[happy monandæg] day of the moon

Despite disagreements, despite the workload we have on our hands this week, despite the previous posts so far, on which one kind soul commented: 'Bit heavy for Monday morning isn't it?', despite any negative vibes, it's going to be a wonderful day and a good lunch. Go to it rightly and may scallops rock yer tadger.

[britain] flat rate tax and cbi

I’m buying into an issue here which others with more claim to expertise have already dealt with. As your average Joe Bloggs, I asked a question on one site: how could a CBI be afforded and flat rate tax also? I suppose I was looking at our own 13% flat rate tax over here.

Here are some summaries of the issue for the benefit of those rare souls, such as me, who may not yet be au fait with the whole biz:

Radical UK Financial Reform. DK . Freebornjohn. Mr E. S&M reported over a year ago. Citizen's Basic Income. Tim Worstall.

Well, someone has costed it and a powerful lot of work it is. The bottom line is a 20% flat tax. Now I’d like to see how this and DK’s proposals can be combined. Stay tuned.

[litvinenko] the vexed issue of whom your sources are

I greatly appreciate comments of any hue on this issue because through thrashing it out, it might be possible to arrive at the truth and by so doing, we might have done a good turn.

Gracchi said: I heard a Radio 4 Start the Week in April where Anna Neistat of Human Rights Watch argued that the Russians had effectively, through their brutality, turned a nationalist into an Islamist movement.

Notsaussure said: Isn't this conflating two separate questions? Whatever one thinks about Russia vs Chechnya, one can still hold views on the propriety of bumping off people who hold the wrong views, and particularly on the propriety of bumping them off in London … I tend to ask who benefits most and who has the opportunity; there's one well-known chap who clearly had the opportunity and whose name springs immediately to mind.

You can read their full comments in the comments section of the last post.

I replied: No doubt at all the Russians were more than heavy handed. The Russians aren't noted for their delicacy. Who was more heavy handed here – the oranges or the greens in Ireland? The Boers or the British? The Canaanites or the Israelis? A better question – who was in the right? These issues go too far back to draw a conclusion about that. And it’s hardly bumping someone off for ‘wrong views’ as you’ll see further down.

What is at issue here is that the British backed the wrong horse in Chechnya, a terrorist training ground. Sympathies were naturally directed towards the Chechnyans because of anti-soviet sentiment, because the FCO and BBC are very pro-arab, as are elements of the Royal Family and therefore the only story coming out was of Russian barbarity and Chechnyen innocence and national self-determination. The only media which was telling the other side was in the Russian language which Brits don’t read. But it was equally well documented and attributed and no – it was not state controlled – this was still in the heady days of almost complete press freedom 1991 - 2001.

I read two articles yesterday very pro Anna P which showed she was admitted to the company of the warlords, treated as a friend and given safe passage and yet the articles constantly referred to her as a fighter for justice, brave woman and so on. The Russians say she was consorting with known mass-murderers but worse – abetting them. You say, ‘What rubbish’ but on what do you base this ‘what rubbish’? I even provided links in the last post which show beyond doubt that Alex V’s and Anna P’s friends were criminals and in two cases, known committers of atrocities. Here and here are two of them.

In Alex V’s case, there is now evidence he’d even gone over to the Muslims and the source was radio Echo Moskva. Predictably, the western press immediately assassinated this radio station by saying it was Gasprom funded. This is gross injustice to a fine station and which my very libertarian Russian friends listen to avidly as the voice of freedom. The presenters’ tone is always critical and the articles in no way support the Putin line. That’s why EM is listened to. Why is it not shut down then?

Yes, exactly. Why is it not shut down then? And why does Putin hold citizen conferences where unvetted questions are asked online? Certainly not for foreign publicity because the west doesn’t know of them. And why does every Ministry have a ‘priyomni’ time where the Minister is in attendance to answer citizen’s questions and I’ve seen him doing it? And why is Putin popular?

The thing is, the British blogger is playing with a stacked deck which has been kindly provided by the MSM, which is controlled. And equally the Russian is playing with the same. And neither appear to want to hear both sides of the issue even when they can get hold of it. Of course I may be wrong in this.

[accident prone] or just plain unlucky

Are you accident prone? Are you unlucky?

Britain's unluckiest man has suffered his 17th accident, falling down a manhole. John Lyne's misfortunes have included lightning strikes, a rock fall, near drowning and car crashes. Mr Lyne, 54, of Stainforth, will be out of action for eight months after his latest mishap.

Maybe you’re the type who’s just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe you just have bad luck. For example, you book a table at the local pub for 16 people from your office for lunch but when you get there, they have you in the V.I.P. room and are expecting the cash to flow whereas all you were hoping for was for them to put some tables together for a few drinks and nibbles.

BBC Health has an explanation but would that explanation cover this? And of course, everyone remembers Final Destination.

[worst movie ever] 2nd nomination – tom and viv

Appearances can be deceptive

Tim Almond submits a second nomination and it is indeed a worthy contender: Tom and Viv, about TS Eliot and Vivienne Haigh-Wood. It appears to have all the necessary qualities.

First, imdb: In 1915, T.S. (Tom) Eliot and Vivienne Haigh-Wood elope, but her longstanding gynecological and emotional problems disrupt their planned honeymoon...

Tim adds: So, when I saw it on a friend's video rack, I asked if I could borrow it. "Take it" he said, "It's terrible. I never finished it". Thing is, nor could I. The whole film is just location after location with Miranda Richardson's character being completely mad and creating a scene, whilst T.S.Eliot stands there looking embarrassed, with lots of irritating characters hanging around looking on.

The Washington Post called it: a stolidly literate new film ...

So, it goes onto the list and the plan is to wait until we have, say, 20 nominations, then run a reader-poll to see which is the worst. Agreed?

[litvinenko] just which side is the west supporting

We needn’t make too much of today’s headline: Suicide possibility of ex-KGB agent probed. This blog always thought it a possibility although, to be honest, it wasn't where my money was:

British detectives investigating the death of an ex-KGB spy probed the possibility he killed himself to discredit Russian President Vladimir Putin, police said. Increasing concerns over the reliability of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko's death-bed testimony have prompted police to check every detail of his version of events Nov. 1, the day he said he was poisoned, The Independent reported Sunday.

Look - the leap to blame Putin was premature, the leap to heartfelt emotional support for ‘Alexander’ may well have been misplaced, the leap to wild assertion by many commenters on how ‘the Russians’ would see him as a traitor but ‘we know better’ was predictable and now we have the conversion to Islam and ties with Chechnya reported by the anti-Putin Echo Moskva. The word suicide very much springs to mind in this context.

The man was not a Solzhenitsyn or a Sakharov, with international standing and one thing which must be stressed is that neither of these treated with the enemy. For that reason, Anna Politkovskaya, who made friends with Russia’s enemies, has to be treated with caution, no matter how much her 'fearless reporter' appearance appeals to journalists. People like Vladimir Rezun also present themselves as whistleblowers but questions arise when delving into their backgrounds.

A trawl of the majority of rightist blogs reveals a strong stance against Muslim extremism and the term 'Defending the West ' is often used. Yet the moment Russia is mentioned, all reason deserts many of these bloggers and they side with the very Muslim extremists they've been attacking - in this case the Chechnyans, responsible for Beslan among other atrocities. Putin is doing precisely what these blogs are calling for - cracking down on extremism and being vilified by the bloggers for doing what they ask for.

Nothing is straightforward in Russia and it is best if the British and Americans step back one pace on this issue and take a ‘wait and see’ stance, as UK Daily Pundit has. Links here and here if it's of interest.