Several people have now been blocked from the March for England Facebook page for posting videos which show missiles being thrown by violent Mfe supporters on Sunday.
It's important to recognise why this is the case.
Missiles can be seen hitting passers-by and shop-fronts on Queen's Road. The videos show that MfE threw the first missiles, doing so within 100 yards of the start of the March.
The videos (links below) raise the question of where these missiles came from.
As they were thrown so soon after the start of the March, it suggests that MfE came armed with the intention of causing injury to the people of Brighton.
This, in turn, raises the question of their right to march in this city again.
A political demonstration attracts a whole different kettle (no pub intended) of rights to, say, a hate-filled gang of armed thugs hell-bent on violence because it hates the culture of our city.
Having made clear their intentions with their missile-throwing, the anger of the crowds intensified and some people started to move into Queen's Road to stop the March for England physically.
For a time, the succeeded. After about 10 minutes during which time the March went nowhere, the police managed to break up the crowd opposing them.
But the March was defeated at that point. Instead of a proud, sunny walk through Brighton's busiest tourist and commercial areas, they were shuffled off down Church Street.
This was a mistake by the police. Church Street was unprepared, unwarned, cafe-furniture got damaged and diners disturbed - some responded by throwing their meals over the MfE in disgust.
People had a right to know the route of the March in advance to they they could choose to avoid it, but this right to go about their business was trampled over by police horses in favour of providing what the Brighton Argus (see below) has called a "misguided minority" with every right to go about theirs, unlawful though much of it was.
The MfE and their friends in the English Defence League, the "Casuals" and other groups have characterised the March as an attack on women and children by the great unwashed of Brighton.
This they have used to justify calls for an EDL march in Brighton, a National Demo in Brighton and a Jubilee Day outing, all with the intention of smashing up 'lefties' in the city.
The videos (links below) give the lie to their analysis, take away their justification for 'revenge' and also undermine their right to return under the banner of 'legitimate protest'.
That's why they banned them from their page.


Argus Editorial: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3441111664245&set=a.1702445398675.2088522.1164159895&type=1

VIDEOS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcJlrhcQQuM&feature=youtu.be
http://twitpic.com/9czbyq

The Sun, The Tories and the Police - why so close?

Is it entirely surprising that the Conservative Party, the Sun and the police developed such a sickly, incestuous relationship?

From Rebekah Wade's loan horse to job offers to former Met Commissioners at Tory HQ or within the Murdoch empire, the trickle evidence illustrating the increasingly sordid and unhealthy triumvirate has turned into a flood in recent days.

Possibly the most harmful outcome of this relationship was the perversion of the course of the Daniel Morgan murder trial - this particularly murky affair is yet to sink into the public consciousness in the way the Milly Dowler phone hacking story did.

It seems that cash and favours were routinely paid to police officers by Sun-hired private investigators and journalists. It's almost as if the force was the paper's only reliable fall-back on a slow news day.

But should this be such a surprise to us, given the origins of this relationship?

During the year-long Wapping Dispute of 1986-1987, the Metropolitan Police effectively acted as a kind of SS Liebstandarte Rupert Murdoch - a personal bodyguard would do anything to protect their glorious leader.

For a year, they beat, kicked, locked up and lied against 6,000 sacked printers and their supporters outside their new fortress.

During the Leveson Inquiry, corrupt policeman after corrupt policeman has trotted out the line that the force had more important things to do than investigate phone hacking. But in 1986-87, thousands of police were ordered onto the streets, not to protect anyone from terrorism, but to enforce a minor aspect of the law relating to the number of people allowed on a picket line.

But the origins of this fellowship of felons is to be found in the year before Wapping - 1984-1985, when the Sun, the police and the Tories joined forces to defeat the miners. Part of a war against the unions, this campaign forged an alliance that only now is beginning to unravel. At the behest of the Tories, driven by a need to solve a chronic crisis of capitalism, the police, cheerled by the Sun, were sent in to assault and illegally arrest and imprison thousands of miners and their supporters.

The collateral damage was incalculable - miners' wives driven to prostitution, miners' kids went hungry, the men driven to danger scrabbling for spare coal off slag heaps, the collapse of British industry, the destruction of communities and even the idea of community itself as Thatcher declared society's non-existence.

The shift of power left a cabal of ruthless criminals to savage the world economy in their own short-term interest - at the helm of the banks, they drove us all to the brink of bankruptcy.

But to the victor, the spoils, as they say: Murdoch's reward for his support of union-busting was a year-long loan of a police force given carte-blanche to defend Fortress Wapping and the Murdoch Empire.

In such times are true friendships formed - and enemies made. Sun journalists found that if no-one else would talk to them, there was always a willing Tory MP or yet another bent copper who could be bribed or paid to tell lies, printed as fact in The Sun.

With this lot in charge, it is no wonder that such dire levels of corruption, malpractice and criminality were allowed to go on? There was one law for most of us and a get-out-of-jail-free card for the trio of trash who made up the biggest gang in Britain.

With yet more revelations to emerge, it is only to be hoped that revolutionary sentiment grows in Britain, and with it the desire to put people in charge of every workplace, town and country in the world who have the interest of humanity at heart, and throw out those who have the heart of humanity for their daily diet.

Standing on your own two feet.

I was brought up to 'stand on my own two feet', to 'pay my way' and go out in the world and win self-respect and the respect of others by earning a living.

'No-one owes you a living' was another cliche which resonates from my childhood to the present day.

The thing is, these views invariably came from Conservatives, who believed that the welfare state should be kept severely in check, lest the feckless take advantage of taxpayers' generosity.

Yet within the last two weeks, something very odd has happened. The Conservative Party has abandoned any pretence that people should 'stand on their own two feet'. It has become the party of the expanding state, the party of subsidies and crutches.

The Tories want the taxpayer to subsidise the unemployed for up to two months while they go on work experience schemes. Participants are not standing on their own two feet, they are standing on the feet of the taxpayer. The Tories also want to subsidise big private companies by offering them free labour. So the big companies are not standing on their own two feet on this one either. They are relying on state handouts.

What Conservatives fail to realise is that being paid is what gives workers self-respect and the respect of others, not simply doing work, especially if that work is menial.

Let's have a look at this in more detail, step-by-step, as recent research has identified a strong correlation between right-wingers and the educationally sub-normal.

1. Get paid.

2. Pay your bills - you know, like rent and other stuff.

3. Job done, you have 'paid your way' in the world and deserve to hold your head up high.

What is further baffling is the attitude of the big companies. Given that there is actual work to do for the people on these slave schemes, why is that work not paid work? Why are the skills of Workfare shelf-stackers zero-rated when compared to workers who have successfully applied for a real job and may be on their very first day?

Given the almost incalculable profits of the companies involved, why can they not spare six quid an hour to pay people who are working for them?

As today's Guardian points out, there is a huge underbelly of unsavoury slave labour in Sussex, with unsuspecting benefit claimants being forced to clean private houses - for no pay at all.

The blame for the near-collapse of Workfare is being laid at the door of left-wing paper-sellers, whom I happen to know are relishing the limelight, and expect today's shopping centre sales to treble.

But all these people are doing is pointing out that the central part of 'work experience' or 'the experience of work' is the experience of being paid. Pay packets are seriously addictive to workers, they literally can't get by without their monthly or weekly fix of pay. Once you've been paid, you never want to stop working in favour of going on the dole.

Is Cameron's Cabinet simply a bunch of class-prejudiced, Bullingdon Bullies hell-bent on grabbing as much free labour as they can for their millionaire mates? Surely not?!

But what else are people to deduce from this abandonment of traditional values. I think the damage this could do to the Tory Party is immense, and yes, I am one to give this particular dog a damn good kicking when it's down.

Republic or Monarchy?

It struck me the other day that Monarchists do not call for the abolition of Parliament, whereas Republicans do call for the abolition of the Monarchy.

Monarchists stopped calling for the suspension or prorogation of Parliament shortly after they stopped arresting MPs during Commons debates - about 350 years ago.

But they never actually called for its abolition - they saw it as a useful tool of Monarchical rule, legitimising the Divine Right of Kings.

These days, Parliamentarians have turned the tables. Few call for the abolition of the Monarchy, as the Monarchy is a useful tool of Parliament - executive powers to declare war, creating a sense of stability and so on.

But maybe it's time the Monarchists fought back with direct calls for the abolition of Parliament. After all, Parliament has rarely been more unpopular, and some of the arguments used by republicans against the Monarchy could easily be turned on their heads (once those heads had been chopped off, of course!).

For instance, the idea that Parliament 'brings in tourists' could easily be ridiculed - how many holidaymakers do you ever see in the Public Gallery? And of those, how many actually pay to be there?

Secondly, the idea that Parliament 'boosts Britain's reputation abroad' is also hogwash - ask the people of Iraq, for instance, what they make of British democracy. Or any country, for that matter.

A traditional Republican criticism of the Monarchy - that it wastes public money - could also be turned like a captured cannon against its own army. Isn't it the MPs, with their illegal and exorbitant expenses claims, who are the real squanderers of the public purse?

With respect for the Queen at an all-time high, surely it's time for Her Maj to prove that she could do a much better job than a succession of jumped up politicians?

Sexism in football

..and we return to the passions enflamed by spherical pieces of leather being kicked around a field.

Last night I attended a meeting with the same title as my last blog - Racism in Football.

A fellow socialist who I have known for some years gave the introductory talk, and I realised I am not the only one who believes that football has all the joys of dance, ballet, drama, comedy and opera - among others, rolled into one, and somehow made even better. More of this later, maybe.

At the very end of a good discussion, another (female) friend piped up with a comment along these lines: "What about sexism - are there any women in football? It completely alienates women - the only women you see at football matches are there with their husbands because they think they might get a meal."

There is no doubt that professional football is sexist in the extreme, in the sense that women are not allowed to play, and in that women's football is a starving, poverty-stricken relative of the men's game.

But the sexism is different from the racism. You don't get openly sexist chanting (though the songs about Posh Spice and other players' wives can be abusive).

As fans, women are welcome at matches and regularly attend. Although it is common to see women accompanied by men at matches, and less commonly by women or alone, in my experience women are in it for the football as much as the men are. Even listening to the telly, you can hear them scream as their team comes close to scoring. Stand in front of a woman at a game, chances are your ears will be ringing by the end.

I know a bunch of women who go to every Spurs away game. They have paid for away season tickets to do so, and make the effort to drive their minibus every time from the South Coast to places as far away as Swansea or Newcastle. I have also seen them abroad, watching pre-season friendlies with European sides. Not only do they know all the players' names, where they play, what their strengths and weaknesses are, who we are looking for in the transfer market etc etc they can out-sing and outshout any opposing set of fans anywhere in the country, as all good Yids should.

They don't need a man to take them to games, though they often do take men along with them, and it's patronising, even coming from a woman, to suggest otherwise.

I'd be all in favour of women playing in the football league, I think it would do wonders for the game and would improve skill levels and maybe even tactics.

And one day, given the billionaires' desperation to find the best talent and sell the game to audiences of millions, it will happen. All the big clubs have women's teams and should involve them increasingly with the academies that produce the top male talent.

It is too 'accepted' that football is a man's game, although there are voices out there campaigning for women in football - Tracey Crouch MP, for example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13874899 or players Eni Aluko or Rachel Yankey (a Gooner, unfortunately) http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jun/21/england-womens-football-transformed

But to throw the baby out with the bathwater would be wrong.

Watching football at its best is sheer joy. Seeing an ordinary player do something no-one thought he was capable of; seeing the best players do things no-one thought anyone was capable of can inspire and amaze.

An Olympic athlete might dance a beautiful, choreographed dance with a ball, but how would he or she perform if Ledley King were trying to take that ball off them? It is the competitive element in football which demands the quality of skill, agility and strength.

"Football" as it is organised today, is sexist, but it does not alienate all women. Football is racist, but it does not alienate all black people. A game involving the kicking of a leather ball round a field cannot in and of itself alienate anyone.

Wet bottom incident

Statement of Claimant Andrew Timothy Burnyeat this July 12 2012.

Entering the St James Tavern on January 15 2012 at around 3pm, I took my usual place on a stool at the southern end of the bar nearest the stairwell.

Within a couple of seconds of sitting down, I noticed a damp, cold sensation around my buttocks and arsehole. I immediately got up to find I had a wet bottom.

I then noticed that my stool and the one next to it were not only damp but had puddles of water in them. It is important to point out that the bar stolls concerned are of the ‘saddle’ variety, containing shaped depressions.

Two soaking bar towels had been left on the bar to dry, and had dripped over the customer side of the bar onto the stools.

I went down the stairwell to the gents toilet, whereupon I spent half an hour trying to dry my arsehole, testicle region, buttocks and trousers ( I was wearing denim jeans which soaked up a lot of the water and were very difficult to dry) and boxers.

At this point, having been unsuccessful in drying my clothes, I then put them back on as I had decided to go home and dry them there. At this point, of course, my arsehole, buttocks and testicles got wet all over again.

It was a very cold day and by the time I got home I can say that I was very cold in very sensitive areas indeed!

I dried myself and my clothes and turned up the heating, stayed in all night and warmed up.

Would this marked the end of my tale of woe!

About a week later I found I was suffering from a cold and discomfort on sitting down. I took some lemsip and sat on cushions, but the symptoms just got worse. It was agony to sit down and the cold turned into a violent fever.

I went to see the doctor and he looked at me like I was a leper. “You look like shit,” he said. (This is now the subject of a separate claim.)

He diagnosed me with a terrible case of piles, after he had shoved his finger up my arsehole. (This is also now the subject of a separate claim.)

He also diagnosed me with the flu. When he found out about the wet stool incident, he said that was without doubt the cause of both conditions!

I immediately contacted ambulancechasersRus.com, a firm of caring solicitors who live only to help poor people that get into scrapes, even when they do it on purpose.

They said that I had grounds for a claim in excess of £11 million against the St James, but that they would probably offer to settle out of court for a free pint, in which case I should accept.

I therefore claim my £11 million and hope this will set an example to bar staff everywhere not to leave rancid dishwater in any place that might infect the arseholes of customers that frequent their establishments.

ANDREW TIMOTHY BURNYEAT

Racism in football

Walking towards White Hart Lane as one of dozens of fans, about 15 minutes before kick off vs Everton on Wednesday night, I overheard a fan discussing Spurs' plan to upgrade the stadium.

"Yeah, they should knock down all the houses in Tottenham with the scum in them, then send 'em back to the Sahara Desert." He wasn't joking. By the scum he meant local residents, many of whom are black.

I didn't challenge him as I was on my own on my way to meet a mate and he was very big and with his mates. I wouldn't even now know where to start with such a ridiculous statement.

After the riots, Spurs chairman Daniel Levy made a commitment that Spurs would stay in Tottenham. Looking round at the businesses in the area that depend on the trade of 30,000 fans needing food, drink and Spurs merchandise, it's hard to imagine what kind of desert Tottenham would become without the presence of the club.

Spurs is almost by nature an an anti-racist club, situated as it is in Britain's most ethnically diverse area, and one of its poorest. You don't hear racist chanting at Spurs in the main, though there have been exceptions, and I'm not including the chants of "Yido!" aimed at Jermaine Defoe and other players as a compliment every time they do something good.

The worst it gets at Spurs is chants of "You only live round the corner" to visiting Polish or Greek supporters during European matches.

I wonder if the recent events involving Tom Adeyemi, Luis Suarez and John Terry gave my fellow Spurs supporter the confidence to say what he did. It is certainly possible that Liverpool FC's defence of Suarez encouraged a racist fan to target Adeyemi.

Adeyemi's reaction was moving. It showed that racist insults can and do hurt their targets, and that this is reason enough not to do it. I feel this was a turning point in the recent mini-tide of racist incidents. It was a moment when millions of people saw a young lad desperately upset, a moment where people realised things had gone too far. A moment when people realised that the clubs must do more than they are doing to tackle racism.

Kenny Dalglish is a legend, and Liverpool is not a club known for racism - quite the opposite in my experience. But he and the club missed opportunities over Suarez and Adeyemi to put things right. In their actions, they made things worse.

Every recession is accompanies by outbreaks of racism as scapegoats are sought to take the blame instead of those in charge of the economic mess. Each time, it takes different forms.

Millions may hold the views they do about immigration, but this does not translate into millions of demonstrations of outright hostility toward people because of the colour of their skin. In order to change that, role models like footballers must be seen to be doing it on a regular basis and for this to become acceptable, even fashionable.

We must all make sure this never happens by making sure the clubs are under pressure to tackle the problem properly wherever it raises its head.