And Now for the News that Matters

After all, having a 200lb issue that “matters” hanging under his nose for over a month now must be taking a toll as he strains to look every which way to avoid it.

The issue, of course, is Andrew Maguire’s disclosure of systemic fraud perpetrated by the usual suspect banksters in the gold and silver futures market.

Now Peston will need to redouble his efforts in looking the other way as the SEC probes six major Wall Street banks for evidence they “mislead investors”. Not that anyone needs any further evidence to notice the jumbo neon sign at the summit of a mountain of corruption blinking, “Bloody Obvious!”

The list of guilty parties, let’s dispense with pretentious words such as alleged considering we are talking about the same old gang, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Citigroup Inc, Deutsche Bank AG, UBS AG, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc reads like roll call at a mobster’s convention and indeed it is.

This malignant and execrable cabal that has hijacked the global economy and looted trillions from humanity will now deploy a steaming horde of the world’s most unscrupulous ambulance chasers to defend their spray-on honour. And of course they’ll prevail because that’s just how it works in these enlightened times.

Gatekeepers like Robert Peston who apologise for gangsters like Goldman Sachs inflict a terrible harm on our society in addition to the fundamental toll caused by the great banking scam. Consider the sight of half the population of the western world wandering around in a delusional state worshipping new heroes like Obama or the cynical “change” coalition spewed up by the UK election. How were these people so thoroughly misled and for such a sustained period of time?

That’s correct, they have been listening to worm-tongues like Robert Peston.

Most of us don’t even suspect the nature of the problems we face, it appears. People like Peston are afforded gravity and authority rather than being laughed and then angrily chased out of the room. Little surprise the banksters can pull off daylight robbery.

The victims of the mass media all worry how the privileged hens shall be aligned in the coup whilst the fox walks through them taking bites from each. We all have to take the pain, advise the banksters’ political and media friends. Nobody must ever mention the fox.

Getting back to the terribly troublesome Andrew Maguire, I suppose he’d be a post apocalyptic Chicken Licken rushing around the silly old hens warning them the sky had long fallen and the heavens were on the way down too.

Cluck, cluck, cluck says Peston as he forces another dose of conventional wisdom from his overtaxed and swollen rectum. Bonds will hold up, the hedge funds are secure, house prices are improving, the recovery is surging ahead, it’s a boom, it’s a bust, treat all the symptoms but never admit to the cancer.

Even so, he won’t be able to forever distract you from the teeth sinking into your groin. “Peston Shocker – The Banks are Corrupt! Who could have known?”

There’s a huge and long running global scandal exploding around our ears yet for now Peston remains confident of the mainstream machine’s ability to airbrush it all away. When will he realise that closing his eyes won’t make Andrew Maguire or the record of the banksters disappear?

We need a better media, a media that informs and acts as a warning when the powerful exceed the bounds of their already lavish entitlement. We need a media that doesn’t entertain the likes of Robert Peston.

And it’s not just Peston but all the gatekeepers who examine the dots but studiously fail to connect them. These hacks and repeaters are detrimental to an informed public that would be a genuine antidote to the corrupt political system and global criminal corporate network. We need to make them invisible rather than the whistleblowers.

That would be a change worth getting excited about.

You have to hand it to the mainstream media. The control it has exerted over the general election coverage these past few weeks is a wonder to behold. A beautifully executed con job that has left nothing to chance.

Certainly what the TV presenters, interviewers, commentators and news anchors have achieved, along with their counterparts in the press, is unethical, immoral, corrosive to democracy and the idea of liberty and wholly harmful to the people of this nation. But it can’t be denied they have managed to massage an angry and vengeful electorate into a compliant and misdirected mass, on the TV screens at least.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/ or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” – Joseph Goebbels

The media prepared the pre-election ground with a campaign of fear based around the ludicrous prospect of the BNP suddenly gaining mass appeal. The message went forth that rejection of the mainstream parties represented a wasted vote or worse, an open door for extremism and fringe politics.

This was presented with a straight face as if it is possible to conceive a more extreme or crackpot outcome than the thirteen years we have suffered under New Labour.

Which “fringe” party advocated illegal war against helpless civilians and the transferral of power to casino gangsters in the City of London followed by a trillion pound bailout when the inevitable consequences unfolded? Which “extremist” party suggested empowering busybodies on the government payroll to root through rubbish bins or inspect the contents of refrigerators to ensure insane behavioural engineering diktats are obeyed? Who built the surveillance state and wants to go further with a control freak agenda that would delight and impress Adolf Hitler or the old Stalinists but leaves civil rights campaigners and libertarians shuddering and fearful for the future?

Say what you like about the BNP (and most if it is deserved) but nothing is more loony than the loony left. Yet everyone else is the madman according to a media that has played along with barely a whimper of protest, barring your cartoon Littlejohn types who are offered up as confirmation the alternative view is brash and dangerous.

Thirteen years of abuse piled upon abuse is a history vanished down the memory hole, unquestioned by political pundits like Nick Robinson who delight in the statistics of the fast approaching kick-off but never stop to consider what the game is all about. Politics as sport is their business and they come armed with fancy graphics and jarring music to blast away sober observations or awkward questions.

Even Stella Rimington, former MI5 chief, has warned against the remorseless rise of the police state – the police themselves complaining of political excess and agendas that run contrary to the beliefs upon which this nation is supposedly built. We hear nothing of this in the so-called debates sandwiched between the spinning logos and prime time advertisements.

But despite the array of tools at their disposal the “experts” can’t spin away what is obvious to even the most uninformed voter, Labour’s turn at playing government has been a disaster of epic proportions. Neither have the talking heads been able to attach significant appeal to the eternally grey David Cameron who has been engineered too precisely to the extent he evokes memories of the widely hated Tony Blair.

Pumping up the profile of the Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg was a master stoke born from necessity and has paid off surely even beyond the mainstream’s wildest expectations. Clegg and his not so secretly fractured party offer nothing but a cosmetic reconfiguration of the traditional two party system and indeed it could be argued their policies are the most detrimental in terms of our liberty and prosperity. You may recall, though the fact has been purged from the discussion, the Liberal Democrats are determined to see us consumed entirely by the anti-democratic and instinctively authoritarian European Union.

Clegg is a lightening conductor for the public rage. The establishment feared a meltdown this election. They fretted at the prospect of the disillusioned and disgusted public rejecting the corruption now clearly exposed in Westminster by turning to genuine alternatives or staying at home.

The solution to rising public resentment has been the packaging and marketing of Nick Clegg, offered for sale as the much demanded change the people yearn for. Yet an examination of his policies on the key issues unmasks him as just another clone tightly bound to the establishment agenda. More government, more control, more taxes, less liberty. This is the “Liberal” Democrat and this is your “alternative” on May 6th.

Certainly on the trivial issues made monumental by media misdirection, such as meaningless proposals for electoral reform, Clegg is singing a different tune. He has big ideas on how to cement beyond removal the utterly crooked and perverted manner in which detached and self-interested puppets for the corporate elite are ushered into bureaucratic prominence.

In reality Clegg has nothing serious to say about bringing the decision making process closer to the man in the street. In an age of technology you might think it is possible to refer to the governed more than once every five years, especially on such huge and far reaching issues as deeper integration with the Europeans.

TV reality shows can organise snap referenda in real time having engaged the audience on a weekly basis thus provoking informed choice. Politicians can’t even honestly inform us through their shady and double-dealing manifestos. The detached “lifer” bureaucrats in parliament and the civil service believe an endorsement every half decade is perfectly sufficient, they go as far as to suggest democracy is threatened when left to the public opinion. You’ve heard them make this remarkable claim every time the idea of genuine public engagement is suggested.

Few, I suppose, would enjoy a parliament run by phone-in vote but this isn’t the point. What matters is the politicians believe the only workable system is a non-representative free hand for them until it comes time to spew a new set of lies and half truths at election time.

The fact the British public was not allowed to voice an opinion when our nation was signed away to the Europeans is staggering. This act alone proves our present form of government is far removed from the democratic principle and more akin to a plutocracy. An important discussion point, you might imagine, but it hasn’t rated a mention during the election campaign with the only party prepared to speak about it, UKIP, thrown to the sidelines and starved of media coverage.

A similar blackout has occurred in relation to the expenses scandal. Of course it has not been possible for the media and politicians to completely ignore the public backlash. Instead the three parties have all agreed to hold their hands up and have promised tighter self-regulation. A handful of the worst offenders have been thrown to the lions, ironically at the public expense. This, all three parties agree, is sufficient recompense for stealing from our wallets at a time when the banks are signing off on our generation spanning poverty.

These politicians all stand in a palace and refer to each other as “honourable” men and women. Even though the evidence indicates the opposite, there are no plans for any of the parties to look deeper into how the whole Westminster bubble operates and maintains itself.

The inescapable but unmentioned conclusion is that politics more and more attracts those most unsuited to public service. It lures dishonest nest featherers who act according to their club affiliation rather than the common good. When caught betraying the public trust they investigate themselves, reprimand themselves, it’s a closed shop.

The expenses scandal informs us beyond argument our politicians are corrupt and our political system is rotten. Now these same miscreants stand before us and tell us they have changed. What do you expect a liar to say when caught red handed? He’ll tell a lie, of course.

These “honourable” men collude with the media and propose criminals and conmen are the best we can hope for come election day. No other options have been granted air time or column inches. This is it, this is your government, this is your media. The overriding issue analysed (to death) is whether one corrupt party will dominate or if they’ll all get a “fair” crack at the trough.

Our politicians are murderers and war criminals too, not that you would know it from the media coverage. Certainly Afghanistan has had plenty of controlled exposure. The debate has been carefully distilled to an unapologetic argument about who will provide the most resources to our imperial forces so they can further destroy a nation far away. Oil and gas contracts for the big corporations is not newsworthy because motive is never considered.

The media rambles about a sham democracy confined to a few square miles in Kabul whilst Afghanistan continues to be the bloodied plaything of profiteers in glass towers in London, Washington and New York.

The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is publicly justified by the events of September 11th, 2001. Based on a proclamation rather than a proper investigation it has been decided an ex-CIA operative and his Taliban friends, who were tolerated until they refused to play ball in handing over their nation’s resources to the west, were responsible for 911 and a “just” and “moral” penalty is the death and destruction of the Afghan people and infrastructure respectively.

The hunt for bin Laden has long ceased to be an issue, ever since he was allowed to escape when cornered – so the story goes. The Taliban, once defeated, are the main focus now. Apparently if we don’t keep fighting over there they will all come and fight us over here. The easy interchangeability of manufactured boogie-men provides the ever present threat useful for policy makers at home and the lucrative opportunities for our big brand companies in the war zones.

If it’s not Al-Qaeda it’s the Taliban or Saddam or the “new Hitler” in Iran. Enemies that have no record whatsoever of having targeted our nation prior to us deciding to bomb them and steal their national resources. Yet the mainstream media is happy to confirm the lie, they hate us because we are free.

How many Afghans have paid the price of this lie is unknown because we don’t count the corpses. What we do know is there is no end in sight to the carnage nor the monetary expenditure at a time when we are told we have no money left to spend. Gordon Brown has been boasting about extending expenditure way beyond any estimations offered when we decided to follow along with tail wagging behind the American war machine.

None of the mainstream approved parties suggest reviewing our commitments overseas and the media hasn’t pressed them. It is silently implied the war in Afghanistan will continue without question or exit strategy.

Worse still is the sordid history of our engagement in Iraq. This issue has been airbrushed out of the campaign entirely. Our nation (or the fathers, sons and daughters of a portion of it) went to war based on the lies told by our political leaders and at least hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of human beings have been murdered as a result.

Four million Iraqis have been reduced to refugee status. Our crazed warmongers boasted they would bomb Iraq back to the stone age and they have delivered on that promise. Regime change and nation building are now the norm and International law is only ever applicable to the other guy.

All the parties strain to heap praise on “our boys” over there who do a marvellous job building nations for Johnny Foreigners who, thanks to previous and similarly disastrous imperial interventions, have failed to build viable states of their own accord. History is parcelled up into detached segments which are then switched in and out according to the demands of the imperial agenda. The media sells each new justification for aggression without a blush.

Iraq is a crime of such magnitude it can scarcely be comprehended, the ultimate war crime of the type we determined to hold Germany accountable for at the conclusion of World War II but for which we now throw away our own laws because we are the aggressor. Behind the scenes the resources of Iraq are silently signed away to Shell and Exxon Mobil, the media ignore the dots that beg to be connected and studiously avoids the repeated patterns that scream of a guiding hand behind these “fateful” events.

The war criminal Tony Blair walks free, in this country at least, and lines his pockets explaining to paying audiences how he would commit his crimes again even though his lies about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction have long since been exposed. The war criminal Gordon Brown, who wrote out the cheques, has been rewarded by promotion to the highest office without seeking any endorsement from the electorate. He is so detached from morality or the fundamentals of justice he has the nerve to run for office again and the media plays along by averting their eyes from his blood soaked past.

In eight hours of televised debate Brown remained unchallenged on his criminal past by the other two candidates. Clegg is fond of using the term “illegal” to describe the invasion and occupation of Iraq but he shuns the next obvious step by failing to associate the policy of prominent British politicians with the illegal act. If a crime has been committed is it not usual to ask who committed that crime and attempt to bring them to justice?

For Clegg the word “illegal” is useful as a campaigning device but it’s plain enough he’d rather not push things further. That’s because he sat in the same parliament as the war criminals and is tarnished by association. He may not have voted for war but he observed the criminal behaviour anyway and did nothing other than show his total commitment to our invading forces once the killing spree commenced. At Nuremberg such a defence resulted in hanging. In modern Britain, regardless of the scale of the crime, the greatest threat to our politicians is banishment to a lucrative boardroom safe from public scrutiny.

Of course David Cameron overtly supported the aggression against Iraq, a fact you may (despite the media silence) still recall.

Perhaps the most glaring omission by the mainstream media in the coverage of this election is the unprecedented fraud conducted by the banks against not just the people of Britain but the entire planet.

Much like the expenses scandal the media would have you believe the underlying problems in the banking system lie with corrupt individuals rather than an inherently corrupt model. Gatekeepers like Robert Peston of the BBC will dutifully relay the latest news that Goldman Sachs stands accused of criminal behaviour but they aren’t disposed to laying out the whole laundry list of crimes attributable to these banksters. And there are many on record.

For those who aren’t afraid of digging where journalists never tread it quickly becomes apparent the banks are a cancer that has eaten away at global economies and hence our personal prosperity for centuries. Boom and bust is the tell-tale sign of the real banking function.

Originally designed to safeguard gold deposits the bankers learned they could cheat their customers by issuing paper promises against those deposits but in amounts that far outweighed the physical quantity of gold in the vaults. Eventually the banksters persuaded kings, queens and politicians this fraud was beneficial to the economy and so fractional reserve banking, a euphemism for counterfeiting, was born.

This crime is now so ingrained in modern economic models most observers sing loudly about the overall benefits of allowing a few individuals to prosper by repeatedly diluting the wealth of their victims. It is proposed that capital driven economics (capital being a euphemism for debt) builds long term prosperity and were it not for fractional reserve banking and the fiat currency (money created from thin air and backed by nothing of tangible value) mankind would have progressed at a slower pace.

Never mind that every bubble must burst if it is inflated sufficiently. Set aside that slavery is the underlying price of the bankster economy as well as the horror of war and a world where a third of the population battles obesity whilst the rest of humanity starves to death. Out of sight, out of mind is the real magic formula behind the first world miracle.

The final nail in the coffin of a free and prosperous humanity arrived when control of the money supply was taken from the state and handed to the banksters. This allowed the latter to cyclically inflate the money supply, thereby expanding the public debt, and then reduce it causing defaults and the transfer of tangible assets to the banks in settlement for debts they had written using money pulled from thin air. Thus their risk was cut to zero and their return guaranteed. The very same model persists today but with a few more avaricious twists applied.

Herein lies your eternal boom and bust cycle that politicians laughably claim they seek to eradicate. All three political parties stress an immediate return to debt production by the banks is imperative. The credit must flow again, they declare. The wheel must turn again. You’ll notice how they use positive terminology to describe highly undesirable circumstances. Debt is credit, money is debt. Freedom is slavery but that’s another story never to be told.

Our economy does not have to operate like this, it could cast off the vampire bankers that suck the nation’s blood. The government could easily create money backed by real assets and then regulate the money supply. In fact this is how it used to be before the banksters cornered the market on everything. Now such concepts are laughed at by “experts” who tell us that paying interest on our own money is an essential ingredient to any modern economy. How convenient.

Of course it’s true that our gleaming consumer debt economies could never have grown so large without voodoo banking practices. We have all become richer in paper terms as a result of this grand fraud but, because of the inertia in the system, we have been saved from a final accounting. Until now perhaps.

Certainly we possess a lot of consumer “things” we never owned before but in reality we are worse off than the penniless pauper. He has nothing but we are submerged in debt and the interest on that debt can never be repaid. After all, if the banksters produce all the money in the system then where does the money required to pay interest come from? Think it through.

In light of this, how should we tackle the banks that have extracted a trillion pounds (£1,000,000,000,000) under threat of a global financial collapse? That’s called an extortion racket, a tool much favoured by your average gangster but taken to new extremes by our expensively suited banksters.

Brown, who handed even more control to the banks, calls it an outrage, Cameron wants more freedom for the banks, Clegg is promising “tough” action so that nobody will ever hold the nation hostage again. They all suggest a limit on bonuses and a tax on the illicit spoils. Would you think justice had been served if a bank robber was forced to pay a small percentage of his loot back to the bank and then had the interest on his ill-gotten gains taxed at a couple of percentage points? This is what the frontrunners in this election are suggesting as a fitting punishment for the greatest criminals ever to foul the planet. It’s a joke.

And what do they offer by way of reform? They urge the banks should be broken up at the very same time they suggest huge and unaccountable money lenders be given sweeping global powers. The Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the IMF, these are the organisations that will be tasked with building a more robust and stable model. They also happen to be the greatest practitioners of the global counterfeiting and debt scams. You couldn’t make it up but because the media carefully conceals the real nature of banking the electorate can be tricked into believing real action has been taken.

Sorry, but it’s only your money that has been taken and your jobs and houses and land and the future of your children. Don’t be fooled, nothing is changing and if anything the future is bleaker than at any time in history.

I really have wandered off the election track now and I could go on and discuss the third world sweat shops and the permanent war economies and the drugs trade and all the other tin foil hat “conspiracies” that our “honest” politicians and bankers would never be involved in. I’m the madman, remember. It’s the guy who stole your wallet that has your best interests at heart.

It is an understatement to conclude the mainstream media could have done a better job of informing the public during this election build up. That it has decided once again against fulfilling its original role in society is another indicator of how corrupt and attached to the political and corporate elite it has become.

As such the voters will go into the polling booths drenched in spin, shielded from the real issues and bereft of a real choice. Some will see through the conditioning, others are already immune to it. But, I fear, most will fall victim. I get this impression from talking directly to people around me. Their issues are meaningless to me and mine are incomprehensible and outlandish to them. I believe they are well meaning but complacent, they think I’m a lunatic. I resent the majority endorsing more of what I despise and the majority despises me for even questioning the system in which they have so much faith invested.

I am a libertarian, the exact opposite of a Liberal Democrat. Therefore I would never seek to impose my beliefs or will on others. What I object to is others who feel it only right to impose their uninformed decisions on me.

It is painfully evident the mainstream parties and their complicit media have scored a decisive victory in this election. All hint of dissent has been purged, all possibility of choice eradicated.

For those of us who were hopeful the glaring exposure of the criminals in office or the direct impact of their (greedy beyond reason) bankster friends on the lives of normal people would somehow energise real change, May 6th will be a bitter blow.

Nevertheless, anyone committed to justice, a fair and level playing field (which just so happens to be the opposite of wealth distribution by force), peace, equality under the common law and above all liberty must start again and plan for the next five years.

These will be trying times in which the state consolidates its grip and the globalist agenda advances at pace. We will witness more war, more suffering and misery, more inequality, more crimes against humanity and the guilty parties will continue to walk free.

We will see the mainstream media taking big steps to recover a monopoly on information as the Internet is strangled using brute force legislation. We may even be targeted directly as the economic situation worsens and the state seeks out minority victims and “truth criminals” to be thrown to the masses as a distraction.

But I truly believe more people are waking up to the reality of the world in which we are living. I believe more realise we are endlessly repeating the same mistakes and the cycle needs to be broken for genuine progress to occur.

We didn’t get our message across this time, we were trounced by a beautifully executed media con. But nobody can afford to lose heart or give up the fight. Great social change never arrives without protracted struggle. No matter how intimidating or pervasive the enemy, take comfort in recalling that every great tyranny has eventually stumbled then fallen. Rome, the power of the Church, the Soviet empire, these are notable examples.

For all the Twittering and political wheezing that disguises the debauchery of our political system and strives to mislead, I believe most people are decent and honest and ready to do the right thing if so persuaded. We failed to persuade them this time. We must double our efforts then.

Each and every libertarian is now tasked with picking up a brick from the ruins and laying it on another to recommence the building process. Speak no more of May 6th but instead look forward to a brighter time when surely change for the better must arrive. And work to make it happen.

Vote as you will, but he gets the money.

David Cameron won the latest debate, according to the polls. Nick Clegg ran in a fairly distant second and the hapless Gordon Brown trailed in last again. None of them fully explained how the deficit will be cut, all of them agreed immigration should be controlled but won’t admit they have no means to control it and all three warned the coming years will be “tough”.

Cameron blasted Brown about his tax on jobs, Brown warned Cameron’s policies were a danger to the alleged recovery and Clegg wondered why everyone couldn’t just get together and work things out.

Shall I stop now? Because we’ve heard all this before, haven’t we? We heard it in the first debate and then again in the second. We’ve heard it over and over in the scripted party messages and in the rehearsed sound bites carefully designed to avoid any and every question.

You have a week to choose which brand you prefer to deliver your tax increases and cut the services those taxes are supposed to pay for. In the “tough” times ahead your taxes will instead be used to fund the huge ransom paid to the banks that has effectively bankrupted this nation. In reality this is nothing new.

Meanwhile, outside the media tent, Greece is being buried and Portugal, Spain and Ireland are receiving the last rites. The same credit rating agencies that committed breathtaking fraud by gold plating the toxic debt created by the money lenders are trusted, without a murmur, to sign the death warrants of entire nations. The hateful pan-European socialist nightmare is staggering and threatening to fall, potentially taking 400 million people with it.

So which of the three great men will you endorse on May 6th? Which do you feel is best qualified to race to the rescue and throw this catastrophic global crisis into reverse?

Will it be the Tory who wants to count the paper clips and Post-It notes? Or the fake Liberal who wants to integrate completely with the European disaster? Or will it be the prudent man who has steered us to where we are today?

In which order will the British public arrange the deck chairs?

Eventually we will have change. It will either come in a controlled manner or as a series of uncontrollable and cascading calamities. The latter is inevitable if we return to office the same characters that have lead us to the brink. All of them claim our situation is some sort of grand accident brought about by incompetence and carelessness in the City of London and on Wall Street. If true, if these politicians really couldn’t read the flashing red warning signs then why should we believe they are suddenly qualified to rescue us now?

These questions are never asked, certainly not in historic election debates. If you look beyond the stage show though, some people are discussing the real and looming issues.

David Hale said Governor Mervyn King had said the measures would keep whoever wins the next election “out of power for a whole generation” – BBC, Bank of England governor ‘warned of tough times’

Is this why we are preparing for a hung parliament? So that no one party will have to carry the can for what is coming? Is this why the Liberal Democrats are suddenly in the mix?

Money lenders took control of our economy a long time ago. They control the money supply and the interest rates charged on the money they create from thin air to lend to the government in exchange for the labour and tangible assets that rightfully belong to the people of this country. This isn’t even a secret and can easily be discovered by anyone who bothers to look.

Politicians have colluded with the money lenders for centuries. Several great historical figures have attempted to contain the power of the usurers to varying degrees of success, but the cancer has always returned and now has spread to every nation on the planet and we are seeing the inevitable results.

The three “honest” men who want your vote have decided not to discuss this with you because they believe you are too stupid to grasp the reality or may lynch them if you discover the truth.

You are intelligent enough to understand that debt can never be money nor can credit provide sustainable prosperity. When expressed in the economic gobbledygook preferred by those who hope to keep you ignorant our economy may seem complex. But in plain English you surely know that using your credit card to consume beyond your means invariably results in bankruptcy.

These three debates are nothing more than a continuation of the great lie and regardless of the choices made on May 6th this will end in bitter tears.

Life is like a crate of chocolate!

So says John Prescott, ex-deputy leader of New Labour and recently some guy on a bus who also writes paranoid fantasies in the Guardian.

Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse for Labour along comes Prescott committing his trademark error, opening his fat mouth. Not content with stuffing £4,500 of food down it, courtesy of the British taxpayer, he now wants us to believe Gordon Brown is the victim in this hilarious tragedy.

Honestly though, what an arse the man is. I didn’t hear him complaining when Murdoch threw his weight behind the New Labour project in 1997. And I must have missed his impassioned speeches about the sinister surveillance state his buddies have subjected us all to. Invasion of privacy only becomes an issue when his mates are in the spotlight.

Well, if Gordon Brown “has nothing to hide he has nothing to fear”, wouldn’t you say? Isn’t that the message New Labour pushed as it marched from one rights violation to the next?

Using dirty tricks to gain ratings and political influence? Who would do such a thing, I wonder? The hypocrisy is astounding.

What Murdoch’s Sky News did today was just as bad as his paper’s phone-hacking. It was a breach of privacy. It was underhand. And it was done in the pursuit of ratings and political influence. – John Prescott, Bigot ‘gaffe’ is nothing but a Murdoch plot

Sorry John but even though I agree your ex-buddy Murdoch is a monstrous shit, on this occasion I have to disagree with your paranoid delusions. It appears even your die-hard and never-learn supporters feel the same way judging by their comments on your article.

It wasn’t Rupert Murdoch who smiled into Gillian Duffy’s face one minute and then insulted her when her back was turned. It wasn’t James Murdoch’s job to check for hot mics. And it isn’t Andy Coulson’s hand that has steered Labour’s campaign from one incompetent disaster to the next.

This stew has been cooked by a failed party that has failed the nation and is running a failed campaign and will soon be flushed down the drain by a fed-up electorate. Murdoch simply served your own mess up on a platter. Maybe you can ask Mandy to slap a Sky News guy around in the next press conference?

Tuck in but try to keep the bill down this time. In case you haven’t heard New Labour’s disastrous economic policies have left us all seriously short of cash.

After the feast perhaps we can enjoy a little poetic justice. Only yesterday I wondered how Labour’s nauseating “cancer” smear would pan out in the long run. Cheap ratings and political influence indeed.

Will this be the absolute low point in their frighteningly incompetent and morally bankrupt campaign? Or can they go lower? I’m betting the latter and have another political cliché at the ready, “You ain’t seen nothing yet!” – Me, yesterday (LOL)

Just desserts are being served and aren’t they just delicious?

Gordon Brown and his New Labour collective have a pungent new message. If you vote Tory in the coming general election you’ll die of cancer. That’s fine, now we can breathe some life back into that old cliché by proudly proclaiming, “I wouldn’t vote Labour, even if my life depended on it!”

Will this be the absolute low point in their frighteningly incompetent and morally bankrupt campaign? Or can they go lower? I’m betting the latter and have another political cliché at the ready, “You ain’t seen nothing yet!”

There will be a lot of sniggering behind the scenes in the class hate energised ranks of the socialist war machine. “LOL, that’ll learn them Tory toffs, that’ll piss ‘em off, watch ‘em squeal at that one!”

Ho, ho, very funny guys but let’s just wait and see how this plays out in the longer term.

Here we go then, New Labour, New Low, scraping the scum from the bottom of the very last barrel. Be warned, it’s desperate stuff.

How now, Brown clown?

Mark Sweney in the Guardian reports, “The broadcast will attempt to shift the focus towards policy and away from personality, in line with Labour’s attempt to refocus election coverage away from the televised debates.”

Yes, you read that correctly, Labour will be engaging in fiction and focusing on another party’s policies as a scare tactic rather than taking its own record and manifesto to the British people. Yawn, change the record (if only).

And they would rather you didn’t look too closely at the motley crew whose names they are asking you to put your mark against on May 6th.

For me, this speaks a great deal about character (or total lack of it) so I’m not sure their plan to distract the voters from the grubby villains who have spent thirteen years dragging this nation into the gutter is a sure-fire winner. If anything viewers are more likely to end up seeing straight through this “cunning stunt.”

It smacks of desperation. A failed party of catastrophically failed policies running a failed campaign. And it clearly demonstrates the level of contempt they have for the British public. A public Mandy and Ali believe can be conned one last time into making a dreadful mistake it’ll have to live with for another half decade at least.

It also tells us where we are today with modern politics. It’s show business, devoid of substance where the actors no longer bother to pretend the drama is factual.

Welcome to the circus. On the left you can marvel at a little fat man being beaten senseless by two environmentally friendly toffs. On the right a little fat man will amaze you with chillingly spiteful prophecies drawn from a crystal ball. In the centre is Rupert the Media Clown who will lead you to your seats and wire you up. But you don’t get the price of admission until after the show when you attempt to leave.

What a joke. We don’t even get to throw stuff at them any more. I want my money back – all of it. And I want these clowns gone for good.

OINK! Nothing to see, hear!

Titled, “Why aren’t bankers an election issue?“, I had first thought it was a satirical piece lampooning the content of the non-debates we’ve been suffering over the past two weeks.

But no, Tom Clark (leader writer for the Guardian) was dead serious. He wanted to know why none of the three mainstream political parties have discussed the obscene theft of £1.5trillion (that’s 1.5 thousand billion pounds) from the public purse by the eternal vampire banksters. Well duh!

I mean sorry Tom but are you serious? Come on Tom, why do you think Cameron, Clegg and Mr Pooh have steered well clear of this topic?

I’m going to float something for you Tom, and it won’t be made of the pungent stuff smeared in the pages of the Guardian. Nope, here’s a little diversion into a strange land called reality, the place we never talk about except in hushed tones when the plebs are asleep. The people who live in reality are angry Tom, very angry. Their rage is barely being contained by the impotence that masquerades as representative democracy in this country.

I’ve talked to a bunch of folks about the blood sucking leeches who jostle for window offices in the city. Nobody likes them much. I’ve heard normally mild mannered, middle of the road types suggest all sorts of prolonged and agonising retribution for what these strangely profitable incompetents have committed. Some of it has shocked me, I thought I was the top dog at creating cruel and unusual punishment for the bankster class. It turns out I’m an unimaginative amateur.

Now let’s assume with due cause there will be some form of backlash against the two main parties on May 6th.

Dalek Brown’s collective is viewed as being at the heart of the scandal, they were in the hot seat and opened the vault doors to let the bankster’s make off with the money. Plus the supreme, unelected leader did that whole thing about “prudence” for years and now he’s having a hell (too good for him) of a time convincing the crowd he’s not the incompetent arse of all time.

Cameron’s mob has been thoroughly unsuccessful at persuading the electorate the gargantuan leeches in the city aren’t directly related to the Tory toffs, probably by birth as well as in philosophy. They are natural bedfellows… hmm, don’t go there!

There’s nothing to be gained for the big two parties by dwelling on this issue and they’ve settled for vague promises of a tax on the banks and lame suggestions that greed is quite naughty and really oughtn’t to be allowed in public. Disgraceful, disgraceful! But how could anyone have possibly known? In private it’s business as usual, no doubt, and it will be in private where the tax evasion scams run night and day.

For the terrible two it’s time to move on rather than dwell on the evidence past. Frame the debate, frame the punishment, let their friends off the hook. That’s what wise guys do for each other Tom.

So you might think this is a golden opportunity for Nick Clegg’s Jamaican bob-sleigh team (Ooh, I really hope they win it,.. bless) to race ahead on the issue. After all, they have a deadly weapon purpose built to cure every economic woe, the all-seeing eye Vince Cable. Oops – he didn’t see that one coming!

Yeah, slight problem. The Lib Dems have been talking shit about the shit they were talking about before the shit they are now talking about during the election campaign. Got that? Vince created a bubble of his own which has burst following a simple review of the record. Damn those newfangled moving picture-majigs.

Besides, the Lib Dems are the third establishment “choice” so they aren’t going to blow their chance by deviating from the path beaten out by the red and blue teams. Whether they’ll tell you or not, they are more than aware they’ll have to deal with banksters and other assorted gangsters if they pull off a miracle. You don’t bite the hand that feeds, not the rich hand anyway. And in his time spent hanging around parliament looking for a job Clegg can’t have failed to hear the rumours about who really runs this country.

Nope, Clegg will play the game and the media will play it with him to ensure the electorate ends up satisfied there was more of the same to choose from in this election. You see, it’s the power of democracy! Present three (but certainly no more) pre-selected candidates instead of two. Stick them on TV. Brand X is a bag of shit, Brand Y a smarmy bell boy laden down with Maggie’s luggage and the all new Brand Z – well now, looks like we got us some real change people! The old system is dead, long live the new version of the old system!

Okay so I have a cynical and depressing view of this election. It’s not my fault I’m right though. Go and blame the three stooges.

Now Tom, we both know that if the leaders were really pissed with the banks and intended to do anything about them we’d be hearing all about creating money out of thin air and charging un-payable interest on it. The special sauce of economics, so to speak.

We’d be hearing about how the £1.5trillion doesn’t exist right now but will have to be generated through our labour and the future labour of our kids. We’d be listening outraged as the peoples’ champions clued us in on the great central banking scam. Because if the £1.5trillion doesn’t exist yet but the banks need the money right now – where does the money come from? Debt! And when you want a loan, even if you’re the government, where do you go?

Man I laughed my arse off as I was loading my (metaphorical – we have to be careful what we say in the free world) shotgun. Are you laughing too Tom? They’ve bailed themselves out by lending us the money to give back to them, at interest! It’s a beautiful thing, if you’re a psychopathic, blood-sucking machine of pure evil which, as we all know, is the very definition of your typical merchant banker.

To be fair to you though, Tom. At least you asked the question. The vast majority of your mainstream colleagues aren’t quite so inquisitive. But I guess they are busy playing, “who will overturn the majority here”, or, “can so-and-so hold the margin there”, and all that other total, utter cack that’s chucked at us once every five years in an attempt to fool us into thinking our voice is actually listened to and this isn’t just a meaningless carnival.

Three parties, all the same apart from the flags and bunting, campaigning on one degree deviations on all the minor issues, the TV cameras recording every painfully dull moment in close up (much like they don’t when a real news story comes along), pre-selected audiences pitching soft-balls at dancing puppets. They don’t have time to talk about the banksters Tom! Have a heart!

Anyway, just for you, here’s why the three amigos don’t want to talk about their compadres in the Shitty of London.

The thing is, Tom, if a half-pissed tosser on a blog, like myself, can rustle up a few bits of information from Google and slap a posting like this together, what might you be capable of given the resources at your disposal?

I understand, I don’t have to cross-reference facts (but I do anyway) or mind my manners in case I get hit with a law suit (which would only draw attention to me), nor do I have a boss who tells me what I can and can’t write (nanny is looking into this) or advertisers than can withdraw funding (but I’m willing to enter into any tragically short lived alliance provided there’s a few quid in it). Is it this last point Tom?

Have “they” forced you to ask stupid questions in public for a living? I’m only kidding Tom. We can’t all be serious about democracy and the future of our kids.

A sneak peek at the new BBC Election 2010 intro. This is an early edit so it might be subject to a few changes between now and the big kick off.

Andrew Maguire is the story the BBC will not mention. Robert Peston is the BBC’s business editor and on his BBC blog Peston’s Picks he claims to offer his “take on the business stories and issues that matter.”

“Business stores and issues that matter” in this case of course refers to stories and issues that matter to Robert Peston and his fellow mainstream gatekeepers at the BBC. Anything else that might well be of critical importance to you, the general public, will never see the light of day.

Mr Peston’s blog is a typical mainstream filtering device. Corporations like the BBC rely on omission to ensure you are kept ignorant of or steered away from anything that runs contrary to the establishment agenda.

This agenda operates on many levels but is ultimately geared to protecting the interests of power and money. And, in the case of the BBC, it uses your money to do its anti-social work.

Some wonder, therefore, how it is possible to openly criticise the BBC and see your criticism printed. The BBC is a shield designed to deflect and absorb such criticism. The criticism is then used as evidence that organisations such as the BBC are honest and receptive to conflicting opinions. “Fair and balanced” as the notoriously unfair and unbalanced Fox News shamelessly boasts. It’s a clever trick and it works well.

But you will hit a brick wall of silence and censorship when you attempt to dig behind the issues and raise a wider perspective than is approved by the media gatekeepers.

Andrew Maguire’s revelations about fraud in the gold and silver futures market and the comprehensive proof he offered to the authorities that implicates JP Morgan Chase is a classic example of the mainstream media agenda at work.

The Andrew Maguire story has been gathering steam on the Internet for weeks now but the mainstream media has deliberately failed to notice. This story is important as it provides a link to other issues that have unavoidably broken into the mainstream, particularly the news that Goldman Sachs has yet again been charged with fraud for market manipulation.

The Maguire story connects dots, a practice long since extinct at the BBC. Goldman Sachs stand accused of manipulating the housing market prior to the crash of 2008. Will Hutton in his article in the Observer finally realises what has been obvious to many for years.

Hiding behind the complexities of our financial system, banks and other institutions are being accused of fraud and deception, with Goldman Sachs just the latest in the spotlight. This has become the most pressing election issue of all – Will Hutton, Now we know the truth. The financial meltdown wasn’t a mistake – it was a con, The Observer, Sunday 18 April 2010

Well done Will, so will you follow this up to ensure it really does become an election issue? I think not. He’s right though, the banks have been stealing your money for ever. It’s the blue whale in the living room, because elephants just don’t measure up in size to the levels of the fraud we are discussing.

The mainstream media is playing a story about fraud in the housing market that discusses the same type of criminal activity detailed by Andrew Maguire in the evidence he submitted to the CFTC. Why is fraud committed two years ago a hot topic when fraud being committed today isn’t worth a mention? Who is drawing the bigger picture?

In 2009 Matt Taibbi aired all of Goldman Sachs’ dirty and blood-stained laundry in an epic article in Rolling Stone. It catalogues Goldman’s involvement in six major cases of deliberately creating financial bubbles and then profiting by collapsing them.

Does Robert Peston lack the necessary skills to do a Google search as he endeavours to offer his, “take on the business stories and issues that matter?” Is Will Hutton moving beyond the suggestion that tighter regulation is all that is required to control the banksters? He even hints the Lib Dems are ideally placed to come to the rescue. Since when have we heard Nick Clegg or the oracle Vince Cable even mentioning the banks’ perpetual debt machines that have sucked the blood from humanity through the ages?

No, a few new regulations here, a tweak there, a couple of scapegoats thrown into jail and all will be well and everyone can get back to business as usual. It’s called a limited hangout, you concede a little ground in order to disguise the fact you already own the pitch. It’s revealing the bare minimum in order to ensure the minimum fallout.

The banks can’t hide the massive scope of their misdeeds and nor can they hide the immense sum of money it has cost you. They think you are stupid but they know nobody is that stupid. So you get a few of the facts in isolation and they tell you what needs to happen next. The politicians parrot the same song and a consensus is constructed to which you’ll be invited to subscribe at pains of being branded a conspiracy theorist or general malcontent should you refuse.

The issues are very complicated, don’t you know? Far too complicated for you to understand. You need to leave it up to the Robert Pestons of this world to decide how much you ought to know and when you need to know it.

Please follow the links in this article. They’ll lead you on a path that Robert Peston hopes you will never tread. Then go back and read his blog and marvel at his footwork as he dances around the whale.

Andrew Maguire had the courage to step forward and expose corruption. When will the BBC have the courage to do the job we pay them handsomely to do?

For those who aren’t familiar with Andrew Maguire and his recent revelations about rampant manipulation of the gold and silver futures market by major players such as JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, I’m not surprised. The story has been completely ignored by the mainstream media.

To get up to speed have a read of Andrew Maguire exposes systemic fraud by CFTC and JPMorgan and follow the links and watch the video contained in that article.

The story has been spreading like wildfire on the Internet, especially among independent gold and silver traders. Of course they have a vested interest, which is not to say they are behaving in a nefarious manner. But when you take the mainstream media silence and all you have left is the Internet buzz you can quickly spot the strategy at work.

Ever since the Internet became a major competitor to the traditional media the latter has attempted to brandish independent Internet based journalism or reporting as less than reliable. The idea goes that if a story only exists on the Internet and has not been confirmed by “legitimate” media sources it is most likely rumour or gossip or a conspiracy theory (their favourite smear).

A lot of the time this isn’t far from the truth. There is a lot of garbage on the Internet. Of course there’s a lot of rubbish in the mainstream media too, but “professional” media people aren’t as keen to talk about that. And mainstream fantasy can have fatal consequences – Iraqi tanks massing on the Saudi border, anyone? People die when the mainstream lies.

But the Andrew Maguire case is legitimate in as far as it is certainly newsworthy and the silence of the mainstream media on this story is highly revealing. In fact it’s a story in its own right.

Let’s pretend all of the Internet articles on Maguire have gone away, that they never existed, that there’s literally no mention anywhere of the story. What are we left with?

What we have is an established trader who has not only blown the whistle on fraud but has also provided absolute proof by demonstrating the fraud as it actually occurred. And Maguire didn’t run to some conspiracy site on the Internet to spill the beans, no he went through official channels and he was ignored.

If this isn’t newsworthy then nothing ever is. The whole world has just suffered a major banking scandal and here we are again watching the usual suspects, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, allegedly committing an even bigger fraud. This should be a global headline but instead we get silence. And that silence is deafening in what it reveals.

I have sent requests to several British mainstream sources asking for their opinion on the facts as we know them to date. I haven’t received a single acknowledgement of receipt of my emails, never mind a considered response.

The mainstream media is killing this story stone dead and in a coordinated manner. How can that be? We can only speculate but whatever the truth it doesn’t align with the notion of an independent press designed to hold the powerful to account. Rather it smacks of collusion with authorities content to stop information escaping into the public domain.

As a result of the recent banking fraud common people have lost their jobs, their homes, their savings. What will be the further consequence if Andrew Maguire is correct? Who will suffer and who will benefit and to what degree?

And what sort of a media do we have when it ignores even a cursory glance at a potentially explosive disclosure and instead spends the majority of its resources pursuing gormless celebrities and repeating tired old sound bites from demonstrably crooked politicians as they jostle for a front row at the pig trough?

Who’s joining the dots? What about Gordon Brown’s fire sale of the British public’s gold reserves? Where’s the audit of the trillions handed over to the banks to bail them out? Does Peter Mandelson’s draconian censorship bill tie into this in any way?

Investigative journalism in the mainstream is dead. For all its warts the Internet is the only place where all the news exists, often buried in trash I agree but there nonetheless. Far from the self-claimed respectability resting with the mainstream the BBCs and CNNs of this world are compromised beyond repair and deserve contempt rather than credibility.

People are catching on, that’s why the mainstream is slowly dying. And that’s why unelected Euro-quislings are attaching their tentacles to the Internet.

What else is the mainstream concealing, burying, killing off? Do they filter and massage the news just to protect their corporate advertising customers or is there more to it? Is it just a matter of greed trumping ethics or could the fact that just a handful of corporations now own the whole mainstream media have a bearing. And why did the politicians ever allow this to happen and…

…can you see where I’m going with this? Oh no – it’s a conspiracy theory! Go back to sleep, there’s nothing to see here except a mad guy without a press pass spouting nonsense on the Internet.

So they would have you believe. It’s still up to you to decide for yourself though, they can’t take that away from you. Yet.