Questions for the candidates by Mikhail Gorbachev

There has been unusual interest throughout the world in the U.S. presidential race.

 

Skeptics, of whom there are quite a few, say the campaign is just a marathon show that has little to do with real policymaking. Even if there’s a grain of truth in that, in an interdependent world the statements of the contenders for the White House are more than just rhetoric addressed to American voters.

 

Major policy problems today cannot be solved without America – and America cannot solve them alone.

 

Even the domestic problems of the United States are no longer purely internal. I am referring first of all to the economy. The problem of the huge U.S. budget deficit can be managed, for a time, by continuing to flood the world with “greenbacks,” whose rate is declining along with the value of U.S. securities. But such a system cannot work forever.

 

Of course, the average American is not concerned with the complexities of global finance. But as I talk to ordinary Americans, and I visit the United States once or twice a year, I sense their anxiety about the state of the economy. The irony, they have said to me, is that the middle class felt little benefit from economic growth when the official indicators were pointing upward, but once the downturn started, it hit them immediately, and it hit them hard.

 

No one can offer a simple fix for America’s economic problems, but it is hard not to see their connection to U.S. foreign policies. Over the past eight years the rapid rise in military spending has been the main factor in increasing the federal budget deficit. The United States spends more money on the military today than at the height of the Cold War.

 

Yet no candidate has made that clear. “Defense spending” is a subject that seems to be surrounded by a wall of silence. But that wall will have to fall one day.

 

We can expect a serious debate about foreign policy issues, including the role of the United States in the world; America’s claim to global leadership; fighting terrorism; nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction; and the problems caused by the invasion of Iraq.

 

Of course I am not pretending to write the script for the presidential candidates’ debates. But I would add to this list of issues two more: the size of America’s defense budget and the militarization of its foreign policy. I am afraid these two questions will not be asked by the moderators. But sooner or later they will have to be answered.

 

The present administration, particularly during George W. Bush’s first presidential term, was bent on trying to solve many foreign policy issues primarily by military means, through threats and pressure. The big question today is whether the presidential nominees will propose a different approach to the world’s most urgent problems.

 

I am extremely alarmed by the increasing tendency to militarize policymaking and thinking. The fact is that the military option has again and again led to a dead end.

 

One doesn’t have to go very far to find an alternative. Take the recent developments on nonproliferation issues, where the focus has been on two countries – North Korea and Iran.

 

After several years of saber-rattling, the United States finally got around to serious talks with the North Koreans, involving South Korea and other neighboring countries. And though it took time to achieve results, the dismantling of the North Korean nuclear program has now begun.

 

It’s true that nuclear issues in Iran encompass some unique features and may be more difficult to solve. But clearly threats and delusions of “regime change” are not the way to do it.

 

We have to look even deeper for a solution. “Horizontal” proliferation will only get worse unless we solve the “vertical” problem, i.e. the continued existence of huge arsenals of sophisticated nuclear weapons held by major powers, particularly the United States and Russia.

 

In recent months there seems to have been a conceptual breakthrough on this issue, with influential Americans calling for revitalizing efforts aimed at the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons. Both John McCain and Barack Obama have now endorsed that goal.

 

I have always been in favor of ridding the world of weapons of mass destruction. On my watch, the Soviet Union and the United States concluded treaties on the elimination of a whole class of nuclear weapons – Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) missiles – and on A 50 percent reduction of strategic weapons, which led to the destruction of thousands of nuclear warheads.

 

But when we proposed complete nuclear disarmament, our Western partners raised the issue of the Soviet Union’s advantage in conventional forces. So we agreed to negotiate major cuts in non-nuclear weapons, signing a treaty on this issue in Vienna.

 

Today, I see a similar and even bigger problem, but the roles have been reversed. Let us imagine that 10 or 15 years down the road the world has abolished nuclear weapons. What would remain? Huge stockpiles of conventional arms, including the newest types, some so devastating as to be comparable to weapons of mass destruction.

 

And the lion’s share of those stockpiles would be in the hands of one country, the United States, giving it an overwhelming advantage. Such a state of affairs would block the road to nuclear disarmament.

 

Today the United States produces about half of the world’s military hardware and has over 700 military bases, from Europe to the most remote corners of the world. Those are just the officially recognized bases, with more being planned. It is as if the Cold War is still raging, as if the United States is surrounded by enemies who can only be fought with tanks, missiles and bombers. Historically, only empires had such an expansive approach to assuring their security.

 

So the candidates, and the next president, will have to decide and state clearly whether America wants to be an empire or a democracy, whether it seeks global dominance or international cooperation. They will have to choose, because this is an either-or proposition: The two things don’t mix, like oil and water.

 

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, is president of the International Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political Studies in Moscow.

Defend Simon Furze

Simon Furze, A CWU rep and SWP member was sacked by letter Saturday morning. Simon and another union member Kyle, where disciplined because his supervisor agreed that he needn’t deliver some of the (Spam)-unaddressed mail to his round at a certain point because he was so busy- but then denying he said that.

The real reason has more to do with his activism than unaddressed post (that nobody wants anyway).

This as well as the attacks on SP and SWP union activists in Unison is a worrying development, it not just high profile union members who can be victims of a witch hunt, but anyone who stands up for themselves.

Below is the original e-mail informing me of Simon’s sacking, I can’t make the campaign meeting tonight, but if you’re in the area tonight I would encourage you to support simon.

Hello everyone,

 

Simon (Eisa) recieved a letter on Saturday morning telling him that he has been sacked. This is a blatant attack on Simon as a union rep, as Kyle has had no charges against him as yet.

 

There was a protest staged outside of Simon’s workplace on Monday morning and CWU members in there walked off the floor in protest.

 

There will be a campaign meeting tomorrow night at 6:30pm (Wednesday 2nd

July) at the Cross Corners Community Centre, Thurcaston Rd, LE4 (Just off Loughborough Rd, near Belgrave Hall).

There will be a national campaign launched and we are encouraging other unions to get involved in this campaign.

We will be organising another protest for next week, so please come along and bring your union banners!

 

If you need more info, please contact me on 07852898779.

 

Sadia Jabeen

 

Terry Fields, Militant MP dies – the workers’ MP on a workers’ wage

We heard the sad news that Terry Fields, Militant supporter and MP for Liverpool Broadgreen (1983 -92), has died over the weekend after a long struggle with cancer.

Terry was a larger than life figure and a fine representative of the Liverpool working class. A ‘salt of the earth’ man who dedicated his efforts to the cause of the working class. Always smiling and joking, he was always seen wearing his black leather jacket, even in Parliament, a place he pretty much hated. He served his time there from 1983, when he was elected along with Dave Nellist and later Pat Wall as part of the Militant trio, until 1992. This was the culmination of decades of work by Militant supporters in the Merseyside labour movement. They had refused to abandon the struggle within the Labour Party.

As a militant trade unionist and firefighter, Terry was elected to the executive of the Fire Brigades Union. During the 1977 firefighters’ strike he joined Militant. Through his work, he was selected to become the prospective Labour candidate for Kirkdale when the sitting member, James Dunn, left the party to join the Social Democratic Party. With the reorganisation of the parliamentary boundaries, a new constituency was created, Broadgreen, in which Terry was selected as the candidate. He went on to take the seat for Labour in the 1983 general election, despite the defeat for Labour on a national scale. As with the other comrades, Terry stood on a socialist programme and held to the socialist principle that he would live on the average wage of a skilled worker, in his case a firefighter. The rest of his parliamentary salary would be put back into the labour movement.

During the election campaign he was told: “Just promise me one thing – you won’t change.” Terry replied: “Many have said it before, but there’s no way I’ll change. I’ve got no pretentions to enhance my own life style on the backs of working people, when you see the conditions and the support that they’ve given me.” And this was true. He stuck by his principle to the very end.

The election in Broadgreen in 1983 was hugely important as, in the midst of Thatcher playing the Falklands card to the maximum and the Labour Party being undermined by the treachery of the right wing, a new candidate putting forward a socialist programme increased the Labour vote, while elsewhere it collapsed. This put the lie to the argument of the right wing that Labour’s relatively left-wing manifesto was the “longest suicide note in history.”

At the time, I was national organiser of the Militant Tendency and was responsible, with a team of comrades, for overseeing our parliamentary work. I remember Terry and Dave at the first meeting we had to discuss the work. It was new unchartered waters for us and we had to plan the work with dedicated teams of comrades not only in parliament but also in the constituencies. How the MPs would work in and out of parliament was discussed. It was essential to be a tribune of the working class, which Terry was keen to perform. He spoke occasionally in parliament, but most of his activities were outside, addressing labour movement meetings, visiting picket lines, etc.

Terry’s whole manner and friendly approach made it difficult for our enemies, as he did not fit into the stereotype and he was obviously not a careerist. Everyone who knew him have the abiding memory of Terry patiently listening to workers or constituents and quietly discussing the issues with them – a true workers’ representative.

At the same time as his election to parliament, the left won a majority on the Liverpool City Council, with its Militant deputy leader Derek Hatton. Terry played a key role in the struggle of the Liverpool City Council, standing shoulder to shoulder with the working class of Liverpool against the Tory government. Again this position was built up over years of patient work in the Labour Party, initially against the right-wing Braddock machine which controlled the party with a Stalinist grip.

Terry also threw himself into supporting the miners’ strike in 1984-85, speaking in the coalfields and elsewhere. Terry truly hated the ruling class and their acolytes. The class struggle was everything to him, and showed how the working class would not only resist the system, but would eventually show the socialist way forward for society. What a total contrast with the rarefied atmosphere of the House of Commons! That was why Terry hated going to parliament. He was like a fish out of water under these conditions.

Terry addressed all the Militant Rallies up and down the country as well as in the Albert Hall. I recall that Terry often opened up a speech with a joke, such as “I would like to extend greetings from the Parliamentary Party. I would like to, but I can’t.” However, with the witch-hunt in progress, and the editorial board being expelled in 1983, the bureaucracy started to tighten the reigns. The MPs were warned not to speak on Militant platforms. Then, at one national meeting, Terry appeared on the platform, to everyone’s merriment, with a paper bag over his head, with the eyeholes and mouth cut out and his glasses on. It was a typical Terry Fields’ stunt! He simply ridiculed the powers-that-be and their bureaucratic dictates.

In the general election of 1987, Terry again increased his majority, while Labour under Kinnock was massively defeated nationally. Considered a Tory marginal in 1983, Terry’s majority increased from 3,800 votes to 6,047, some 48.6% of the vote. The right wing were stony silent about this remarkable victory and simply repeated the lie that socialist policies were unpopular.

Terry also played a prominent role in the campaign against the poll tax which advocated non-payment. Millions refused to pay the tax which ended with Thatcher’s resignation. Terry refused to pay his poll tax and was jailed on 11^th July 1991 for 60 days, the only Labour MP to have been jailed for non-payment. Comrades held regular protests outside the prison until his release.

In 1991, the Militant Tendency was thrown into a heated faction fight over whether or not to abandon our long-term work in the Labour Party. This became known as the ‘open turn’ debate.

The whole episode really took off with the Walton by-election in Liverpool. The left-wing MP, Eric Heffer, had died. The left had put up Militant supporter Leslie Mahmood as their candidate. She was bureaucratically denied the position and Peter Kilfoyle, the regional organiser and arch witch-hunter on Merseyside, was chosen instead. The leadership of Militant were under pressure to stand independently as a “real” Labour candidate. Myself and Ted Grant opposed the idea in a special meeting in Liverpool. We were isolated and the decision was taken to stand, which threatened 40 years of work in the party. The fact that the MPs could be expelled as a result was of no consequence.

Whether the Militant MPs would have avoided expulsion without Walton it is not possible to say. Walton, however, made it inevitable.

After a massive campaign to get Leslie elected, on polling day some 2,700 people voted for the “real” Labour candidate. The disappointment was palpable. Kilfoyle had won comfortably. Ted Grant and myself urged the comrades to reconsider their position at a national meeting called just after the by-election result, but they would hear nothing of it. For them, it was a great “success” and we should consider developing this further on the same lines, starting with an open organisation in Scotland.

The Walton fiasco was, as predicted, used by the Labour bureaucracy to push through expulsions, including the Militant MPs. The soft left capitulated. One of these was NEC member, Clare Short MP. She had made up her mind to support expulsions after Walton, not only of those involved in Leslie Mahmood’s campaign, but also of the two Militant MPs (Pat Wall had died in 1990). “The most difficult task I have ever undertaken as a member of the NEC was the action we took to declare Dave Nellist and Terry Fields unsuitable as Labour MPs… The decision was difficult and painful – not least as the two did not admit they were members of Militant.”

On 24^th July 1991, a few weeks after Walton, Labour’s NEC suspended 85 party members and decided the cases of Nellist and Fields would be handled in September. Both were later expelled by Labour’s National Constitutional Committee. In the general election of 1992, both lost their seats – Terry to Jane Kennedy.

We salute Terry’s courageous stand while he was a Member of Parliament and his years of effort both supporting and leading the working class. In Terry’s immortal words, “A Militant is a moderate who has got off their knees.” He was an honest class fighter and will be remembered for this.

The editorial board of Socialist Appeal wishes to extend their condolences to Terry’s wife and family. Terry leaves widow Maureen, 68, children Denise, 48, Michael, 45, and Paula, 40, Stephen, 37, and 10 grandchildren and a great-grandchild.

Statement on Tower Hamlets councillors’ defection

Latest from SWP-Respect …

 

It with great regret that we have learnt that Tower Hamlets councillors Oliur Rahman, Rania Khan and Lutfa Begum have left Respect. Press reports suggest they have joined or are going to join New Labour. Respect Renewal councillor Shahid Ali is also joining New Labour.

 

The Respect councillors were elected on a platform of opposing the occupation of Iraq, the government’s privatisation policies, the transfer of housing stock, the introduction of ID cards and the retention of the Tory anti-union laws.

 

It is regrettable that they have now turned their backs on the people who elected them.. The councillors’ desire to retain their seats should not have been put before the interests of the people who originally voted for them.

 

The recent split in Respect has created conditions in which New Labour can seek to regain the initiative in Tower Hamlets but Respect/Left List supporters will continue to oppose New Labour and the other establishment parties. We know that many in the working class movement look on the decline of the Labour government with mounting concern and desparately want a real left alternative.

 

We will continue with our efforts to help create an alternative left party that working people can look to for a defence of their living standards and their trade unions. A party that struggles against war and the racism it breeds.

 

 

Respect/The Left List

209 Coborn House, 3 Coborn Road, London E3 2DA

The Dreyfus affair…

I note that Inspector Chris Dreyfus has claimed that he was not at the anti-Bush demonstration, acting as an agent provocateur. You will recall that the Daily Mail ran an article by Yasmin Whittaker-Khan, claiming that a senior policeman, later identified as Chris Dreyfus, had been posing as a demonstrator, and seeking to inflame tensions. George Galloway MP subsequently rasied the issue with a letter to the Home Secretary.

However, If you look at the blog of Linda Jack, who is a Lib Dem, and a friend of Yasmin Whittaker-Khan,

Linda says that she was at the same party as Yasmin when they met the police officer in question.

Linda Jack confirms that Yasmin actually addressed Inspector Chris Dreyfus by name at the demo, and he responded to her, and acknowledged her.

Chis Dreyfus says he has taken legal advice, so we await developments with interest.

WHO WAS TO BLAME FOR VIOLENCE AT ANTI-WAR PROTEST?

New evidence has now emerged that the violent attack on the anti-Bush demonstration by the police on the 15th June, was not only premeditated but was also orchestrated by the police themselves. Yasmin Whittaker-Khan writing in last Sunday’s Mail on Sunday identified one ‘protester’ as a police ‘agent provocateur’. This policeman – his name and rank – has now been discovered. The background is this: On Sunday 15th June the Stop the War Coalition together with the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the British Muslim Initiative organised a peaceful protest against the visit of US President George Bush to London. Over the last seven years Stop the War has organised numerous demonstrations all of which have all passed off peacefully. All these events have been arranged with the co-operation of the Metropolitan police with whom the Coalition has had a good working relationship. This time the police were clearly operating with a different agenda: 1] Whitehall was sealed off for unspecified reasons. The police had taken the ‘political’ decision not to allow a march to proceed along Whitehall. 2] More than 1200 police, many of whom were riot police, were deployed to control a peace demonstration of no more than 2500 people. 3] Without provocation the police drew their batons en masse and proceeded to attack the demonstrators. There are many independent witnesses to this and the photographic evidence is strong. Several people were hospitalised and others arrested indiscriminately. 4] There is evidence that the police used ‘agent provocateurs’ to try [without success] and stir up the crowd. See the article by Yasmin Whittaker-Khan in the Mail on Sunday 22nd June 2008. A number of questions now need urgent attention: a] Who took the decision to ban the march? Which government ministers were involved? What role did the United States security services play in this decision? b] Why were so many police deployed? c] Who gave the order for batons to be drawn and used? d] Why did the police use ‘agent provocateurs’ to try and create disorder? Were the security services involved in this sinister development? Andrew Murray, Chair of the Stop the War Coalition, said today, ‘The premeditated attack on a peace demonstration by the police marks a further deterioration in the civil liberties of all people in Britain. We demand a full public investigation into the events of June 15th.’

 

Orginal artical

P.S. the officer in questron is Inspector Chris Dreyfus

BNP supporter admits terror campaign

By Jon Kelly BBC News Martyn Gilleard wrote of “blowing up mosques”, police discovered Neo-Nazi Martyn Gilleard has been found guilty of making bombs for a far-right terrorist campaign, after having previously admitted downloading thousands of images of child sexual abuse.  He wrote of starting a “racial war” and murdering Muslims.   But Martyn Gilleard boasted that he was no “barstool nationalist”. He wanted to put his white supremacist views into action.   And when police raided the 31-year-old’s flat, they found four home-made nail bombs, bullets, knives, swords, an axe and handcuffs with which – a jury has decided – he intended to launch his campaign of terror.   However, his comrades in various extremist groups were shocked to learn that this was not the limit of his criminal activities.   At the opening of his trial at Leeds Crown Court, Gilleard admitted 10 counts of child pornography offences. Officers had discovered more than 39,000 indecent images of children on his computer.   Jurors considering the terror charges did not learn of this until they delivered their verdict.   ‘Potentially lethal’   Gilleard, a forklift truck driver from Goole, East Yorkshire, admitted to police and the court that he had held racist views.   At the time of his arrest he was a paid-up member of the National Front, the White Nationalist Party and the British People’s Party – all opposed to multiculturalism. I am so sick and tired of hearing nationalists talk of killing Muslims, of blowing up mosques, of fighting back, only to see these acts of resistance fail to appear Martyn Gilleard In pictures: An arsenal of hate   His computer password was Martyn1488 – the 14, according to prosecutor Andrew Edis QC, being a reference to the far-right’s “14 words” slogan, “We must secure the existence of our race and the future for white children.”   The 88, Mr Edis added, represented the eighth letter of the alphabet – an abbreviation for “Heil Hitler”.   But Gilleard was not simply a passive crank, the court was told.   In a notebook recovered by police, Gilleard wrote that the “time has come to stop the talk and start to act”.   “Unless we the British right stop talking of racial war and take steps to make it happen, we will never get back that which has been stolen from us,” he added. “I am so sick and tired of hearing nationalists talk of killing Muslims, of blowing up mosques, of fighting back, only to see these acts of resistance fail to appear.”   In another note, he wrote that he wanted to see “reds” – left-wing activists – attacked with “lightning strikes” and “home-made grenades”.   His comments were a chilling echo of far-right nail bomber David Copeland, jailed for life for murder after attacks targeting London’s gay community and ethnic minorities in 1999. Gilleard wrote that “reds” should be attacked with home-made grenades By the time police raided his flat, Mr Edis said, Gilleard’s preparations for this impending conflict had already been well under way. Officers had discovered the four nail bombs under a bed along with “potentially lethal bladed weapons”, 34 bullets for a 2.2 calibre firearm, and printouts from the internet about committing acts of terrorism, Mr Edis told the court. These had included instructions on how to make a bomb and how to poison someone, he added.   Gilleard had already pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to possessing 34 cartridges of ammunition without holding a firearms certificate. But he denied that he had intended to hurt anyone with the nail bombs, arguing in court that he had only assembled them to give himself something to do. When asked why he made the devices, he said: “I’d had a couple of cans. I was just sat around bored.”   The jury, however, decided that he had more sinister purposes in mind.   Offensive weapon After the raid on Wednesday 31 October 2007, Gilleard fled to the home of his half-brother in Dundee, Tayside. Police caught up with him after a three-day manhunt.   Detectives who interviewed his work colleagues were told that he had expressed racist views to them. The police also recovered a high-visibility jacket belonging to Gilleard that had been daubed with a hand-drawn swastika.   Born on 15 July 1976 in York, Martyn Paul Gilleard had a complicated upbringing. At the time of his birth his mother had two older children by her ex-husband. He became the adopted son of his mother’s new partner after she remarried in 1978.   He left school at 16 with GCSEs in history, English language and literature, but failed to complete a course at Northallerton College. In 2000 he began working for Howarth Timber in Breighton, East Yorkshire, as a forklift truck driver.   In 2002 – the same year he was fined £25 for possession of an offensive weapon – his partner gave birth to a son, but the couple split in 2006. A prison cell, not the racial conflict of which he dreamed, now awaits him.

Man guilty over nail bombs plot

Gilleard was convicted of three terror charges A Nazi sympathiser who kept nail bombs under his bed has been convicted of three terrorism offences. Martyn Gilleard, 31, of Goole, East Yorkshire, was a paid-up member of the National Front, the White Nationalist Party and the British People’s Party. Police officers discovered four home-made nail bombs, as well as bullets and bladed weapons in his flat. Prosecutors said Gilleard had written that he had wanted to “save” Britain from “multi-racial peril”. Gilleard was convicted of preparing for terrorist acts and possessing articles and collecting information for terrorist purposes. During the trial, he admitted having a collection of Nazi memorabilia, saying Nazism appealed to him because of the way the Nazis had “rebuilt” Germany. Officers had found “potentially lethal bladed weapons”, 34 bullets for a 2.2 calibre firearm and printouts from the internet about committing acts of terrorism, the court heard. These included instructions on how to make a bomb and how to kill someone with poison. Explaining why he made the bombs, Gilleard said: “I’d had a couple of cans. I was just sat around bored.” “An idea popped up and I thought, ‘Why not?’ I thought, ‘I’ve got pretty much what I need,’ and I threw them together.”

Terror suspect ’spoke of bombs under bed’

A man accused of terrorist offences who had links to white supremacist organisations made racist comments to workmates and spoke of having bombs under his bed, a jury heard yesterday. Police later recovered four nail bombs hidden in a holdall among other items seized during a raid at Martyn Gilleard’s flat in Pool Court, Goole, which the prosecution claim he intended to “further his political cause.”

Gilleard, 31, an admirer of Hitler and Nazism, denies conduct in preparation of terrorist acts, possessing articles for terrorist purposes and collecting information for terrorist purposes. He has admitted possession of 34 .22 cartridges.

Witness John Percival told Leeds Crown Court that Gilleard was already a fork lift truck driver at Howarth Timber when he began working there aged 18 last summer. He was waiting to go into the RAF, which he had now done, but his start had been delayed because his jaw had been broken in an assault.

He told the jury he got to know Gilleard by mixing in the smokers’ area at the branch of the timber merchants at Breighton Airfield, Bubwith, near Selby .

“He once mentioned in jest of having bombs under his bed and if they blew up he would be nailed to the wall.”

He said he did not take any notice of it “because nothing said at work was meant to be taken seriously.”

Gilleard also spoke of what he used to do with gunpowder from fireworks when he was younger to make them have a bigger bang. “He said it’s not making the fuse that’s the hard part, it was putting it in without blowing yourself up.”

He told the court he and Gilleard also spoke together about football, drinking and target shooting with air rifles. He was aware Gilleard’s political views were to “the far right, the BNP, the BPP and the National Front.”

Gilleard had put up some racist cartoons from the internet on the canteen wall and on occasions wore T-shirts with BNP or National Front logos on. He also expressed racist views particularly relating to Muslims. When two paratroopers were killed in Iraq, Gilleard commented “what would happen if we blew them up back here.”

He told the jury because he was the youngest he thought it would make him feel older, more of a man and fit in by associating with Gilleard and the others. He had given Gilleard his e-mail and did receive a message from him referring him to a site about a Russian beheading. “I saw a Russian man, obviously a Jew, getting beheaded and slaughtered on camera. There was a swastika in the background.”

Gilleard also spoke to him about joining the BPP but he had never taken it further out.

He agreed under cross examination by David Hatton QC defending Gilleard the name “Bulls…t Corner” was used to describe the smoking room because of all sarcastic comments and jokes there which were not taken seriously.

Production manager Robert Belton told the jury he dropped Gilleard in Goole on October 31 after the fork lift truck driver said police had raided his flat. He seemed panicky and on edge. Gilleard was arrested in Dundee at 1.40am on November 3. They were shown items found at his flat including swords, knives, an axe, a machete, balaclavas and a strip of nails.

The trial continues.

Yorkshire Post

READING CAPITAL

I am delighted to point out to readers an excellent new resource.

David Harvey, the Marxist urban theorist and geographer, has been teaching a course on Marx’s Capital (Vol. 1) to postgraduate students at CUNY and John Hopkins University for more than thirty years. This is a (slightly) famous course and several noteable Marxist academics have taken it at one point or another.

This year, Harvey is making the whole course available online for free.

Each of the lectures, including questions and discussion from his postgraduate students, is being filmed and put on his website soon afterwards. The course consists of 13 two hour lectures. The first two are already up, an introductory lecture and a lecture dealing with Chapter 1 and Chapter 2. The idea is that people will read two chapters of Capital and then listen to the lecture before moving on to the next two, as if you were taking his class in CUNY. If anyone is thinking about reading or re-reading Capital this will probably be of great assistance. Harvey is a very interesting thinker and also an engaging lecturer and he knows Capital inside out. 26 hours of lectures look like they will be a fantastic resource. The third lecture is due to go online in three days.

Here it is: http://www.davidharvey.org

Thanks to Mark P (The Irish one)