KHOODEELAAR! focussing on the repressive behaviour by the inner city Tower Hamlets Council: in context of Ken Clarke's 'national emergency'

The following commentary will be continued with evidential updates during Monday 26 January 2009

By © Muhammad Haque

0650 Hrs GMT London Monday 26 January 2009

How we are going through times that are many times worse than they were in the 1970s in Britain.

Not only is there a party political consensus

That sleaze balls are quite normal as MPs

And peers but that there is not really much that we can do about them.

We are also witnessing the acceptance of racism as not only normal but something that Gordon Brown can be ‘rightly’ proud of.

There is more than a pun intended in that little sentence just written.

Two Tory MPs have made two statements over the weekend.
Both were heard and seen doing this on the BBC.

And the second Tory MP has also been extensively stated to have made a third comment which according to the publishers of the ‘news’ about THAT is even more serious.

One David Davis said that the 42 days detention thing by Brown was nothing to do with ‘terrorism’ at all. It was to show that the Brown lot was even more Rightwing than the Tories. David Davis did not use these words. But this is what he meant.

I shall be quoting Davis in full, and from the BBC's published item, in a later part of this commentary.

The second Tory, Ken Clarke, made his remarks on Sunday 25 January 2009. In his comments he said words that did not go as far as saying that certain members of the UK House of Peers were involved in corruption. Clarke suggested and implied
That people MIHT call the reported behaviour as corrupt [if evidence backed the charge].

The other comments that Clarke made contained a quoted reference to the UK being in the middle of a ‘national emergency’.

The reported item did not include a description of what Clarke was meaning by a ‘national emergency’.

In the absence of that information, it is necessary to refer to some other times and some other invocations of ‘national emergency’ by some other sets of politicians.

They mainly use the phrase or the two words or the equivalent/s thereof when they want to withhold giving evidence supporting their particular stance

On Thursday, the hugely-promoted American rightwing propagandist who has dominated a permanent slot on the BBC for the best part of the last 40 years, Janet Daly, was allowed to ‘let slip’ words suggesting that ‘democracy’ might or might not be suspended in Britain.

It was noticed that she was not challenged on that.

Given that the Janet Daly statement took place in the ‘Question Time’ programme on BBC TV – which edition was ‘commented on’ in the hour that followed and segments of that edition were broadcast again on the BBC News Channel; the fact that Janet Daly was not challenged is significant

And there has been no noticeable comment on the utterance in any print media since. The day of the broadcast

What these comments mean is that there is a two-faced strategy llowed to control people.

One is the excuse of a ‘national emergency’ which does not exist in truth but which is being hyped up.

The other is that the ‘national emergency’ can only be dealt with by suspending democracy. I define it as ‘democracy’. More on this aspect in a later part.

Now in inner city East End of London, these two component elements have been present for quite some time.

And the behaviour of the ‘local’ ‘democratically elected’ Tower Hamlets
Council as observed in the past six months shows that to be the case.

[To be continued]