Social Grade Definitions C2DE, only makes up about 44% of the population. If your electoral strategy starts by only appealing to less than half of the population before you have even started competing with other parties then you are never likely to be a party of government, and that means that many good people interested in public service will find another berth.

Labour's best bet is to find another leader who can raise money and who wants to keep them in the political mainstream. Much more of the class war stuff and Nick Clegg will be leading Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition in a couple of general elections.

Simon Heffer casts aside his former hero

Simon Heffer has come to a realisation in his latest column:

1. Labour are in government and have been for some time.
2. They aren't very good.
3. The only way to remove them is to support the Conservatives.
   

Previously Simon's line on UK politics has been that Labour in general and Gordon Brown in particular were quite impressive. His love for Gordon Brown was quite evident on September 5th 2007:

Mr Brown is doing so well not because he has better policies than his rivals (insofar as his rivals have any), but because he is a better politician than any of them.

There was also a continuing theme in Simon's work that the Conservatives, and especially David Cameron, were basically crap, to the point that they represented no improvement on the current government. However, Brown's unfunded £2.7 billion tax fiddle to buy off his own backbenchers seems finally to have punctured Simon's illusions. In truth Brown's actions are quite appalling. Adding to the national debt in this way will also add to inflation, which will in turn keep interest rates high, which will hurt the whole economy. At the same time he is doing that he is at war with public sector workers because he needs to keep their wages down so as not to increase the national debt and so add to inflation. So the government is operating a wholly contradictory policy, which will cause nothing but grief in the medium to long term. But Brown does not care about the medium to long term, he cares about next week at Crewe and Nantwich because if he loses the by-election there, he may be out of a job. So, hang the economy, my survival is more important. This leads Simon to say:

We must hope the electors of Crewe and Nantwich make this point forcefully next Thursday, and throw the bribe back in his face.

The only way to do that of course is to vote Conservative. Any other vote and Labour wins, and so Simon is finally getting with the programme. It is also an interesting sign. For the Conservatives to win a General Election they need people who are not natural supporters, like Simon, to decide that they are the best route to oust Labour. The signs are that many people have reached the same point in the road as Simon. Next he will be giving David Cameron some credit for getting the Conservatives into a potentially winning position. I wonder how long we will have to wait for that?

Racist Labour message on Local Party Website

For anyone who doubted the story about the racist Labour leaflet, here it is on the website of the Crewe and Nantwich Labour party. However, I bet that it won't be there very long, especially in the mainstream media pick up on it. To their credit, Labour activists on the Labourhome blog aren't too impressed either.

Unbelievable Labour By-election Leaflet

I lifted this from Guido, but it is so appalling that I couldn't but comment. The first two points are sheer class war. This leaflet has apparently gone out in the poorer parts of Crewe and what they are trying to sell to the worst off there is the idea that if someone is economically successful then they cannot be in politics. Of course it won't go out in Crewe's richer areas and this is from a party whose former leader has just bought a £3.5 million house. Labour don't really believe this stuff any more, but they think it will appeal to the narrow prejudice of a segment of the electorate and so they are happy to run with it. This is simply dishonest.

The next point is an interesting counterpoint to Labour's claims that crime is falling. Unless there is some particular crime wave in Crewe fuelled by specific local incompetence then they are again not saying what they believe and trying to convince that public safety has nothing to do with the Labour government. This is simply dishonest.

Then comes the direct lift from the BNP's approach to political campaigning. The 'foreign nationals' thing is a direct appeal to xenophobia, and of course they don't mention that everyone gets an ID card under Labour, not just foreigners. This is not just dishonest, this is reprehensible. Labour, the master non-racists, unless it increases their chances of winning a by-election when they are happy to take lessons from Nick Griffin.

The last point is just a flat-out lie. There is no Conservative policy to cut funding for schools and children's centres.

So, there we have it, vote Labour for lies and racism. No doubt this is what Gordon Brown calls listening and leading.