Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1384)
SNP manifesto for May poll unveiled

Scotland’s first minister promises a council tax freeze, jobs for the young and 100% renewable energy if SNP returns to power Alex Salmond has promised to deliver a five-year council tax freeze, 100,000 new jobs for the young and 100% renewable energy by 2020 if the Scottish National party is returned to power in the Holyrood election. Speaking as he unveiled the SNP’s manifesto for May’s poll, Salmond said only his party had the ambition and vision to make Scotland a fairer and more just country. He told several hundred party activists and candidates: “This manifesto is for the whole of the country, not a part of it, not a social group, not a section. This is a manifesto for the whole of Scotland.” The first minister sought to strike a very different tone to Labour’s often aggressive attacks on the Conservatives by indirectly accusing his opponents – who remain narrowly ahead in the polls – of running a negative campaign. Salmond avoided naming any of his opponents, but said: “Some people say when times are tough, the politics of vision is a luxury you can’t afford. “I take the opposite view. When times are tough and you’re moving through hard times and you’re seeing the country and economy recover, it’s precisely then that vision is at a premium. “It’s precisely then that vision is required in Scotland. And we have a vision for a free, just and independent country.” Even so, the SNP’s manifesto offers far fewer of the ambitious but undelivered pledges it made in 2007, including a £2bn promise to pay off all student debts and introduce a new local income tax. Already attacked by its opponents for making scores of broken promises in 2007, the SNP is anxious to avoid the renewed charge of promising unachievable policies. Instead, Salmond said a second SNP government would build on its record of achievement. That would include: • Raising the Scottish target for renewable power for the third time in less than a year to 100% by 2020 • Freezing the council tax for the five-year lifetime of the next parliament, at a cost of £1bn, with a promise to reform local taxation for the following parliament in 2016 • Increasing NHS funding by £1bn over the next four years • Guaranteeing free universities for Scottish students and repairing half of Scotland’s “crumbling” schools • Attracting £2.5bn of private investment in capital projects, such as the new Forth bridge, in a further move away from the SNP’s 2007 pledge to abandon privately-funded public construction schemes • A £250m Scottish Futures Fund to promote broadband investment, pre-school education, green transport and home energy efficiency. Salmond’s promise to meet all of Scotland’s domestic electricity needs with renewable energy will provoke scepticism from energy companies and financiers. He has already admitted that tens of billions of pounds of private and state investment would be needed within the decade to achieve his last target, unveiled last September, of 80% renewable generation by 2020. How that money will be found remains unclear, but Salmond insisted that 130,000 green jobs would be created in Scotland, making the country a world leader in renewable and marine energy technologies. “We’re going to engineer the 21st century, just as this country once engineered the 19th century,” he said, to loud applause. Unlike the last Holyrood campaign, when the SNP had enjoyed a clear lead in the opinion polls for months, party officials admit Labour are still narrowly ahead with just three weeks to go before polling day. The SNP believes the gap is closing, but Salmond is refusing to make any public predictions about winning. The manifesto is also more muted about the SNP’s goal of achieving full independence within the next parliament. It promises to hold the now delayed referendum on independence but does not set a date. Salmond did promise, however, that a new SNP government would press hard for its more realisable goal of increased fiscal freedom for Holyrood. The first minister played down expectations that the SNP would seek a coalition with a smaller opposition party such as the Liberal Democrats. He said he would prefer to lead another minority government – a model which had proven highly successful in the last four years. “We have the incalculable advantage of being able to point to our record of achievement for the past four years,” he said. Buried in the manifesto were other pledges, including proposals to increase state support for the poorest students to £7,000 a year, allowing local councils to levy special taxes on businesses to fund new building and infrastructure projects, and keeping the £2m a year Expo and Made in Scotland grants schemes for the Edinburgh festivals. Scottish elections 2011 Scottish politics Scottish National Party (SNP) Alex Salmond Elections 2011 Scotland Severin Carrell guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

President Obama is “Mr. Prudent,” a grown-up heralding “deficit sanity” in a Washington gone mad with “delusional” Republican plans for draconian budget cuts and tax breaks for the wealthy. That's the predictable leftist talking point-laden take that Time magazine's Joe Klein had after listening to President Obama's hectoring lecture yesterday at George Washington University (emphasis mine): “This is one of the most important debates that we can have,” President Obama said at the close of his much anticipated speech about the federal-budget deficit. He is absolutely right, although his speech didn't add much to the conversation in terms of specifics. Unlike Republican Congressman Paul Ryan's recent budget plan, Barack Obama's proposed no radical restructurings or curtailments of brontosaurus-size programs like Medicare or Medicaid. Unlike some of the other plans floating about, and there are scads of them, his didn't propose gimmicky new revenue-raising schemes like a national sales tax. Indeed, Obama didn't add much to the measures he had previously proposed — except for an increased desire to cut defense spending and a requirement that Congress enter into annual sudden-death negotiations if the deficit exceeds 2.8% of gross domestic product. But the President did add a crucial element to the debate: a sense of proportion and sanity.

Continue reading …
Have your say on … regional rivalry

Following Andrew Flintoff’s remarks about ‘six-fingered’ Burnley residents, we’d like commenters to write for us on local rivalry Following Prestonian cricket star Andrew Flintoff’s Twitter sledging in which he labelled the people of rival Lancashire town Burnley as “six-fingered dingles”, we would like four Comment is free users to go “above the line” and discuss their own experiences of regional rivalry. Do you live in a town, city or area that has a long-standing rivalry with a neighbour? Maybe you’re in Yorkshire, and look down on Lancashire. Maybe you’re in north London, and wouldn’t dream of crossing the river south. Or is Portsmouth held in contempt if you’re based in Southampton? And if so, why? How does this rivalry manifest itself? Is it friendly and lighthearted or are there darker undertones? Was this tribalism instilled in you from an early age by family, friends or the local culture? What knowledge do you have of its origins? We’d like to hear from people up and down the country. If you would like to participate, please email Philip Oltermann (philip.oltermann@guardian.co.uk) before 9am tomorrow, Friday 15 April, with a contribution of around 200-250 words, from which we’ll pick four. The subject line of your email should be “People’s panel”. Please include your Comment is free username if you have one, your real name, and a number we can contact you on. Please note that we may not be able to respond to all submissions. Andrew Flintoff guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Morrissey to open for U2 at this summer’s festival

Singer returns to Worthy Farm as festival organisers announce star-studded bill including Beyoncé, Cee Lo Green and Elbow Read the full Glastonbury 2011 lineup The first time he played the world’s biggest and best-loved music festival in 1984, the set had to be cut short as fans stormed the stage. Twenty-seven years later, and still with a devoted fanbase, Morrissey will return to Glastonbury, playing the festival’s opening night (Friday 24 June), warming up for headline act U2. Fellow Mancunians Elbow are also on the bill, organisers announced as they released the full lineup, playing the Pyramid stage before Glastonbury stalwarts Coldplay headline on the Saturday evening. Festival organiser Emily Eavis said this year will be one of Glastonbury’s most exciting offerings. “To get all of these incredible artists is really quite a feat,” she said. “I think this is one of most eclectic lineups yet.” Elbow will raise the crowd with their “lovely, celebratory and uplifting” music, she said, while Queens of the Stone Age – who are going head-to-head on the Other Stage against Beyoncé on the Sunday evening – will go some way to keeping everyone happy. “That will be fantastic because they will appeal to very different people,” she added. There are also acts geared toward Glastonbury’s older fans. Sunday will see Don McLean play the Pyramid stage in the afternoon, followed later by Paul Simon. Blues legend BB King will play the same stage on Friday, while Jimmy Cliff and Kool and the Gang will feature on West Holts. Simon is expected to play a range of hits, said Eavis. “Everyone should check out Paul Simon. He’s going to do a total mix of his songs, so it will be like a greatest hits set.” American band Fleet Foxes will play the Other Stage before Mumford & Sons on Friday, while White Lies will warm up for the Chemical Brothers on Saturday. There will also be acts appealing to urban music fans, with rising British rap star Tinie Tempah taking to the Pyramid stage on Saturday and US R&B singer Cee Lo Green at West Holts on Friday, while dance fans can take their pick from Chase and Status, DJ Shadow and Robyn, with Annie Mac and John Digweed also playing DJ sets. Up-and-coming artists include Anna Calvi, James Blake, Jessie J, Warpaint and the Vaccines. Festival founder Michael Eavis could barely contain his glee at getting Morrissey back to Worthy Farm in Pilton, Somerset, where the festival takes place. Morrissey last played Glastonbury in 2004. “When the Smiths played in 1984 it changed everything for us. We had just been about hippy bands until then and when they performed it was like a bolt of lightning,” he said. “There were no fences in those days – we thought fences were wicked – and when the crowd started invading the stage we had to close the set. It got everyone talking about us.” Coldplay’s performance on the Saturday evening will be “the climax of their career”, while U2′s headline set on Friday will have no shortage of “razzmatazz”, he promised. “It is going to be an enormous set for Coldplay and I think U2 will be one of the biggest moments of the summer. They might have been on a long tour, but our wait to get them at Glastonbury has been even longer,” he said. Glastonbury’s night-time playgrounds, such as Shangri La and Trash City, will have more venues, with the festival also creating a new performance “bull-ring” from donated lock timbers. Last year, the festival’s 40th anniversary, was blessed with memorable performances and uninterrupted sunshine, but Eavis is confident it can be bettered. “I think we have the best headliners we’ve ever had, and if we get the sunshine I think it will be even better than last year.” Glastonbury festival Morrissey U2 Queens of the Stone Age Beyoncé Coldplay Elbow Cee Lo Green Tinie Tempah R&B Pop and rock Festivals Alexandra Topping guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

Remember all those mini-movies that summarized a broad topic in two minutes or less? Whether the subject was the Civil War, the magical things that happen when you multiply by ten, or the complete history of Western Civilization, these mini-films covered everything in one rapid-fire shot after another, giving you a whole lot of information – and a splitting headache – in a very short period of time. The first minute or two of this Michelle Bachmann Today show interview is like that. She runs through the entire litany of disproven conservative cliches about the economy in 100 seconds or less without even getting short of breath. If someone ever wants to make one of those two-minute movies and call it The Ideas That Crushed the American Dream , Rep. Bachmann’s written the script. Fire it up and watch her go! We’ll sound the bell every time she floats a discredited idea. Ready? Raising taxes for the wealthy shouldn’t be “on the table,” says Bachmann, because “tax rates are high enough (ding!), and history shows (ding!) that when we raise taxes, particularly on job creators (ding!) we actually bring in less revenue (ding! ding! ding!) rather than more.” Forget what I said about two-minute movies. Michelle Bachmann could cover Western Civilization in ten seconds . I was on a talk radio show from St. Louis yesterday with a guy from the Heritage Foundation who used the same “history shows us” line. What history actually shows is that we lost jobs after the Bush tax cuts, even before deregulation brought down the economy. History also shows us that our periods of greatest economic prosperity occurred when taxes were higher than they are now. And the history of the Great Depression shows that it took government investment to get people working and the economy growing. FDR listened to the Bachmannites of his time in the late 1930′s, and everything started falling apart again. That’s what history shows. And “job creators”? Oh, please. Wall Street financiers have regained their pre-crash parasitical economic stranglehold, seizing nearly 40% of corporate profits. They’re getting rich by not creating jobs – and sometimes by destroying them through destructive hedging. Somehow,with corporate profits at historic highs and taxes at historic lows, people in the real world are taking the world’s longest unemployment gut-punch. If these guys are “job creators,” where are the jobs ? “The question is,” continues Bachmann, “do we want more revenue or more taxes? Because the two don’t go together.” No she didn’t! Unh-unh! Oh no she didn’t! Did she just bring out the Laffer Curve ? Yes, she did. Mm-hmm. Michelle Bachmann just brought out the most discredited theory in modern economic history: the notion that people will stop making money if taxes are too high, so overall government income will fall and not rise. There’s only one thing that contradicts that theory: The economic history of every single nation on the planet. Economists like the name “Laffer curve” because this theory is always good for a laugh. “You could actually confiscate (ding!) all the wealth that people make at $200,000 or more,” says Bachmann, “and that would only yield about six or seven months of revenue to run the government.” Hey, that’s half the whole cost of government! She’s selling the idea pretty well! They love that word “confiscate.” And I love the way these conservatives say they’d lay down their lives for their country, but if you ask them to pay four pennies on the dollar on six-figure income,that’s dictatorship! Think of it: The highest tax bracket under Dwight D. Eisenhower was 91% percent. He must be the greatest dictator of all time! They love that song that talk about the people who died defending this country, takes their name in vain, and then says “I’d gladly stand up next to you and defend her still today.” Ah, you know the one … “There ain’t no doubt I love this land” – just not enough to pay for it. Not cash money, anyway. Here’s the theme song they should really be using. All that’s being proposed is a four-and-a-half percent increase on income over $250,000. And you know what’s funny? Bachmann and her colleagues are the same people people who think we can’t afford to pay thirty million per year to reduce the damage from coastal storms and floods. These floods cost more than $11 billion per year on average, every year – and they think we can’t spare the dinero . And yet they’ll give away hundreds of billions in tax revenue like it was peanut butter in a roomful of stoned billionaires. Bachmann goes on in this vein for what seems like forever, but which in reality only four minutes or so. (This seemingly paradoxical phenomenon is the product of what physicists call the “Time Dilation Effect,” in which time appears to be moving more slowly as the flow of bullsh*t approaches the speed of light.) For the Representative from Minnesota it’s “confiscate” this and “take 100 percent” of that … on and on and on … until all of the ridiculous rhetorical tricks that got us into this mess are on rapid-fire display. Well, almost all. She left out one. The only cliche she forgot to repeat was “If you could go back in time one day for every dollar the government spends, you’d be face to face with Jesus.” Since the GOP’s cutting $600 million for law enforcement, somebody’s going to get shot. Guess they’ll wind up face-to-face with Jesus too. “Already again,” she says later, “the top 1% of income earners pay about 40% of all taxes.” (That’s not the right number, but whatever.) But why do the top 1% pay a large share of taxes? Because the top 400 families in America are richer than the bottom fifty percent of the entire country! So of course they pay a big chunk of income tax, even after they’re coddled with tax breaks galore. She sure has a lot of talking points, but it’s a funny thing: When it comes to answering a question like Matt Lauer’s, about the CBO’s report on the devastating financial impact of their Medicare cuts on seniors, suddenly she “hasn’t had a chance to look at the study.” “But it’s important for us to understand,” says Bachmann, “that individualism (ding!) and personal responsibility (ding!) have always been a bedrock of this country.” When it comes to the whole “devastating financial impact” thing, I’ll take that as a “yes.” (And note: You can’t have “a” bedrock. There’s just bedrock .) There’s more, but you get the gist. Some people think she’s a little nuts, and they even get a little personal about it. (Her eyes do have an odd glint, a kind ofgrown-up Children of the Damned quality, but that could be anything.) Nuts or not, her ideas are definitely radical. Even so, as my friend and colleague Dave Johnson points out, Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposed budget is even too extreme for her. That’s the state of play these days on the Right. Whenever the radicals start attacking each other, that means the movement is officially going crazy. Think Stalin vs. Trotsky. Or the Judean People’s Front vs. the People’s Front of Judaea. (“Splitters!”) It’s Bachmann/Ryan Overdrive time. This schism on the American Right means the whole movement has finally gone full-tilt crazy. Wait, you say. How can you be so sure? How do we know that they’ve gone over the edge? We know it because history has shown us.

Continue reading …
Reel history: Che’s clean getaway

Gael García Bernal is overgroomed as Che Guevara, but this chronicle of a formative and revolutionary roadtrip is accurate Director: Walter Salles Entertainment grade: B History grade: A– Ernesto Guevara de la Serna was an Argentine doctor. Under the name Che Guevara, he became a comandante, or major, in the Cuban revolution, and later led communist guerrilla units in the Congo and Bolivia. Casting Medical student Ernesto Guevara and his biochemist friend Alberto Granado set out on their motorcycle from Buenos Aires, heading for North America. According to press reports, Rodrigo de la Serna, playing Alberto, is a second cousin to the real Che Guevara. DNA isn’t everything, though: the unrelated Mexican actor Gael García Bernal, playing Ernesto, much more closely resembles Guevara in 1952. Indeed, when the real Ernesto was well groomed, it was often said that he looked like a movie star. But that didn’t happen too often, for he had a lifelong aversion to grooming. He once wore a pair of underpants for two months, and then gleefully won a bet that they would stand up by themselves. Thankfully, that isn’t in the film. Romance The first stop on the men’s trip is Miramar, south of Buenos Aires, where they visit Ernesto’s girlfriend Chichina. He gives her a puppy, named (in English) Come-back, to indicate that he intends to, well, come back. In the film, she gives him $15 to buy her a bathing suit when he reaches the United States. In real life, according to one of Che’s biographers, the money was for a scarf. Other than that, this is accurate. Media The bike breaks down near a small Chilean town. Alberto and Ernesto are broke – but they have an idea. They give an interview to the town paper, claiming to be touring leprosy experts, and then use the piece to impress the locals into giving them free stuff. This is also true. The mechanic who fixes their bike invites them to a dance. By now, Chichina has dumped Ernesto, and he is nursing a broken heart. Which means he’s trying to cop off with the mechanic’s wife. Scandal The film subtly cleans Ernesto’s conduct up in comparison with his own description of the evening. It depicts the mechanic’s wife, as the real Guevara wrote, acting “pretty randy”, but glosses over the fact that Ernesto too was “full of Chilean wine”. When she refused him, “I was in no state to listen to reason and we had a bit of a barney in the middle of the dance floor,” he admitted. As in in the movie, Ernesto and Alberto were chased out of the dance hall by a mob of angry Chileans. But the film uses dramatic licence when it has them bust out their bike from the mechanic’s garage and speed off in the nick of time. In reality, they stayed another night, had lunch with a family next door to the garage, and left without incident in the afternoon. Politics In the mining settlement near Chuquicamata, Alberto and Ernesto meet an impoverished couple who fear persecution on the grounds that they are communists – which, at the time, Ernesto was not. From 1948 until 1958, the Chilean Communist party was banned and its adherents prosecuted under the Law for the Defence of Democracy. The poet Pablo Neruda was among those who fled the country. The scene in the movie sticks closely to Guevara’s account. There’s one striking difference. In the film, we are later told that Ernesto gave Chichina’s $15 to the couple. In real life, both Ernesto and the $15 eventually made it to Miami – and, though Ernesto never saw Chichina again, he did apparently send her that scarf. Verdict If the young Ernesto Guevara needed a clean-up, it was in the sense of an actual wash. As for his faults, he himself was more frank about them than this movie is. That aside, The Motorcycle Diaries gets a lot right. It’s an entertaining and accurate portrayal of the formative youth of a revolutionary icon. • Alex von Tunzelmann’s Red Heat: Conspiracy, Murder and the Cold War in the Caribbean, is published by Simon & Schuster this week. Che Guevara Alex von Tunzelmann guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Reel history: Che’s clean getaway

Gael García Bernal is overgroomed as Che Guevara, but this chronicle of a formative and revolutionary roadtrip is accurate Director: Walter Salles Entertainment grade: B History grade: A– Ernesto Guevara de la Serna was an Argentine doctor. Under the name Che Guevara, he became a comandante, or major, in the Cuban revolution, and later led communist guerrilla units in the Congo and Bolivia. Casting Medical student Ernesto Guevara and his biochemist friend Alberto Granado set out on their motorcycle from Buenos Aires, heading for North America. According to press reports, Rodrigo de la Serna, playing Alberto, is a second cousin to the real Che Guevara. DNA isn’t everything, though: the unrelated Mexican actor Gael García Bernal, playing Ernesto, much more closely resembles Guevara in 1952. Indeed, when the real Ernesto was well groomed, it was often said that he looked like a movie star. But that didn’t happen too often, for he had a lifelong aversion to grooming. He once wore a pair of underpants for two months, and then gleefully won a bet that they would stand up by themselves. Thankfully, that isn’t in the film. Romance The first stop on the men’s trip is Miramar, south of Buenos Aires, where they visit Ernesto’s girlfriend Chichina. He gives her a puppy, named (in English) Come-back, to indicate that he intends to, well, come back. In the film, she gives him $15 to buy her a bathing suit when he reaches the United States. In real life, according to one of Che’s biographers, the money was for a scarf. Other than that, this is accurate. Media The bike breaks down near a small Chilean town. Alberto and Ernesto are broke – but they have an idea. They give an interview to the town paper, claiming to be touring leprosy experts, and then use the piece to impress the locals into giving them free stuff. This is also true. The mechanic who fixes their bike invites them to a dance. By now, Chichina has dumped Ernesto, and he is nursing a broken heart. Which means he’s trying to cop off with the mechanic’s wife. Scandal The film subtly cleans Ernesto’s conduct up in comparison with his own description of the evening. It depicts the mechanic’s wife, as the real Guevara wrote, acting “pretty randy”, but glosses over the fact that Ernesto too was “full of Chilean wine”. When she refused him, “I was in no state to listen to reason and we had a bit of a barney in the middle of the dance floor,” he admitted. As in in the movie, Ernesto and Alberto were chased out of the dance hall by a mob of angry Chileans. But the film uses dramatic licence when it has them bust out their bike from the mechanic’s garage and speed off in the nick of time. In reality, they stayed another night, had lunch with a family next door to the garage, and left without incident in the afternoon. Politics In the mining settlement near Chuquicamata, Alberto and Ernesto meet an impoverished couple who fear persecution on the grounds that they are communists – which, at the time, Ernesto was not. From 1948 until 1958, the Chilean Communist party was banned and its adherents prosecuted under the Law for the Defence of Democracy. The poet Pablo Neruda was among those who fled the country. The scene in the movie sticks closely to Guevara’s account. There’s one striking difference. In the film, we are later told that Ernesto gave Chichina’s $15 to the couple. In real life, both Ernesto and the $15 eventually made it to Miami – and, though Ernesto never saw Chichina again, he did apparently send her that scarf. Verdict If the young Ernesto Guevara needed a clean-up, it was in the sense of an actual wash. As for his faults, he himself was more frank about them than this movie is. That aside, The Motorcycle Diaries gets a lot right. It’s an entertaining and accurate portrayal of the formative youth of a revolutionary icon. • Alex von Tunzelmann’s Red Heat: Conspiracy, Murder and the Cold War in the Caribbean, is published by Simon & Schuster this week. Che Guevara Alex von Tunzelmann guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Soho pub ‘ejects gay men for kissing’

Two men say staff at the John Snow asked them to leave because they were being ‘obscene’ Two men have spoken of their shock and anger after they were asked to leave a pub in London after a member of staff apparently objected to them kissing. Jonathan Williams, a journalist for a financial trade magazine, and James Bull, a charity volunteer, say they were ejected from the John Snow on Broadwick Street, Soho, by a woman who claimed to be the landlady and said they were being “obscene”. Bull said he was physically sick after the incident, which happened at about 10.45pm on Wednesday, after the couple had earlier been for dinner on their first date together in Covent Garden. Bull said: “I felt so belittled, and to be made to feel so dirty and cheap over something like that – it’s just wrong.” The pair say that objections were first raised to their displays of affection shortly after they arrived at 8.30pm by a fellow drinker claiming to be the landlord, who was off duty. They refused what they described as his “polite request” to stop kissing. Williams, 26, and Bull, 23, insist they were not indulging in a “huge display of affection”, but were merely kissing on the lips. They said they chose the John Snow, which they have both visited in the past but which does not style itself as a gay bar, because they enjoyed the cider sold at the venue. Williams said: “It’s a nice little pub, it’s a nice atmosphere. The people are friendly, it’s not too expensive considering the area and it’s a decent pub where you can just relax.” He said the first man, who identified himself as the landlord, asked them to stop kissing “because it was bothering him”. The couple refused and were left alone until about 10.45pm, when a woman who said she was the landlady intervened. Bull said he was putting on his coat to leave and had given Williams “a peck on the lips” when the woman, who was wearing a staff uniform, came up to them. “She said we had to leave because we were being obscene. Then the other guy from earlier came over again and said we had to leave now, we ‘weren’t allowed to do that’.” Both Bull and Williams said the man took hold of Williams’s coat lapels as he asked them to leave the pub. Bull called the police when he arrived home, who came and took a statement. Bar staff have the right to eject drinkers, but they must abide by equality legislation. It is not clear what further action the police intend to take. Lucy Clements, a 27-year-old production manager, and Jamie Morton, neither of whom know Bull or Williams, were sitting at the next table and witnessed the events. They were also asked to leave after questioning the couple’s ejection. Clements said: “I was totally shocked. Dumbfounded really. From a pub in the middle of Soho you just don’t expect it.” She said Bull and Williams were “snogging, but it wasn’t heavy petting”, adding that “no one seemed to mind apart from this one man”. She said she spoke to bar staff who confirmed the man who raised the first objections was the landlord. The John Snow is one of about 300 pubs in the UK operated by the independent brewery, Samuel Smiths. Bull and Williams said they had not yet complained to the company, but planned to do so today. When the Guardian called the pub, a woman initially put the phone down. On a second call, she said: “Can you just stop calling this number please, or we’ll have you done for harassment.” Williams said: “We weren’t being over the top, there wasn’t anything that would be deemed unseemly – I’m not the kind of person to do that kind of thing in public. “I was very angry. I’ve been incredibly lucky and never had to experience much in the way of homophobic bullying, a few minor incidents at school aside. “So considering that’s the extent of it, I mostly felt anger and shock. The upset wore off pretty quickly and the anger remained.” Williams turned to Twitter to complain about the ordeal. “Seven years in London & I’ve never been made to feel bad for being gay. 45 min ago the John Snow pub, W1F had me removed for kissing a date.” His post was retweeted dozens of times, while several high-profile tweeters, including Goodness Gracious Me and The Smoking Room actor Emma Kennedy, helped to raise awareness of the incident. “The John Snow pub is in SOHO. Way to alienate your passing trade fellahs. Well done. *never, ever goes there again*,” Kennedy wrote. A spokeswoman for the Metropolitan police said: “Police are investigating an incident which occurred at approximately 10.50pm last night at a venue in Broadwick Street, W1. There have been no arrests and inquiries are ongoing.” Gay rights London Equality Adam Gabbatt guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Soho pub ‘ejects gay men for kissing’

Two men say staff at the John Snow asked them to leave because they were being ‘obscene’ Two men have spoken of their shock and anger after they were asked to leave a pub in London after a member of staff apparently objected to them kissing. Jonathan Williams, a journalist for a financial trade magazine, and James Bull, a charity volunteer, say they were ejected from the John Snow on Broadwick Street, Soho, by a woman who claimed to be the landlady and said they were being “obscene”. Bull said he was physically sick after the incident, which happened at about 10.45pm on Wednesday, after the couple had earlier been for dinner on their first date together in Covent Garden. Bull said: “I felt so belittled, and to be made to feel so dirty and cheap over something like that – it’s just wrong.” The pair say that objections were first raised to their displays of affection shortly after they arrived at 8.30pm by a fellow drinker claiming to be the landlord, who was off duty. They refused what they described as his “polite request” to stop kissing. Williams, 26, and Bull, 23, insist they were not indulging in a “huge display of affection”, but were merely kissing on the lips. They said they chose the John Snow, which they have both visited in the past but which does not style itself as a gay bar, because they enjoyed the cider sold at the venue. Williams said: “It’s a nice little pub, it’s a nice atmosphere. The people are friendly, it’s not too expensive considering the area and it’s a decent pub where you can just relax.” He said the first man, who identified himself as the landlord, asked them to stop kissing “because it was bothering him”. The couple refused and were left alone until about 10.45pm, when a woman who said she was the landlady intervened. Bull said he was putting on his coat to leave and had given Williams “a peck on the lips” when the woman, who was wearing a staff uniform, came up to them. “She said we had to leave because we were being obscene. Then the other guy from earlier came over again and said we had to leave now, we ‘weren’t allowed to do that’.” Both Bull and Williams said the man took hold of Williams’s coat lapels as he asked them to leave the pub. Bull called the police when he arrived home, who came and took a statement. Bar staff have the right to eject drinkers, but they must abide by equality legislation. It is not clear what further action the police intend to take. Lucy Clements, a 27-year-old production manager, and Jamie Morton, neither of whom know Bull or Williams, were sitting at the next table and witnessed the events. They were also asked to leave after questioning the couple’s ejection. Clements said: “I was totally shocked. Dumbfounded really. From a pub in the middle of Soho you just don’t expect it.” She said Bull and Williams were “snogging, but it wasn’t heavy petting”, adding that “no one seemed to mind apart from this one man”. She said she spoke to bar staff who confirmed the man who raised the first objections was the landlord. The John Snow is one of about 300 pubs in the UK operated by the independent brewery, Samuel Smiths. Bull and Williams said they had not yet complained to the company, but planned to do so today. When the Guardian called the pub, a woman initially put the phone down. On a second call, she said: “Can you just stop calling this number please, or we’ll have you done for harassment.” Williams said: “We weren’t being over the top, there wasn’t anything that would be deemed unseemly – I’m not the kind of person to do that kind of thing in public. “I was very angry. I’ve been incredibly lucky and never had to experience much in the way of homophobic bullying, a few minor incidents at school aside. “So considering that’s the extent of it, I mostly felt anger and shock. The upset wore off pretty quickly and the anger remained.” Williams turned to Twitter to complain about the ordeal. “Seven years in London & I’ve never been made to feel bad for being gay. 45 min ago the John Snow pub, W1F had me removed for kissing a date.” His post was retweeted dozens of times, while several high-profile tweeters, including Goodness Gracious Me and The Smoking Room actor Emma Kennedy, helped to raise awareness of the incident. “The John Snow pub is in SOHO. Way to alienate your passing trade fellahs. Well done. *never, ever goes there again*,” Kennedy wrote. A spokeswoman for the Metropolitan police said: “Police are investigating an incident which occurred at approximately 10.50pm last night at a venue in Broadwick Street, W1. There have been no arrests and inquiries are ongoing.” Gay rights London Equality Adam Gabbatt guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Berkeley Scientist: Marijuana Causes Global Warming

Nobel Laureate Al Gore's favorite money making myth suddenly has some competition for the wackiest reason the planet has warmed in recent years. As the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Marlo Lewis reported Tuesday, a University of California, Berkeley, scientist believes that the indoor growing of marijuana is responsible – at least partially, of course: A new study by

Continue reading …