Fresh round of protests over the new Harrow mosque

In a repeat of the events of September, the protest group Stop the Islamification of Europe (SIOE) once again attempted to organise a rally outside the skyline-dominating Harrow Mosque. The group’s leader, Stephen Gash, had previously claimed that he would bring 2,000 anti-mosque protestors to the location.

Instead, on the ground were a pitiful 20 people who hid their faces behind scarves, hoodies and a copy of the Daily Mail. The police, mindful of the September protest which turned into a barely-contained riot, had laid down barricades and were surrounding the area in force. Mounted units, dogs, a helicopter and riot vans were all in attendance, along with British Transport Police at all local bus and railway stations.

A number of extreme-left groups, including the Socialist Party, the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, United Against Fascism and Workers’ Liberty gathered to oppose the SIOE demonstrators, including a hysterical woman on a PA system who felt it necessary to shout about concentration camps. Other, more moderate organisations including Unite the Union and the Brent branch of the Universities and Colleges’ Lecturers' Union, were also present, as were local Muslims from the mosque itself, led by Imam Ghulam Rabbani.

The day passed without incident, primarily because of the very heavy police presence.

The Rise and Rise of the European Superstate

Today, the European Union officially comes into being as a legal political entity. It has a President and a High Representative for Foreign Affairs. It has an internal police force who can remove citizens from their homelands to face trial and imprisonment in foreign countries, via a legal mechanism specifically designed to "abolish the political stage of extradition" that can be invoked even when a person is tried and convicted in absentia.

The political elite of this new superstate are selected behind closed doors, not elected by those they purport to represent. Their laws are decided in a parliament that purports to represent hundreds of millions. That legislation is then implemented directly by subservient politicians at national level, with deadlines set and enforceable penalties if they refuse to comply. In the UK, most of this is achieved via secondary legislation such as Statutory Instruments and Regulations, which bypass the normal Parliamentary debating process.

The last national referendum held on membership of the EU was in 1975, meaning that nobody in the UK under the age of 52 has ever had a say on the replacement of Parliament by this unaccountable organisation. Who voted for the creation of a new state over our heads? Why would we want this new layer of taxpayer-funded bureaucracy leaching ever more of our hard-earned wages from our hands?

We can't even hold it to account. Its Supreme Court answers to nobody and cannot be held in check by democratically elected personnel. Merely by writing this article, I am committing blasphemy against the EU - this is the word clearly inferred by the EU's Spanish inquisitor-general in the linked Spectator article.

Speaking of legal systems, the EU also seeks to impose the alien napoleonic legal code upon us. The napoleonic code works from the basic premise that "everything is forbidden unless strictly authorised in law", in direct opposition to English common law where "nothing is forbidden unless strictly banned in law". Further, the EU's legal systems are written around the inquisitorial system of justice, where the judge researches and considers the evidence in a court case by himself. The system used in Britain and America is known as the adversarial system, where the right to trial by a jury of one's peers and the right of appeal are enshrined in law.

This terrifying juggernaut rolls on, blatting private citizens out of its way like bugs squashed on a windshield.


On a completey unrelated note, I've just heard New Young Pony Club's latest track "Lost A Girl" on the radio. Cracking stuff!

Normal service will resume shortly!

Sorry for the lack of blogging, real life's getting in the way. Got a few articles lined up, but I need time to write and research them!

Next week should see some activity.

In Memoriam

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.”

A quickie

Today I had it suggested me that I apply for an internship with the Independent, on the basis that they're "starving and broke". I laughed, and then had a look at their website.

One particular article on higher education caught my eye. It was poorly written and seemingly finished halfway through, without concluding. The sole comment at the bottom (integrated via LiveJournal, rather than being a piece of built-in functionality - "broke" indeed) said, and I quote: "What a pointless article".

I then had a quick look at their list of columnists. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Johann Hari, Janet Street-Porter and John Rentoul all leapt out of the page, snarling through the plastic barrier of my screen. At least Rentoul's redeeming feature is that he's regularly cited by Howard Denton's pro-Labour blog, which is both insightful and free from the shameless attacks that feature heavily on other political blogs.

Oh well, beggars can't be choosers - anything's better than the Grauniad!

Lesson 1: Bad Admin, School of Arts style

Friends, students, graduates; lend me your ears. I have a tale to tell you, a tale of misery, woe and hardship.

Let’s say you’re paying £3,225 per year for a particular service. This service lasts for 8 months and takes up about 20 hours of your week during that period. As part of this service, you give the service provider documents which you expect to have returned. You also have regular daily meetings with your service provider, which, for mutual convenience, need to be scheduled in advance.

Now, what would your reaction be if your service provider only gave you the meeting schedule at 5pm on a Friday afternoon, with the first meeting to be held at 9am Monday morning? Or if they lost your documents and asked you to send them a fresh copy, which they then lose again? Or, even better, if they just lost your documents altogether, proceeded to deny any knowledge of posting them back to you and then claimed that it must be Royal Mail’s fault?

You’d cancel the contract and ask for your money back, that’s what. Unfortunately, when your ‘service’ is a degree course administered by the School of Arts, it isn’t that simple.

All of the things mentioned above are actual events that have happened to arts students in the last academic year alone. I have spoken to students who don’t know what marks they gained in last year’s modules, students whose courseworks have gone missing, students whose telephone calls have been ignored and students whose lectures have been moved or cancelled with zero notice; an unacceptable state of affairs.

The administrative branch of the School is doubtless under a lot of pressure. However, given that lectures finish in May and the new year starts in late September, it is totally unacceptable for the timetable to be issued the Friday before the start of term. I know full well that booking a room in the lecture centre takes just one email to Timetabling, with the allocation normally being confirmed within 48 hours – why should it take the admin office over four months to achieve the same result?

Module guides for the year have been issued. I am told by several people that they were issued a guide, and promptly issued no fewer than 3 pages of amendments to it. One of my own guides came with several repetitions of “details TBC” or “room to be advised”. A particular module guide came without the page which detailed coursework questions, which is one of the main points of having a module guide in the first place.

The rot runs deeper than this, however. Many people have had horrendous problems with enrolment. I spoke to a fellow student, who was unable to enrol for the whole of the summer. They emailed the School asking for help. They were sent automated replies, other replies promising help that never materialised and then asked the student to email them their module selections, so they could be manually put onto the system. None of these things were done. When this student phoned the office for some direct contact, their phonecalls went unanswered. As this student lives a fair distance away from Uxbridge, they were only able to get to the office in person on the first Monday of term. Clearly, had the School of Arts responded in a timely manner and sorted out this student’s problems, a face-to-face meeting to determine their academic future would not have been needed.

Sadly, it is not just people’s academic lives that are affected by the appalling administration of courses. One particular mature student commented to me that the late release of the online enrolment task – originally scheduled for early August, then deferred to late August, and finally deferred to September 1st – combined with the late release of the timetable (released late on Friday 25th September, lectures beginning on Monday 28th September) had interfered with her childcare arrangements. As those of you with young children of your own will know, your child’s welfare must take absolute priority; in this example, the School’s lack of organisation aggravates an already less-than-ideal situation.

I know other students who have commuted to campus from their homes, often an hour or two away, to discover their lecture has been cancelled or rescheduled with no notice. This travel costs people money, money which in the current economic climate they are ill-positioned to waste on needless journeys. It affects their work patterns, many of which have to be re-arranged to fit around the demands of a full-time degree course, and, on the whole, employers do not look kindly upon last-minute requests to swap shifts or not to work on a certain day. While students are paying upfront for degree courses, they deserve timely support from their University and academic School – not late release of essential information which people need in order to plan ahead.

Naturally, for those who are dependent upon the Student Loans Company in order to stay afloat during their studies, the difficulties with enrolment present a much deeper problem. As any fule no, receipt of your grant or loan depends on the university confirming that you are an enrolled student. Naturally, when your university then presents you with an assault course of obstacles to cross and hoops to jump through, with minimal or no support, people’s financial situations are put into jeopardy. A growing number of students have contacted me, bitterly complaining about their loans being delayed because of problems with enrolment; the blame for which can squarely be laid at the door of the School of Arts. They are looking at their bank balances and considering whether it is better to be a bankrupt graduate or a solvent non-grad. No student should ever be put into this position as a result of maladministration by their university.

To continue this litany of woe, there are further problems with module selection. Another student, who has requested anonymity, selected her modules on E-Vision, seemingly successfully. However, one of the modules failed to appear on U-Link. Upon questioning this, the student was told that she hadn’t selected the module and that it was now full so she couldn’t re-apply. In effect, the student was excluded from the module because of bad admin by the School, leaving them with the sole option of pursuing a module in practical work experience; something they had not planned for and had no previous intention of doing.

Hitherto, all the cases I have mentioned in this article have been examples of poor administrative practice, poor organisational skills and a clear disregard for the knock-on effects of decisions implemented weeks after the date they should have been. However, hard as it may be to believe, an even worse example of the School’s malpractice comes to light. Many returning students will be familiar with Professor Maureen Moran, who lectured for many years with the English department. She retired at the end of September, something that was known months in advance by staff and students alike. In fact, my sources tell me that the School is throwing a party to celebrate her distinguished career with Brunel University, and having been a student of hers I’d like to wish her the very best in her future endeavours.

Despite knowing the date of Prof Moran’s retirement, the School saw fit to allocate Prof Moran as a lecturer for modules commencing in 2010 and even to allocate her as supervisor to a group of final-year dissertation students! This beggars belief, that a staff member departing less than a week after the start of the academic year should have been allocated as a supervisor for a task that will last until May 2010. This malpractice is not fair on Prof Moran, and it is not fair to the students who have to continue their dissertations without support or guidance from their school. My source tells me that another lecturer has been appointed in Prof Moran’s place; the sum total of information he’s received about this is that the replacement’s first name is Jessica.

By exposing this litany of incompetence, I hope to shame the School into cleaning up its act. I did try to contact them, in the hope that they could show some evidence of mitigating circumstances. After being kept on hold for 20 minutes, I abandoned any hope of trying to phone them, and resorted to email. This went unanswered as well. For self-evident reasons, I’m not about to present myself at the admin office and announce that I am the one who’s displaying their dirty laundry to the University at large. Hence, unfortunately, there can be no reply to these situations from the School itself, because the School seemingly doesn’t want to hear from its students.

In closing, my impression is that morale amongst my fellow arts students is low. Dark jokes are made about coursework ‘only’ being returned after eight or nine weeks. The Gallic shrug is a common sight when one finds that a lecture has been unexpectedly rescheduled, or that vital information about the lecture was only released the night before via email. All of this leads up to School of Arts students castigating Brunel in public. This can only lead to bad results in the Student Satisfaction Survey, Brunel’s place in university league tables falling, and your degree – irrespective of subject – being valued less by employers. I have spoken to one student who plans to submit a formal complaint against the School and another who is writing an open letter to the Vice-Chancellor detailing his grievances. Let us hope that the School, or failing them, the University Senate, sorts this mess out before it comes back to bite us all.

The Death of European Democracy

It's happened.

The principle over which millions fought and died in the Second World War - that of resisting a European superstate presided over by an unaccountable dictatorship - has been betrayed. That which our fathers and grandfathers stood fast to defend during the Cold War - that of resisting a dictatorial superstate - has been betrayed.

The most shameful aspect of today's results are that this is the second time that the Irish electorate have been asked the same question. The first "no" result, in June 2008, should have been taken as an outright rejection of the EU Constitution. By rights, the EU's lawmakers should have gone scurrying back to their taxpayer-funded quangos to revise their iniquitous constitution and abandon the idea of one USA-style European superstate. Yet, like one of Torqemada's inqusitors, the EU continued to ask the question of Ireland, this time after bribing big business to keep EU-funded jobs in the country; and publically boasting about this despicable act.

So it comes to pass that the Irish, after this campaign of bullying and taxpayer-funded propaganda, have signed their national sovereignty over to the unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats of Brussels. The only hope for the free peoples of Europe lies in Poland and the Czech republic, where ratification is yet to be carried out. Reports have it that Poland will ratify in days, leaving just the Czechs alone to derail the abrogation of sovereignty and self-determination that is the hallmark of the European Union.

The UK, under the unpopular Labour government, have already ratified the Lisbon Constitution, despite this breaking their manifesto pledge to hold a public referendum on the matter. The incoming Conservative government have already begun hinting that they will not hold a referendum on the Constitution as the anticipated ratification by Poland and the Czech Republic will effectively make it a "done deal".

All in all, a terrible day for European democracy and a betrayal of the values upon which British society was founded over a thousand years ago.

"Anti-Muslim" protest turns violent after right-wing extremists fail to show

Yesterday thousands of anti-fascist demonstrators gathered in front of the new Harrow Central Mosque to protest against a planned demonstration by the group Stop Islamification of Europe (SIOE). Amongst the groups present were United Against Fascism (UAF), the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and Unite the Union, alongside a sizeable majority of worshippers from the Harrow Mosque itself.



The estimated 2,000 protestors were outside the mosque to oppose the English Defence League (EDL) and SIOE's demonstration against the construction of a new 5-storey masjid (traditionally-built mosque with dome and spire) to replace the existing mosque, a converted house on the end of a terrace. However, reportedly fewer than 20 right-wing protestors made it to the area after police prevented them from gaining access to the area. A police source commented that, "If the SIOE demonstration started it would have resulted in serious disorder".

Once it was clear that the anti-Islam protestors were not going to attend, the mood turned ugly. The crowd, the vast portion of which was wearing Arabic headdress which conceals the face, began joining in with UAF agitators who encouraged the crowd to chant "Nazi scum - off our streets". Rival chants of "Allahu akhbar" began from the mosque, while Islamic leaders began herding people back onto the pavements.

An initial scuffle took place in the Civic Centre carpark. A young Somalian, Mohammed Hussein, 16, claimed to have "banged this white man" and further proclaimed he was "ready for war". A group of similar-aged Muslim youth around him readily agreed.

In stark contrast to this was Claire, a 33-year-old political history graduate who was attending with the Socialist Workers' Party. In response to Mohammed Hussein's aggression, she calmly stated "If someone's got a skinhead you can't just beat the crap out of them". Claire's measured reasoning was a stark contrast to the rest of the crowd, however, who were visibly becoming more and more agitated. In the words of one police sergeant, they were "chasing shadows".

Interestingly, in contrast to the usual press angle, the mosque elders were doing their level best to keep calm. A number of locals were mingling in the crowd, wearing hi-vis jackets, while calming the more inflammatory elements; this last including the UAF , who had brought a megaphone with them. It was a telling sight, seeing the imams directly telling the UAF to "shut up and go home" - the popular perception of Islam, as an organised front for violent extremism, bore no resemblance to these people who merely wanted to observe their religion in peace.

Violent confrontation was never far from the surface, however. Several hundred Muslims, believing they had seen a group of SIOE protestors (who, on the balance of probabilities, were actually the European reporters coming over the railway bridge), broke free of the thin police cordon outside the Star Club restaurant and charged over the bridge. There they met not far-right extremists, but a solid cordon of riot police. Stones, bottles and staves were quickly thrown and a full-scale riot came within seconds of starting as police deployed stun grenades to drive the Muslims back. One protestor next to this journalist claimed to have seen Nick Griffin standing behind the police, a palpably laughable claim when I identified a reporter from a well-known TV news channel. His only resemblance to the BNP leader was that he was white and wearing a suit.

Denied a confrontation with the police, who stood resolutely and shrugged off the incoming missiles, the youths turned on the press photographers in their midst, angrily screaming "No cameras!" Once again, violence was mere seconds away until the press relented and fell back to the relative safety of the police line. With all their targets now ignoring them or cowed into submission, the baying mob gradually fell back amidst shouts of "defend the masjid" [mosque]. Community leaders hastened the retreat, telling the more reluctant individuals "Fall back or they'll take our pictures and show how bad we are, we don't want that."

As the Muslim youths fell back - no sign of the trades union or UAF now - individuals started running at the civic centre. Spurred on by the thought of far-right blood to spill, the mob took to its heels once again. However, as in almost every other occurrence, there were no SIOE protestors - just shadows. The frustrated mob began slaking its thirst on the civic centre windows, with barriers being picked up and hurled. It took some minutes for more riot police to intervene and drive the mob back before the violence got out of hand.


The rest of the evening followed this pattern of the mainly Muslim mob chasing at shadows and the police wearily rushing after them to corrall them back in and prevent serious damage from occurring. As always, once the mob realised it didn't have a 'legitimate' target, it vented its anger on the police, who to their credit, stood fast and took the bricks and bottles. Community leaders did their best to stem the anger, but the mob was simply too large for them to effectively control.

All in all, yesterday's events showed the anti-fascists for what they were; a mob just as capricious and violent as the fascists they professed to oppose. The only creditable performances were from the police, who had clearly learned their lessons from the G20 demos, and the local Muslim religious leaders, who did their level best to stem the violence and calm the mob who rioted in their name.

See also: BBC, Sky, Times Online, Daily Telegraph


Postscript: On my way home I fell in with an Australian called Dav, who had attended as part of the UAF contingent. While we walked towards Harrow-on-the-Hill station together, we witnessed a large gang of masked and hooded Asians and Somalians throwing stones at a police van, shouting "white pig fascist scum". Some way further on, a gang of boys about 15 or 16 years of age followed us, shouting "BNP fascist" at Dav - who was as white as chalk and unfortunately suffered from baldness. To his credit, he stopped and clearly explained who he was and what he was doing there, which calmed the boys; yet had he been alone I would have feared for his safety.

Conservative Future - what is it good for?

Time for controversy, methinks.

Quite a few people around the blogosphere (what a naff phrase, but in the absence of anything better to describe it ...) have commented upon the youth wing of the Conservative Party: Conservative Future.

Like most political organisations, CF exists to promote the values of the party and ultimately ensure that the Party is elected. So goes the theory, anyway. Whilst I freely admit I'm stuck in a deadend backwater of this wondrous city, I hadn't even heard of CF until I began reading Tory Bear. Admittedly, I hadn't taken that much interest in the Tory party itself, rather its policy announcements as seen in the press.

It seems that my natural antipathy to organised politics actually served me well for once; This Observer's experience of CF in Jockistan frankly beggared belief:

while the Edinburgh South Conservatives have made sure that I know I'm a member and are continually asking me along to campaign days; the Edinburgh CF branch, which as I understand it actually does exist, might as well not.

Since I joined the party in February, I have had precisely nil contact from Conservative Future. Indeed, had I not been an avid reader of political blogs I would not even have known that the organisation exists.

Strangely similar to my own impression of CF, except confirmed by personal experience in this case. I would, at this stage, add how their London branch election was attended by 10 people, of whom 8 attended purely because they were due for re-election into post, but the Tory Bear article about that has vanished into his invisible (and unsearchable) archive.

Further, CF's leading lights don't seem to take much interest in anything except writing personal puff-pieces; have a look at this, which to me reads more like a personal statement of "look how great I am and all the things I make happen" than a genuine enquiry into creating enthusiasm for politics amongst students.

While we're on the CF site, take a look at this article on youth dropout from education, trg or employment. Damn lies and statistics, Labour wrecking the nation, harrumpf harrumpf, yes? Good. Now read it again, but swap the word "Labour" for "Conservative". Doesn't that read uncannily like a press release from Labour HQ?

The article does not attack Labour policy and offer a credible alternative, it attacks Labour purely because they're Labour. This is ad hominem politics of the sort that all Tory bloggers rip to shreds when it originates from the left; why have "we", the Conservative movement, knowingly descended to the level of schoolboy mud-slinging? Are we really that unoriginal that we can't think of a workable alternative by ourselves? Should we really be carrying dead wood that seeks to glorify itself rather than work for the good of the country?

How far have we gone down the slippery slope?

Oh nuts to it, I thought I'd start this and stay all serious in article-style format, but then I promptly abandoned it. Plus, reading news-style blogs is a bit ... boring ... contrast Matt Wardman and Tory Bear for an example of what I mean. Nothing against Matt, I find his serious take on things a pleasant diversion from the personalised approach of most Tory bloggers, but it doesn't have the amusement factor of TB, nor the in-yer-face-ya-cahnt directness of Old Holborn.


But to serious matters. Labour's recent lurch into left-wing authoritarianism has hit new ground.

Before I go into detail tho, a personal anecdote. I studied History at school, to A-level. Within that I had to complete six separate modules. One was on the Bolsheviks gaining power in 1917 Russia, and three - three! - were on Adolf Hitler's rise to power in 1930s Germany. For a year or two afterwards I wondered why I had been made to study the beginnings of two of the most oppressive regimes of the 20th century.

Reading the headlines from the last week, I now understand why. It may be from the Daily Wail, but it is accurate, and a simple Google search returns the council's official page on the scheme as the first result.

My earlier comparison to the Bolshevik seizure of power and the rise of the Third Reich was flawed, I admit; this is more akin to the Staatsicherheitsdienst ('der Stasi') of the old East Germany. Paying people to spy on their neighbours was one of the hallmarks of the Stasi's system for internal repression. Now, if you couple this divisive and worryingly authoritarian move with the latest wheeze to give bouncers the power to hand out on-the-spot fines, then a worrying trend begins to take shape.

Cast your mind back a few years, to the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act's original incarnation. This nakedly authoritarian grab for power - comparable to Hitler's "Enabling Act" of 1933 - would have given Ministers the ability to amend primary legislation at will, bypassing the democratic process completely. The Act in its current form is still completely unacceptable in a democratic country, but it sits quietly on the statue books like a benign cancer, waiting to strike at any moment.

Something must be done to overhaul the political system and make politicians personally accountable for their actions in office. I do not know what, short of a civil war, but it needs to be done soon.

On the ground at the G20 demos

Wednesday 1st April, 2009

The Canadian woman standing in line with the hundreds of other protestors on Threadneedle Street looked vaguely confused when asked “Can you please put your placard down? I can’t see.” Yet with a gracious smile, she said “Oh, I’m sorry” and lowered it, impervious to the fact that it proclaimed “Canada Out Of Afghanistan”. Above us, a police helicopter hovered, filling the air with its insistent throbbing.

We were in the City of London’s Bank district. Crowds stood ten, twenty deep, hemmed in by cordons of police in hi-vis jackets, jostling at the edges and being politely but firmly guided backwards every so often by the police. Drums rolled and percussion instruments played, lending an almost carnival atmosphere to the scene. Banners and flags (“MAKE TEA NOT WAR”) appeared from the middle of Bank concourse itself.

Most ‘protestors’ turned out to be ordinary people out for a laugh, such as Matt. He was on his lunch break from the office, along with a handful of his colleagues who’d “come to see the fun, watch a few crusties get beaten up,” at the hands of the police. The lost Canadian woman, Veronica from Vancouver, turned around and frowned. “Why aren’t you supporting withdrawal from Afghanistan?” Matt laughed. “I think you’re in the wrong place, love”.

Everyone laughed and joked together, cheering whenever a policeman’s helmet was knocked askew or a particularly rowdy protestor was forced back a few paces. It was almost a sporting atmosphere, neatly divided between the British love for the underdog and sympathy for the poor coppers caught in the middle of it all.

Then it happened. At 12.45, the percussion band, who had been quietly edging towards the police cordon, reached the edge and began to push. The police line tensed, like a muscle, and held firm. The band tried and tried again, aided by dubious characters dressed in black with scarves obscuring their faces. Matt looked worried. “I’m out of here mate, this is going to get nasty”. A female Eastern European voice behind me whined “Get the pigs!” Policemen swayed, batons were drawn, voices were raised. A tall, imposing figure in black at the front of the push fell and resurfaced with blood streaming down his head. The mood perceptively changed.

This was no longer a peaceful demonstration. This was a full-on Protest, capital emphasis and all. The police struggled manfully to hold the line, pushing us back (no “please can you move, sir” now), sweeping photographers back from the elevated ledges they were snapping from. Far above us all, an ornamental clock hung from the side of a building. From the window adjacent to the clock, a man emerged, as cool as ice, and nonchalantly watched the seething crowds swaying back and forth. Occasionally he called down and pointed at some key tussle within the crowd.

A sudden commotion began behind us and a hand in the small of the back pushing me face first into the stinking beard of the hippy next to me. Police reinforcements had arrived, led by a burly Inspector. Again, the Eastern European woman piped up with, “We don’t want blood”. You could imagine her whining the same thing after the failed 1990 August Coup in Moscow. The band broke through, to a wave of cheers, and the protestors surged towards the Royal Bank of Scotland’s branch on the corner of Threadneedle and Bartholomew Street. None of them seemed to notice the great big “To Let” sign over the door. That didn’t stop the mob – for that was what it now was, fuelled by timpani drums and the greedy lust of success – advanced on the RBS offices. Coloured smoke began to waft from the direction of the police lines as black-masked rioters burst through the police lines and started chanting “Our streets!”

Several things stood out at this moment: the number of cameramen gathered around RBS; urgent figures dressed in black pushing their way towards the bank’s offices; the number of smokers in the crowd; the weird old hippy still beating his drum in front of me. Such was the scene as the first window of RBS shattered, at precisely 1.32pm. Cheers went up from the whole mob, the police (now augmented by riot police with helmets and shields) backing off. A senior policeman came and looked round the corner at the shattered window, shook his head like a disbelieving parent and turned to walk away. A plastic bottle bounced off the pillar next to his head.

Once RBS had been breached, to the accompaniment of about fifty cameras recording every movement, the crowd lost interest. I moved back to Bank square and observed the peaceful half of the protest. Some people were waving banners – for some reason the Green Party were present inside the police ‘kettle’ – and more still were just sitting around chatting. Compared to the hardcore elements crowing over RBS, the majority here were either students or genuine believers in their cause. Public speakers stood in front of the Bank of England, exhorting the ills of the capitalist banking system. ‘Fun police’ offered weed to passers-by. Somebody started dancing, and before long an impromptu rave had begun. Couples kissed. Girls rode past on bicycles bearing flower power placards. The violence evident on Threadneedle Street was nowhere to be seen here; and tellingly, neither were the sinister people in black. No longer were the crowds expectant, merely venting their feelings.


A City of London policeman on the edge of the protests commented, “It’s good that we have the freedom in this country to protest peacefully, just a shame that you get the idiots who spoil it for everyone”. But what had the 'peaceful' protest achieved? Broken windows, road closures, bloody noses and a street party. Hardly the beginning of the end for Britain's megabanks.

Spain "uses EU legislation to control Gibraltar seas"

For over 300 years, the old Rock has been a symbol of British pride in the Mediterranean. Since the 19th century Gibraltar has proven its worth to the Royal Navy, especially during the prolonged convoy battles against Hitler's U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic. Spain has long maintained a territorial claim over Gibraltar, basing this on spurious grounds of "territorial integrity" and falling back on skewed interpretations of UN resolutions. (yes, it's a wikipedia link, but it's also a fairly accessible guide to what was said and why, complete with backing references)

The latest in a long string of incursions and abortive Spanish attempts at reclaiming the Rock is an attempt to use EU environmental protocols to gain control over Gibraltarian territorial waters. What alarms me about this latest effort is the complicity of EU bureaucrats and the subversion of the green agenda into an instrument of Spanish foreign policy. While it is not in doubt that the 2002 referendum on joint sovereignty removed any doubts over the wishes of Gibraltarians themselves, the Spanish have pressed on regardless with their efforts to recapture the isthmus.

The worrying thing is that such moves come at a time when the Royal Navy is facing near-complete overstretch (to the point where Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels are undertaking essential duties once covered by HM Ships) and Britain's ability to withstand incursions by Spanish assets into British sovereign waters are vastly reduced. The Gibraltar patrol squadron consists of two 21-tonne boats (see HMS Sabre, above) that look little reduced from pleasure cruising craft; what hope do we have if the Spanish really make a move against British interests?

As much as it goes against my anti-EU instincts to trust any of that hopelessly corrupt institution's organs, I do hope the Gibraltar government's application to the European high court pays off and reverses this pernicious decision. Watch this space.

Brown and the MP code of conduct

Right at this moment in time (against a background of some bugger setting off fireworks in the street - how auspicious), the lead article on the BBC's news homepage is Brown's plan to make a legally binding code of conduct for MPs.

Normally I would be dead against this, but on the face of it, this is a very good idea. As with most other policies from the Labour party, however, the devil will lie firmly in the detail - not that any of that appears to be available. Aunty Beeb managed to put a fairly positive spin on the article, quoting Brown as saying "I did not expect to see instances where there are clear cases which maybe have to be answered for fraud." Then again, judging from the BBC's coverage of the expenses scandals, which glossed over Labour before settling on the Tories and giving much prominence to the departure of Julie Kirkbride, placing her name at the top of all articles relating to the simultaneous resignation of Margaret Moran.

It is through such subtle tricks that the BBC display their pro-Labour leanings. But anyway... the Times has an interesting take on Brown's proposal for reform, lumping it in with his refusal to stand down in any way, shape or form. Clearly the man is crazed by his lust for power; as well as change in the political system, which nobody disputes is long overdue, what Britain needs is the speedy removal of New Labour from power and the installation of a proper Conservative administration with the balls to clean up the vast damage caused by the last 12 years of student union-level politics, spin, deceit and constitutional vandalism.

The question is, will Cameron - at the head of the next government - have the minerals to push these changes through?

Here we are!

I anticipate that the majority of early readers to this will be driven from my old personal blog, which mainly contained highly personal rants about whatever issues weighed on my mind, with a smattering of political comment and the odd piece of original journalism.

To gain a wider audience, I've decided to separate the politics and journalism from the personal, because I think the wider world really couldn't care less about the mundane details of living in a West London backwater. (If you disagree, say so! Comments at the bottom)

Expect the layout to do surprising things in the next week or two while I tweak it to suit.