The Spectator

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 16 September 2006

Third degree at Heathrow From Andrew HamiltonSir: In my experience the overzealous and politically correct airport security in America (High Life, 2 September) is being replicated in this country. At Heathrow security recently, off to see my son in Shanghai, I couldn’t resist asking the body-searcher whether or not I resembled a Muslim terrorist (I am 59, white, grey-haired and an accountant). The gentleman looked rather embarrassed. But his young Asian colleague said, ‘You shouldn’t have said that, just stay where you are, I’m calling the supervisor.’ The supervisor appeared and after an animated conversation turned to me and said, ‘You are in deep trouble, wait there.

The Spectator

The few, not the many

From our UK edition

‘Things need to be different than what they currently are,’ Derek Simpson, the general secretary of the trade union Amicus, said on the Today programme last week. This is a proposition around which the whole country can unite. But there Mr Simpson’s status as national spokesman begins and ends. The former communist is one of the foremost union barons pressing Labour to change direction radically when Tony Blair leaves office. New Labour, Mr Simpson argues, was the problem: it is time to reassert the workers’ rights and to win back the electorate. It should be obvious to anyone with the slightest knowledge of recent electoral history that his two objectives — socialist and electoral — are not only distinct but utterly incompatible.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 2 September 2006

Nothing but the truth From Peter Clarke Sir: Rod Liddle suggests that the public are losing confidence in the police because Scotland Yard ‘has developed a tendency, as night follows day, to change its story repeatedly and shiftily’ (‘Passengers won’t mutiny on planes if they are made to feel safe’, 26 August). Why should I bother to change my story when Rod Liddle has already spared me the trouble? I am the only police officer who has made any public statements about the evidence uncovered in the recent case. Just for the record, I have never said, as Mr Liddle suggests, that martyrdom videos were found in a wood, that bomb-making equipment had been found in suspects’ houses, or that which had been found consisted primarily of hydrogen peroxide.

The Spectator

Old New Labour

From our UK edition

‘New, new, new,’ Tony Blair told a meeting of European socialist leaders shortly after becoming Prime Minister, ‘everything is new.’ Embarrassing at the time, that declaration now seems merely a distant and risible memory. For, after nine years, the one thing this administration cannot possibly claim to be is ‘new’. In his original campaign for office between 1994 and 1997, Mr Blair presented novelty as a good in itself. By relabelling Labour as ‘New’, he signalled not only that the party of old-fashioned socialism had changed, but that it offered a fresh and vernal alternative to the Conservative winter.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 26 August 2006

Pakistan ‘supports terrorism’ From Sam MukerjiSir: Stephen Schwartz (‘Britain has a unique problem’, 19 August) brilliantly exposes the doctrinal poison coming to us from Pakistan. Over the 1980s and the 1990s there has been evidence to suggest that the radical Sunni community in the UK, US and Canada has funded terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir and that the government here has experienced great difficulty in restraining this activity. On the ground in Jammu and Kashmir, innocent shepherds have been slaughtered in their thousands, only because they were Hindus, in order to terrify the rest of the population and force them to run for the plains.

The Spectator

A great country to live in

From our UK edition

Those who think Britain is no longer a great and decent country should consider the events of the past two weeks: an alleged Islamist plot to attack airliners has already led to the charging of 11 suspects; our airports have been in turmoil; there is a furore over the effectiveness and propriety of ethnic ‘passenger profiling’; the Home Secretary warns that there are ‘dozens’ more terrorist plots under investigation. Yet — in the midst of all this — the country is finally embarking upon a long-needed debate on immigration, and doing so (with a very few exceptions) in a calm and pragmatic fashion. Elsewhere in the world, such a conjunction of events would have led to inflammatory rhetoric by politicians and widespread social disorder.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 19 August 2006

From our UK edition

Too many or too few?From K.R. HoustonSir: Rod Liddle’s assertion (‘Our overpopulation is a catastrophe’, 12 August) that an ever-growing population fuelled by mass immigration is seriously debilitating our quality of life was spot on. But it also highlights the question of why we ever reached this state of affairs in the first place. When my three children were born between 1977 and 1982 — a period which took in both Labour and Conservative governments — new parents were sent a missive from the local health authority stating that while family size was a matter of personal choice, Britain needed to have a population level that it could ‘sustain’. The underlying message was clear: don’t have too many children.

The Spectator

At least the British people get it

From our UK edition

In his book The Wisdom of Crowds, James Surowiecki writes that ‘under the right circumstances, groups are remarkably intelligent, and are often smarter than the smartest people in them’. Our poll today shows that the response of the British people to the terror emergency has been robust and clear-sighted. While many in the political and media elite have offered only hand-wringing, point-scoring and a feeble enthusiasm to blame the West for everything, the voters themselves grasp the scale of the threat and the need for a firm response.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 12 August 2006

A new Holocaust From Lucy MandelstamSir: Melanie Phillips’s mention of the ‘annual hate-fest’ on the streets of London filled me with despair (‘Hezbollah cells await Iran’s orders’, 5 August). Last month I celebrated my 80th birthday. Never in my wildest dreams did I expect to live so long. I survived four years in Vienna under Nazi rule, and three years in concentration camps. After the end of the war I was a refugee for three years, spending those years mostly in displaced persons’ camps in Europe and Cyprus, finally coming to Israel. I had hoped to live out the rest of my life in relative peace. It was not to be.

The Spectator

Security first

From our UK edition

The United Nations is good at passing resolutions. It is, sadly, a little less effective at displaying resolve. As The Spectator went to press, Security Council discussions on the French-inspired resolution designed to deal with the conflict in Lebanon and Israel were dragging on. But whatever form of words the UN settles upon, the actions required by the international community seem to be implicitly understood by the French, the Americans and the British government. What will count in the days ahead is an unshakeable readiness to implement the steps required to provide both Lebanon and Israel with the security they deserve.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 5 August 2006

Hezbollah and genocide From Lord KalmsSir: William Hague’s usual good sense has deserted him. Criticising Israel for being disproportionate without serious consideration of the alternatives merely mouths the buzzwords of the ignorant armchair critic. Think again, William, for whom you speak. How do you deal with the Hezbollah leader Nasrallah, who is committed to Israel’s total destruction (not a single Jew to remain alive in Israel) and who rains thousands of rockets on Israel, keeping the population in shelters, devastating industry, kidnapping and killing Israeli soldiers within Israeli territory? Hezbollah combines a unique and dangerous formula: a terrorist organisation ensconced within a large area of the independent but incompetent nation state of Lebanon.

The Spectator

Against isolation

From our UK edition

The old order changeth, yielding place to new: as Fidel Castro’s mortality marks the fall of the last Cold War colossus, so a new global ideological struggle hardens in our midst. The conflict in the Middle East is but one symptom of this battle between the West and militant Islam. To extract this particular crisis from its broader context and see it as merely another chapter in the long battle between Jew and Arab — as many do — is a grievous error, and one that could have terrible consequences far beyond the Middle East. Rarely has the word ‘renaissance’ been used as euphemistically as it was by Tony Blair in his speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council on Tuesday.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 29 July 2006

From our UK edition

Lebanon: who’s to blame? From Nicholas MillmanSir: It was refreshing to read your editorial (22 July) after a week of witnessing the rest of the British media sadly misrepresent the Middle East crisis. In typical fashion Hezbollah has manipulated the journalists on the ground to the point where, for example, Channel 4 News must now be considered an effective extension of Hezbollah propaganda. The constant talk here of a ‘disproportionate’ response by Israel is baffling. A gang of nasty thugs, with only a tenuous claim to represent a sovereign state, violate the border of a neighbouring sovereign state and kidnap her soldiers.

The Spectator

The absence of peace

From our UK edition

The Blair–Bush summit in Washington was long-planned, but fortuitously well-timed. The President and Prime Minister face not only a huge strategic challenge in the Middle East but also a fundamental political problem at home. They have not yet managed to persuade Western voters of the path they have jointly pursued in the region. Neither man is seeking re-election. All the more reason, then, for candour and robust explanation of what this crisis is truly about.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 22 July 2006

From our UK edition

Cameron on crime From Oliver Letwin MPSir: Your leading article ‘Love isn’t all you need’ (15 July) misses the point of David Cameron’s speech on the causes of crime (indeed, it gives the impression that you did not read the speech very closely). David’s speech focused from the very beginning on the fear and suffering caused by crime and disorder; the no-go zones our town centres become on a Friday or Saturday night; and the damage done by vandalism and graffiti. But — more importantly — it looked beyond the usual hand-wringing and hasty gimmicks of Labour’s approach to consider how we solve these problems for the long term. It is now 13 years since Tony Blair first pledged to be both tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.

The Spectator

Let Israel finish the job

From our UK edition

At a time of global tension and regional bloodshed, it is easy for governments to retreat behind rhetorical platitudes and uncontroversial diplomatic ‘initiatives’. As Clausewitz observed: ‘Although our intellect always longs for clarity and certainty, our nature often finds uncertainty fascinating.’ In the case of the Middle East conflagration, such lazy fascination would be disastrous. Moshe Kaplinsky, Israel’s deputy army chief, insisted this week that his country’s military forces required sufficient time to achieve ‘very clear goals’ in Lebanon before any notional ceasefire would be countenanced. The international community would do well to emulate Major General Kaplinsky’s focus and clarity.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 15 July 2006

From our UK edition

Tories must leave the EPP From Douglas Carswell MPSir: Fraser Nelson should ask himself why Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy and the rest of Old Europe’s political elite are so desperate to keep the Conservatives in the EPP (Politics, 8 July). It is precisely because they recognise the importance of maintaining their ideological monopoly. Once we Tories, with our free-market allies on the Continent, start arguing for a different kind of Europe, the Euro-elites’ cartel will be broken, and deeper integration will no longer look inevitable. Those pre-Cameroonian Conservatives lobbying David to shelve his promise need to understand what is at stake. Leaving the EPP is one of the very few commitments that he is in a position to deliver now.

The Spectator

Leading article: Love isn’t all you need

From our UK edition

The language of priorities is the religion of socialism, said Nye Bevan. In fact, the setting of priorities is the basis of all practical politics. This is one of many reasons that David Cameron’s speech on social justice and crime this week was his worst error to date. It suggested — to an alarming extent — that his concerns do not mesh with those of the public. Some of what the Tory leader said about the breakdown of the traditional family and poor standards of education was sound enough. Much of his speech to the Centre for Social Justice consisted of forgettable bromides. But his remarks on ‘hoodies’ — whether a gimmick or a protestation of sincere principle — were a grave error.

Saturday

The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 8 July 2006

From our UK edition

Elite electorates From Alan HallSir: I was amused by your leading article this week (1 July), criticising New Labour for treating ‘the highest office of government’ as if it were ‘the captaincy of its own team’. You affect to be shocked that the debate on who should succeed Tony Blair is not being conducted, so to speak, in open forum — or perhaps at the Court of St James’s — where the Queen’s loyal subjects might be invited to contribute their own pennyworth of opinion. But since when was the leadership of a political party (in or out of office) anything more than a matter for the party itself to decide?

The Spectator

Suspend the treaty now

From our UK edition

Any relationship, ‘special’ or otherwise, depends upon clarity, fairness and reciprocity. The US–UK extradition treaty signed in March 2003, ratified in this country the following year, boasts none of those features. As a consequence, three British businessmen — David Bermingham, Gary Mulgrew, and Giles Darby — face imminent extradition from this country to Texas over allegations that they committed a crime in Britain, while operating in Britain with a British employer. The ‘NatWest Three’ are accused by US investigators of swindling the bank out of £4.5 million via some devious trading of its stake in an Enron subsidiary — allegations they deny.