Economic Voice News About Failing EU

The EU is not important enough for these people

The spread below is written by a reporter for the Economic Voice. It is reported and authored by Jeff Taylor. As I read this, I could not help thinking that Jeff Taylor had a very striking point indeed about the voices that scream for the benefits of the EU - these educated people that try to tell us we would be in a very bad way if we left the EU. Try telling the people who live in these run down areas with no hope at all. What is the pro-EU voice for these people? "More no hope or things might be bad for the fat cats who will never employ you anyway?" 

If the rulers don't care, why do they expect these people to care about the country being in the EU. They (pro EU) are calling from a platform that has no meaning to this electorate and all they can see are people who don't concern themselves with estates forced to live on benefit. Not all of these voters are wasters, but a great many have had their dreams taken from them long ago and someone else's dream of an EU means nothing to them.

These people have votes and UKIP will take them from Labour supporters too, because Labour are no different from the Tories. The Economic Voice report is as follows:

Why study rich people's desire for EU. Staying in makes no difference.

Big multinational businesses have signed an open letter on the need to ‘promote the cause of EU membership’ claiming that we wouldn’t have it so good outside the Union.

But while they push for a continuation of more of the same they should spare a thought for the millions of people who live in this country’s forgotten welfare ghettos and have no hope of sharing in the economic plunder that the heads of big business enjoy. Those people (and whole families) have been consigned to the scrapheap while the powers that be pretend that the EU benefits us all. Well it has not benefitted these people has it? And what’s more I see nothing in the pipeline that will improve their plight.

A report out today from the Centre for Social Justice (Signed Off, Written Off) should be read by every politician and give them all nightmares tonight.

Whilst the rich and powerful politicians and business people have been strutting the world stage over the last couple of decades busying themselves making a world fit only for them, they have ignored and failed so many ordinary people at every level on a breathtaking scale.

And, as the report points out, this is not something that has happened overnight. This has been evolving over decades to the extent where families of three generations in some areas have never worked. How can it have come to pass that so many people have given up aspiring for something better? They cannot all be wasters.

All those politicians that profess to have gone into their chosen Westminster career to make the UK a better place should look at this report and ask themselves bluntly “what have I really done to try and prevent this?” Then they should say loudly that they are going to do something about it.

Just like so many people across the EU in countries like Spain, Greece and Cyprus who have been failed by their domestic politicians and sacrificed at the altar of an ever more intrusive EU, so have our own people been let down.

Instead of worrying about what the EU thinks or says, or what the needs of other countries are, our own politicians should be concentrating on the needs of the people that live within the UK.

The report itself does not link the benefit ghettoes with the failings of the EU, that is just my interpretation of events. All I see is that instead of spreading wealth the EU has concentrated it amongst a few to the detriment of so many and will continue to do so.

Here is the CSJ press release:

Benefit ghettos of Britain exposed by CSJ in major new inquiry into welfare state

Total spending on social security in the five years of this Parliament will top £1 trillion

CSJ says these areas represent the tragedy of wasted human potential

Some British towns and cities contain welfare ghettos where more than half the working age residents depend on out-of-work benefits, according to a major new investigation into the anatomy of the welfare state.

Parts of Denbighshire in Wales, Birmingham, Blackburn with Darwen, Wirral, Tendring and North East Lincolnshire are the worst affected, the report reveals.

In Liverpool, there are nearly 70 neighbourhoods where the number of people claiming out-of-work benefits is 30 per cent or higher. This is followed by Birmingham (49 neighbourhoods), Hull (45 neighbourhoods), Manchester (40 neighbourhoods), Leeds (37 Neighbourhoods) and Knowsley (31 neighbourhoods).

The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) report features a “league table” of the 20 neighbourhoods (Lower Layer Super Output areas, which have an average population of 1,614) in the UK where out-of-work dependency is highest.

The report, Signed On, Written Off, will be published in the week beginning Monday May 20, 2013.

Ranked on the percentage of people claiming out-of-work benefits, the top six neighbourhoods in England and Wales are:

Click to Enlarge

But if the rankings are calculated on average welfare spending per head, the top six local authorities are:

1. Sefton £6,278.75

2. Barking & Dagenham £5,916.98

3. Blackburn & Darwen £5,400.57

4. Luton £5,292.80

5. Newham £5,256.88

6. Bradford £5,252.89

Across the country, 6.8 million people are living in a home where no one has a job. Nearly one fifth of UK children (1.8 million) are growing up in a workless household (the second highest rate in the European Union), and the vast majority of charities helping the unemployed surveyed in the report say that they know of families where two or three generations have no one in work.

One of the charities, Chance UK, said that some children do not understand what work is. Asked what they wanted to be when they grew up, the children said “I want to be famous” or that they wanted to be the “boss” of a gang.

Knowsley in Merseyside and Glasgow both had over 25 per cent of working age people dependent on out of work benefits during the economic boom in 2003 (25.3 per cent and 26.1 per cent respectively), compared with a national average at the time of 12.4 per cent. In Boston, Lincolnshire, dependency on benefits actually rose during the boom years.

The new CSJ report follows two previous studies, published in 2007 and 2009, that shaped the “make work pay” reforms introduced by the Coalition Government under Iain Duncan Smith’s leadership as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. A further report, due next year, will draw up detailed recommendations for a second phase in the welfare revolution.

This report exposes the soaring cost of welfare. It has risen 18-fold since the inception of the welfare state in 1948, up from £11 billion to more than £200 billion today and accounts for 13 per cent of GDP, compared with 4 per cent in 1948. Despite the Government’s welfare reforms, the bill is projected to go on rising to £218 billion by 2015/16.

Over the five years of this Parliament, the Government will spend over £1 trillion on social security, not far short of the total value of all goods and services produced in the UK in a year.

In a foreword to the report, CSJ Managing Director Christian Guy warns that a much sought-after resumption of economic growth is not guaranteed to curb the seemingly unstoppable rise in worklessness and welfare bills.

He points out that during the recent economic boom, welfare spending on people of working age rose by around 40 per cent in real terms, mainly because of the Tax Credits paid to people with a job. The Tax Credit bill surged from under £3.3 billion in 1997/98 to more than £20 billion in 2010/11.

By 2009, nine out of ten families with children were entitled to some kind of state support.

But Mr Guy says it is the waste of human potential rather than money that should keep politicians awake at night.

He said: “The welfare ghettos trapping as many as 6.8 million people are a national disgrace.

“They represent years of tragic failure and indifference from the political class. People in these neighbourhoods have been consistently written off as incapable and their poverty plight inevitable.

“Their lives have been limited by a fatalistic assumption that they have little prospect of anything better.

“While some campaigners accuse this Government of being callous for its benefit cap, the truth is there has been a much more damaging welfare cap in these communities for years – an unjust cap on personal potential.”

The report also reveals just how deeply entrenched worklessness has become. Despite 63 successive quarters of growth from the early 90s onwards, the numbers claiming out of work benefits stayed above 4 million.

Liverpool has 50 jobseekers claiming for 10 years or more; Tower Hamlets in London 40 such jobseekers; and Middleborough has ten.

The report backs the Government’s efforts to make work pay and to move people off long-term dependency on state benefits into a job.

But it says that the present package of changes is only a start.

“Reform is now essential and can wait no longer. Some cite the spiralling costs of the welfare state as the key reason to act. These arguments are important as the Government now spends more than one in every three pounds on welfare.

“Yet the most powerful arguments for reforming welfare are not financial, but social. By focusing on income transfers rather than employment, our welfare system has made people dependent on benefits, trapping them in poverty and preventing them from achieving economic independence.”

Read more: http://www.economicvoice.com/big-business-calls-for-eu-case-to-be-made-while-benefit-ghettos-are-ignored/50037069#ixzz2TuFfQFKJ

Raynald of Châtillon 1125 - 1187 - Why Wolf of Kerak was a Mad Holy Land Crusader

A Knight Crusader could achieve great social standing in the Holy Lands
It attracted pious and holy men plus ambitious and unscrupulous people too. 

Raynald of Châtillon is a very controversial crusader knight of the middle ages. He was born in France in 1125, but his origins are vague. He was a man of middle-class ranking in Middle age French society and his father was said to be a Lord of Châtillon. However history seems unsure if Raynald came from Châtillon Sur/on Marne or Châtillon on Loing - each Châtillon is on a river.

This young man seems to have been a reckless and rebellious character and was sent away on the second crusade at age 22 years in 1147. He entered the service of Constance of Antioch - a noble born lady who would be widowed in 1149. Raynald of Châtillon was to spend the next 40 years in the Holy Land until the end of his life aged 62.

Raynald of Châtillon must have made some impression upon Constance of Antioch - perhaps the lady was taken by the brash young chancer - there would have been an obvious element of danger about the young man. It is also possible that the young noble lady of Antioch was manipulated in some way for she was used as a commodity of power from a young age. Her mother, Alice of Antioch, had tried to marry her to a Muslim Prince to gain control over Antioch as a reagent. This was when Constance was an infant. Alice of Antioch was banished for this deed, and when she was allowed to return, she tried to broker a marriage alliance for herself with a Christian Crusader called Raymond of Poitiers. Through this marriage, they could both rule Antioch, by her young daughter, as regents. Again Alice was foiled by Raymond of Poitiers for he married her 9-year-old daughter in secret and Alice was forced into humiliated exile. This was in the year of 1136.

In the Holy Land, lower ranked individuals could rise in social standing, far easier than in Europe, doing service for the Holy Roman Empire in the Holy Land. Here, the new Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem had been founded in 1099 AD. Areas all about the Middle East were being colonised by Christian invaders and small vassal kingdoms were being set up in various surrounding cities. The Crusader state of Antioch was one such place and now, through devious means, a low-rank knight had won control of a small kingdom state within the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem.

A situation had developed in the Holy Land where wealthy men were pedalling the religion of Christianity as a material business. Anyone could jump on the band waggon and all were deluding themselves that they were doing God's work. Some may have believed this, but many that were intelligent enough to grasp the situation of ambition and acquisition, easily manipulated more pious and devoted men, of lower rank, to naively support hidden and unscrupulous causes. The example of Raymond of Poitiers and Alice of Antioch is such an example. The 9-year-old wife could hardly have known what was going on.


Then at the age of 20, Constance of Antioch sees a young knight from France come into her service, though more likely under the command of her husband. This is Raynald of Châtillon's first appearance in the Holy Land. Did he quickly grasp the situation coupled with his rebellious streak?

Raynald of Châtillon would have witnessed Muslims and Hebrews being subjugated to Christian rulers - immigrants who believed their prophet Jesus Christ should have Christian people rule the area. He may have been indifferent to them and probably the lower ranks of his own kind. It is hard to put oneself in the mind of such men when they could do underhand things and pedal forgiveness and penance so easily through their church. Imagine - suddenly there is a land of milk and honey to plunder and there is a God given right to do what you want, provided you rule as a believer of the Christian religion - or say you do if you are of an unscrupulous and cunning mind.

In 1149, two years after Raynald of Châtillon arrived at Antioch, his Lord and master were killed at the Battle of Inab. Raymond of Poitiers - the husband of Constance of Antioch, was beheaded by his Muslim enemy when captured during the battle. His head was sent to the Caliph of Baghdad as a gift. Why young Raynald of Châtillon was not on this expedition is not known for he was in the service of Constance and Raymond the co-rulers of Antioch.

Four years passed for the widow Constance of Antioch, then one day in 1153, she secretly married Raynald of Châtillon. How this secret marriage came about is not well known but it was not approved by King Baldwin III of Jerusalem. Together Raynald and Constance would have two daughters. The marriage of Constance to a man of such low birth was not permitted, but this was the Holy Land where men could better themselves in the service of God. Raynald had got his foot on the ladder of ambition and climbed up a few steps.

From the start, the rebellious and reckless young man caused controversy, often raiding and plundering neighbouring Muslim states in the name of God and the Holy Church of Rome, becoming a difficult person to control within his Crusader state of Antioch.

Raynald of Châtillon became very angry and resentful towards the Byzantine Emperor Manuel I, who Raynald believed, owed him a vast a sum of money. As a form of revenge and punishment, Raynald wanted to invade the island of Cyprus which was ruled by the Byzantine Emperor. For this, Raynald requested that the Patriarch of Antioch (Bishop) grant him the funds necessary to finance such an invasion. When the Patriarch refused this, Raynald had the Patriarch stripped naked and covered in honey. He was then put out in the hot sun for a great length of time until the exhausted holy man was forced to relent and grant the funds required.

Raynald of Châtillon led his Crusader forces against the Byzantine state of Cyprus, the way he attacked Muslim states in the Holy Land. The island was ravaged and plundered by his knights much to the consternation of the King Baldwin III of Jerusalem and the Byzantine Emperor. The shock waves caused Emperor Manuel I to raise an army and move towards the Holy Land.

Raynald of Châtillon was forced to grovel before the Byzantine Emperor in bare feet and dressed in rags. Later the Emperor went to Raynald's Crusader state of Antioch where he was received with pomp and ceremony by Raynald, and then; in full view of his subjects, Raynald of Châtillon, had to be seen leading the Byzantine Emperor's horse through the streets. This was always a mark of humility in the Middle East. Also, Antioch was forced to accept a new Patriarch - an Orthodox Greek Bishop. The last thing wanted by Rome and the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem was too upset the Eastern Christian Church. This political unrest with neighbouring Byzantine lands was put to rest in 1159.

If 1159 was a bad year for Raynald of Châtillon, then 1160 was to be the beginning of 16 years of trouble and strife. He led an expedition raid against the Muslim Kingdom called Marash and got himself captured. He was taken to the large city of Aleppo in Syria and remained a prisoner for 16 years. He was released in 1176 aged 51. When captured he was 35 years of age and now after a 16-year prison sentence and aged 51, one might think the old ruler of Antioch had mellowed. This was not so. Perhaps, as a high ranked official of Antioch, Raynald of Châtillon's confinement might have been better accommodation than most might expect. The Crusader Knight does not seem to have been humbled or integrated with an understanding of the Muslims where he had lived over the years as a prisoner. His wife, Constance of Antioch, had died in 1163 and all rule of Antioch was passed from him.

In 1176, after his years of confinement, Raynald of Châtillon was released from the Islamic prison and sent back to the Holy Land, where he was married to a Princess called Stephanie of Milly. She had been widowed twice and had children. She would have two more by Raynald of Châtillon and was the heiress to Oultrejordain and owned the castle of Kerak.

Kerak Castle

Raynald was back and into his old habit of attacking Muslim caravans as they travelled through the Kingdom of Jerusalem and her other Crusader states. The signed truces had allowed for this, but Raynald of Châtillon would not abide by these things still - despite all of the trouble this impulsive and disorderly conduct had brought upon him, in the past. History seems to portray him as a very driven pantomime villain, for he would not conform in any way. He even made threats upon the Islamic Holy Temple of Mecca and this brought Saladin the Great upon his castle at Kerak during the year of 1183. At the time there was an arranged marriage ceremony going on between Leper King Baldwin IV's half-sister and Stephanie's son.

The antics of Raynald of Châtillon were a constant cause for concern and when the Leper King Baldwin IV died, the reckless knight supported Queen Sibylla (Baldwin IV's sister) and her husband Guy of Lusignan. This led to a fatal confrontation with Saladin's invading army at Hattin. Raynald of Châtillon continued to attack Muslim pilgrimages and caravans - one had Saladin's sister travelling within. This final outrage brought Saladin the Great into the Holy Land to sort the problem, of rogue Christian attacks, out - once and for all.

The Crusaders suffered a heavy defeat at the Battle of Hattin
Here Raynald of Châtillon fortune ran dry.

The confrontation at Hattin was a huge defeat for the Crusaders and many prisoners were taken - among them Raynald of Châtillon and Guy of Lusignan (ruler of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem.) It was 40 years since 1147 when 22-year-old Raynald of Châtillon arrived in the Kingdom of Jerusalem and by this time in 1187, the 62-year-old Crusader's luck had run dry. Some say Saladin himself plunged a dagger into the unruly Crusader's neck before he was dragged among his Muslim soldiers and beheaded. It was also said to have been done before Guy of Lusignan's eyes. Whatever happened; the problem of Raynald of Châtillon - the mad Christian crusader was put to rest. He died as violently and terribly as he had lived, receiving no mercy for his rank and social standing. In the eyes of Saladin and his Muslim soldiers, Raynald of Châtillon (often called the wolf of Kerak) had shown no such protocol to Muslims - why should he receive such respect for his social standing in return. While convulsively choking from his stab wound in the neck, he was beheaded and probably not too quickly. It is difficult to imagine a person choking for life and standing still so that an executioner can swiftly behead. It was probably a very messy affair.

He died a martyr by the consideration of some Crusaders, but history is less sympathetic to the man in this day and age. For 40 years he lived out in the Holy Land, spending 16 years as a prisoner, midway through this time. His monument among the Muslims is that of a terrible land pirate or plunderer known as The Wolf of Kerak. Among Christians and the western world, he is remembered not. Only historians with a special interest in the Crusader wars would know of this man. He was also portrayed in the Ridley Scott movie 'Kingdom of Heaven.' 

    

How Balian of Ibelin Commanded During the Fall of Jerusalem - Capital of the Crusader Kingdom 1187

The Christian Crusaders of the Holy Wars

There is a historical movie by Ridley Scott, called 'The Kingdom of Heaven.' This film is very enjoyable and portrays the events that led to the fall of Jerusalem. Of course, the romance of Hollywood film directors added social diversions within the movie that were not so. Mainly concerning the historical characters of Balian of Ibelin and that of King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem's sister; Sibylla, who would later become Queen Sibylla of Jerusalem.

This romantic story, with stunning special effects, for the backdrop of the fall of Jerusalem, in the year 1187, is untrue where Balian and Sibylla are concerned, though their paths did cross. I mention this because the film was most entertaining, but the love interest of the two mentioned (Balian and Sibylla) is untrue. Also the happy ever after ending in France was a big no, no as well.

In the movie 'Kingdom of Heaven,' we are presented with a young Balian who is 20 something years of age, and a humble blacksmith working in a remote French village. He is recently a widower and is the bastard son of an aristocratic man who fights in the crusades in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. Again this aspect of Balian is not true. 

In reality Balian was a third son of Barisan of Ibelin with two elder brothers Hugh and Baldwin. Ibelin was a castle in a province ruled by the Christian crusaders. Concerning Balian's brother Baldwin; it is important to know that King Baldwin of Jerusalem (the king suffering from leprosy) and Balian’s brother Baldwin, are two different people with the same name. This bit of info is to avoid confusion as I continue the blog.

When Barisan of Ibelin died, his eldest son Hugh became the Lord of Castle Ibelin, and when he passed away the castle went to Baldwin who was already the Lord of Rama. He gave Ibelin castle to Balian, hence we have Balian of Ibelin. At this time Balian would have been around 44 to 46 years of age.

The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem had come about in 1099 when the city fell to the Christian crusaders. It has to be visualised from a certain perspective in western points of view when calling it the 'Crusader Kingdom.'

Imagine, if you will, the American continent when it was first discovered by European nations. They carved out chunks of land for themselves, like Canada, USA, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina etc. Well in the middle ages, the Christian crusaders tried to do this with the Middle East, believing that it was their Holy Land where their prophet was born. Untitled Christian men could win renown for themselves and find improved social standing beyond their dreams. Far greater than if they remained in Europe. In the long run; the Muslims would win this long and turbulent struggle for the Holy Land, but it would take many generations to displace the invading Christian Kingdom builders.

Many of Europe's nobility gave themselves regal titles within this Crusader Kingdom under the endorsement of the Popes. From their point of view it was legal and the Muslims and Hebrews no longer had a viable standing concerning the matter. In this time, the Muslim nations tried to battle the European Christian invaders, but for a long period of time; the Christians occupied the Holy Land (The Crusader Kingdom of)

Over the years there had been battles, defeats and victories for the Christian Crusaders, but they also began to argue among themselves concerning lands within the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem and when Balian was charged with the overseeing of castle Ibelin he may have been away from the squabbling fractions at the court of Jerusalem. Here King Baldwin IV was in the advanced stages of Leprosy and he was concerned as to who would take control of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. He wanted to marry his sister, Princess Sibylla, to a worthy consort and the person his sister married was Guy of Lusignan. 

In 1183, Balian and his elder brother Baldwin championed their support for a noble called Raymond III of Tripoli against Guy of Lusignan who was acting as a regent for Baldwin IV King of Jerusalem. The king was rapidly dying from the leprosy that was eating away at him. Balian's brother Baldwin had not long returned from Muslim captivity after being captured in a battle.

In 1185, King Baldwin IV died aged 24 and the young son of Sibylla was crowned king at just five years of age. The sickly child died a year later as Sibylla became Queen of Jerusalem in 1186 with her husband Guy of Lusignan as her consort. Balian reluctantly accepted the new consort, even though he did not support the man, while his elder brother exiled himself in Antioch. Brother Baldwin is believed to have died here in 1187.

Meanwhile, Consort Guy then went with an army of Crusaders to challenge the Muslim Sultan Saladin who had mobilised his Islamic army because of brutal raids against Muslim caravans that had permission to pass over the Christian held territories. This culminated in the Battle of Hattin in which the Muslim forces defeated the Christian Crusaders. Guy of Lusignan was captured by Saladin and imprisoned in Damascus.

Balian was in Jerusalem when Saladin led his Muslim army to recapture the city and make Islam the dominant power of the Holy Land and vanquish the Crusader Kingdom of. The siege lasted for several months and though Saladin's forces managed to puncture holes in the walls of Jerusalem; his Muslim forces could not enter the city because the Christian crusaders put up formidable defences against the besiegers.

Balian was able to evacuate his wife and four children to Tripoli unmolested because Saladin observed strict Muslim laws, and Balian was recognised as the highest ranking official defending the besieged city. He had honour status and thus his family had this right and privilege to vacate Jerusalem unmolested. It should be noted that Christian crusaders did not always afford or observe the same protocols towards Muslim nobility.

During Balian's valiant defence of Jerusalem, he made sixty men knights because there was under twelve knights to defend the Holy city when he first began to prepare defences against Saladin's army.

The siege lasted through September and when Sultan Saladin asked to speak with Balian outside the walls, a peace treaty was thrashed out after Balian promised to destroy everything of value in the city before any of the Christian Crusaders would give up.

Eventually Balian agreed to surrender the city of Jerusalem to Saladin for the Christian defenders to go free. However, there was a material price in bezants (gold coin) for this mass release of Christians. It was 30,000 bezants per man or two women or ten children. Any who could not meet the price would be sold into Islamic slavery. There were many who could not pay, but many of these were released by Saladin after and allowed safe escort from the city. There remained some Christian Frankish citizens who were not freed. Balian and Patriarch Eraclus offered themselves as high ranking hostages for their freedom, but on this issue Saladin would not give way. The Frankish inhabitants went into slavery.

Queen Sibylla was also allowed to leave with her daughters. She went to Cyprus and died of an epidemic three years later in 1190 at the age of 30. Her daughters also perished of this illness too.

Balian was reunited with his wife and four children and would have some involvement in the third Crusade, in which England's Richard the Lionheart was leading. He was at the Battle of Jaffa and took part in the peace negotiations that was known as the Treaty of Ramala. King Richard the Lionheart left for England while Sultan Saladin gave Balian castle Caymont as a Christian Vassal. Balian died in 1193 at about 53 years of age, six years after the fall of Jerusalem.