Wake up America and Global Village too Let’s have serious political debate about all issues – and stop the puppet masters having excessive power !
What has the Sun newspaper ever done for Britain?
Promoted vulgarity
Cheered on xenophobia
Demeaned women
Led the lynchmobs
Lied
Lied again
Lied and lied and lied and lied etc.
Oh, that’s it, I’ve just thought of something useful the Sun has done for Britain.
Wrapped up millions of fish & chips!
properly translated he is saying BUY BUY US dollars
as these institutions always get it wrong when they go public- who are their real scriptwriters – devious market manipulators ! so BUY US DOllars
and watch these next 24 months for strengh, whether from an orchestrated crises or whatever reson is given !
well it is lovely to have Peter, master of spin and what shoudl or not be said!
and the reference to Boy George! somewhat confused as the pun is about lost sexuality, youth and little experience, beating up a hired sex worker ! catchy pop, so appealling to the masses !
whatever- the crowd at the conference today- with slippery Lord Kinnock in the background- looked like a past tory rented or specially invited audience !
fake ! and we do not seek any hard searching or soul searching or difficult & embarrassing questions- we are back to an orchestrated show – with much make believe! Labour has learned from Satchi, Tories and others !
who will win the next election- a removed rtight wing class of Etonians or a continued mafua from th eNorth- who have alreayd made a fortune in 12 yeras and shall go on for another 5 !
little choice and sadly few seem to care ! as real isssues are used as smokescreens , of weak concern !
cheers – lets roll!
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1184614595?bctid=41847358001
similar scandals and crimes in North Brazil and similar tourists from similar countries — what a comment on our supposed educated society!!
But the story below happened 5 years ago!
and now we have the incident at Rye Hill Prison where a Ukrainian who dies whilst supposedly under Primecare watch! scary! and who in the Government is asssiting this company ? as they have grown out of all proportions these past 12 years !! wow Labour sure helps some in Health Biz!
Paedophile held post as police surgeonAs sex offender gets 15 years, job loophole is revealed
Buzz up!
Digg it
A dangerous paedophile convicted yesterday of drugging, raping and filming girls got a job as a police doctor, despite previous accusations of sexually abusing children.
Robert Wells, 52, was jailed for 15 years after being found guilty of nine of the 11 charges he faced, including raping an 11-year-old girl twice and sexually assaulting her three times.
Wells, who denied all the offences, also filmed himself attacking another 11-year-old girl as she slept after giving the victim and her five-year-old sister Angel Delight dessert laced with tranquillisers.
The Winchester crown court jury of nine men and three women deliberated for seven and a half hours before clearing Wells of raping and indecently assaulting the five-year-old.
But in a shocking parallel to the case of the Soham murderer, Ian Huntley, it was revealed yesterday that a vetting loophole led to Wells getting a job as a police surgeon six years after being charged with assaulting two girls. Detectives fear he abused many more victims in his 27 years as a doctor.
In 1995, Wells was cleared of attacking an eight-year-old girl and a girl of 15 in Brighton when two separate trials at Lewes crown court collapsed following legal arguments. The General Medical Council decided to take no action.
However, in October 2001 he was sub-contracted through Primecare medical staffing agency to work for Hampshire police, examining victims of crime, despite being known to the neighbouring Sussex force.
Guidelines in place from 1993 to 2002 meant police were only obliged to carry out local checks. They now have to run checks everywhere the prospective employee lived for the previous five years.
Hampshire’s assistant chief constable, Colin Smith, who is responsible for police doctors in the force, said vetting procedures had been tightened as a result of the Wells case. He would not have employed Wells had he known of any previous allegations, but he said that Primecare, Wells’ main employer, had the major responsibility for carrying out checks.
Primecare said it completed all the required government checks at the time, and Hampshire police insisted they were satisfied Wells did not abuse any of the 20 girls under 16 he examined as part of 3,731 examinations he carried out for them from October 2001 until his arrest in February 2003.
Nevertheless, the case raises questions about how many more sex abusers might have slipped through the net and obtained jobs giving them access to children and vulnerable adults. Huntley, who murdered schoolgirls Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, got a job as a school caretaker in Soham, Cambridgeshire, despite a catalogue of sexual accusations against him from women and girls in Humberside, where he had previously lived; these were wiped from police records because he had no convictions.
Passing sentence yesterday, Judge Keith Cutler said Wells was a dangerous sex offender who used his status and wealth to gain the trust of his victims’ parents, and that his behaviour cast a shadow over the entire medical profession.
The offences took place in 2002 and 2003. But detectives believe Wells may have abused many more victims in his 27 years as a doctor and appealed for them to come forward.
Police officers, who described his deviousness and total refusal to cooperate with the investigation, are trying to decode encrypted computer files which could yield vital clues, although they admitted this could take years.
Detective Inspector Sara Glen, who headed the inquiry, said the computer file had a long list of girls’ names on it and she was convinced more crimes would be uncovered.
now !!
Coroner condemns Rye Hill jail where prisoner on suicide watch bled to deathBuzz up!
Digg it
James Sturcke guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 23 September 2009 18.57 BST Article history
A coroner today condemned “appalling and unacceptable conditions” at a privately-run prison where an inmate on suicide watch was allowed to bleed to death. Aleksey Baranovsky, 33, a Ukrainian national, died in a blood-covered cell at HMP Rye Hill, Warwickshire, in June 2006.
A jury was told that Baranovsky repeatedly self-harmed himself as a protest against his pending deportation after serving a seven-year sentence for burglary. Baranovsky feared he would be killed by Russian mafia if he was sent back home.
After being placed on constant supervision, Baranovsky was found unconscious, kneeling on the ground in his cell, with his head and arms resting on his bed.
Returning a narrative verdict, the jury found inadequacies and failures contributed to his death, which was caused by anaemia due to chronic blood loss and under-nutrition.
“The treatment that Aleksey received during the period that he was at Rye Hill was appalling and … unacceptable,” the assistant deputy coroner for Northamptonshire ,Tom Osbourne, told the inquest at Irthlingborough.
Baranovsky’s death was the third in a 15-month period at the GSL-run prison and came after inspectors concluded Rye Hill was “unsafe and an unstable environment, both for prisoners and staff”.
The jury found that failures to carry out an adequate mental health assessment and to assess health needs contributed to the death. It criticised the lack of communication between the healthcare service at the prison, run by private company Primecare at the time, and prison security and prison management, which led to “insufficient management of Mr Baranovsky’s wellbeing”.
Liz Clay, security manager at the prison, told the inquest that on one occasion “quite a lot of blood” had been left in the cell for more than 12 hours before it was properly cleaned.
Chaplain Charles Sweeney said other prisoners were concerned about the blood in Baranovsky’s cell. He said he thought there was a “lack of care and compassion” towards the inmate.
The Prison Reform Trust director, Juliet Lyon, said inquests into three deaths had highlighted serious shortcomings at Rye Hill. “Notwithstanding any improvements made since these tragic deaths, serious questions remain about the competence and accountability of its private providers and the private healthcare they commissioned at the time.
“The story of Aleksey Baranovsky’s final months is shocking and disturbing. No one should be so neglected or have to die such a lonely, lingering death.”
Jerry Petherick, for GSL, claimed huge improvements had been made since Baranovsky’s death. “I think we have learned from this enormously. It’s almost unrecognisable to the establishment of some time ago,” he said.
IT is hard not to feel like you are watching a Bond movie or a hostage drama when looking at how NAMA is playing out. Hostage dramas are compelling, which is why they make such good television.
The big questions are fascinating. How stable are the kidnappers? Will they get away with it? What price will the good guys put on the hostage? If they pay the kidnappers now, will they just do it again? Can’t the good guys just storm the kidnappers or maybe call their bluff?
The NAMA saga is easier to understand if it is watched through the lens of a hostage drama. The bankers, the creditors, the Government, and the old establishment who got us into this mess, are the kidnappers. They ruined the banks, but now they realise that the banks are their last chance. So they have taken hostage the shell that is the Irish banking system. They have a gun to the banks’ head and are claiming that if we don’t bail them out, the hostage will be killed. So they demand the cash or else they threaten to bring down the whole economy.
It’s a bit like watching the North Koreans with their bankrupt country and their pathetic ideology threatening all and sundry with ramshackle nuclear weapons, which might just devastate their neighbours. The reason anyone takes these creeps seriously is that they have a hostage called South Korea. So we have the bizarre spectacle of the USA indulging a country that starves its own people. As long as North Korea has South Korea and has a gun to its head, the world has to pay some attention. And the more bankrupt North Korea becomes, the more likely it is to do something mad.
The reason we take the banks seriously is that they have convinced us that without them the economy can’t recover. So the Government is both the kidnapper and the negotiator on our behalf. This is because the Government has already bought a stake in the banks and letting them go would mean that that stake is now worthless. So to keep its stake alive, it hangs on to the charade that it can neither let the banks go nor nationalise them.
So we are left with the hostage situation. We are the people who will pay the banks.
Like all hostage situations, there are two questions. First: if we settle and pay up, how do we know that the kidnapper was ever prepared to kill the hostage? And second: if we pay now, how do we know that the kidnapper won’t strike again? After all, the kidnapper has just been rewarded for bad behaviour.
In the NAMA case, the equivalent of this conundrum is that we must assess whether or not letting the banks go — and in the process saving us from handing over to them what could be up to €40bn — is a risk. If you believe that letting the banks go in an orderly fashion would not kill the economy, then there is absolutely no reason to pay a cent to NAMA.
International evidence here is interesting. There is no evidence from the world of finance and banking which says that a winding up of the banking system in a country and replacing it with a new banking system has any lasting effect on the economic performance of the country. In the US this year alone 300 banks and finance houses have gone to the wall and, according to the latest data, the US economy is tentatively recovering. Sweden wound up its worst banks without adverse effect. In France, banks are rarely called banks due to the frequency of bank collapses in the past and France is not a basket case — it recovered and constructed new banks.
Banks are like any other business: new ones replace old ones, and if we install a national deposit guarantee rather than a blanket guarantee, which can be allowed to lapse, we can prevent chaos.
The second question is: if we pay now and reward the kidnappers for bad behaviour, will they not just conclude that there is a blank cheque which will be signed to bail out every problem, thus encouraging them to repeat this bad behaviour again? So, instead of changing behaviour and saving the system, we risk encouraging bad behaviour.
There is also the problem of image. If we are seen as the sort of place that pays kidnappers, what is to stop them kidnapping again for an even bigger ransom? What is to stop bankers rolling up their other bad debts and dropping them into a NAMA mkII?
It is easy to imagine a constitutional challenge to NAMA by an average citizen who is about to be evicted.
This citizen might argue why his debts are being foreclosed on when the much greater debts of huge developers are being given a 10-year timeframe to be sorted out? Such a constitutional challenge could see the entire structure collapsing. On balance it would seem more logical to negotiate with the kidnappers rather than succumb to all their demands. This would mean suggesting that we might not extend the guarantee. This would send equity in the banks plummeting and would upset and unnerve the kidnappers. We might also suggest that we don’t think the hostage is worth the price. Sure, this might cause the share prices to drop back to cents but this is what we should want as it is the people who are going to foot the bill.
The share price is an indication of the confidence of the kidnappers. At the moment it is rising because they think they are going to get top dollar for their hostage and, in the process, they are going to escape jail. It is time now to recalibrate the balance of fear so that the kidnappers have to think twice about their next move.
Cadbury Chairman Rejects ‘Low-Growth’ Kraft’s ‘Unappealing’ Bid
Cadbury Plc, the world’s second- biggest confectionery company, said an unsolicited takeover offer from Kraft Foods Inc. is an “unappealing prospect” due to its rival’s business model and “lower growth” prospects.
Kraft’s cash and stock offer, worth 9.6 billion pounds ($16 billion) at the Sept. 11 closing price, “fundamentally fails to reflect the current value of Cadbury as a standalone business,” Cadbury Chairman Roger Carr said in a letter to Kraft Chief Executive Officer Irene Rosenfeld posted on the company’s Web site yesterday.
“Under your proposal, Cadbury would be absorbed into Kraft’s low growth, conglomerate business model, an unappealing prospect which contrasts sharply with our strategy to be a pure- play confectionery company,” Carr said in the letter dated yesterday. Kraft is “a company with a considerably less focused business mix and historically lower growth,” he wrote.
The value of Kraft’s offer has fallen from 10.2 billion pounds when it was announced on Sept. 7, as investors sold the company’s stock last week. London-based Cadbury, halfway through a four-year drive to increase profitability, said shareholders will receive “optimum value” by sticking with its focus on the faster-growing confectionery market.
Kraft has a market value of $38.5 billion after its shares fell 7.1 percent last week. Cadbury is worth 11.4 billion pounds after its shared surged 37 percent this past week to 775.5 pence following Kraft’s approach. The price tag for Cadbury, the maker of Dairy Milk chocolate and Trident chewing gum, may reach 937 pence per share for the successful bidder according to the average estimate of six analysts surveyed by Bloomberg.
‘Uncertain Value’
“The proposal is of uncertain value for Cadbury shareholders as underlined by the movement in the Kraft share price since your announcement,” Carr wrote.
Rosenfeld has led acquisitions including the $7.8 billion purchase of Paris-based Groupe Danone SA’s cookie unit to reshape the world’s second-biggest food company through international growth. Kraft is based in Northfield, Illinois.
Rosenfeld will speak at the University of Toronto on “Leading Transformational Change” later today, according to the Rotman School of Management’s Web site. Cadbury Chief Executive Officer Todd Stitzer is speaking at a Sanford C. Bernstein analyst conference in London on Wednesday, Sept. 16, where according to the Financial Times, he’ll lay out his strategy to keep the company independent.
Cadbury investors including Mario Gabelli, who runs Rye, New-York-based Gamco Asset Management Inc., said she’ll have to improve her offer to win their support
Raise Offer?
Lisa Gibbons, Kraft’s director of communications, declined to comment on the letter or confirm its receipt.
Cadbury’s four-year restructuring aims to increase the operating margin, a gauge of profitability, to a “mid-teens” percentage from 10 percent in June 2007. Under the program Stitzer plans to close 15 percent of all factories and cull staff globally.
The company has “a clear set of targets” and “a track record of delivery accepted by the market,” Carr said. “We have the scale, capabilities and resource to deliver on our commitments to shareholders
Total unecessary waste of money- unnecessary job losses greed by the bankers , lawyers and advisors? and the list just goes on and on and on !!!
surprise surprise!! what woman is supposedly at the top at Kraft?? Irene Rosenfeld another greedy jewish business tycoon ( forget madoff forget Lehman
forget Tannebaum etc etc forget AIG forget Bear Sterns etc etc
There is no synergy here ? there is no need for a deal expect for ther bankers fees etc etc and those that bought shares months ago, when the news leaked like always !
so Cadbury STOP and sell at no price as Kraft is a crafty scam, when seriousy investigated – if the business model was so sound , there would be no need for these latest deals
so what do they need to hide!?
Mark should behave. Who is more out of touch and protected form the real commercial world !
As this poll, in Monday’s Guardian, is more like a Government poll, and we all know the Government does not support a BBC split or sell off.
As it would not win votes!
Whilst Tories have adopted this strange and speculative policy!
Maybe as they expect to receive Murdoch support- and why not sell off the BBC which has become so commercial, so to pay excessive wages!!- for what they presume is commercial rates ! whilst they are not anserable to real commercial conditions !
This pretence should stop! and if you asked many ex BBC viewers they have already turned off ! and the corporation has been on a constant and consistent dumbing excercise and make the independent producers wealthy quick!!
