There are lots of things in mainstream thought, viewpoint and activity, that seemingly just "are". If you were to ask anyone about those subjects, they would just respond like it was a truth carved in stone. They've never questioned whether it's true or not. That's almost understandable because everyone's parroting it with the same level of conviction.
The funny thing is when they're explored, many of these have stories have weak or questionable foundations. This is especially true of the scare stories. Take for example, the oft quoted "the average Briton is caught on CCTV x times per day." All sorts of people love that phrase. Turns out, its roots lie in a piece of fiction about a theoretical character and slowly it drifted into mainstream thought via an academic paper. Similarly, the Y2K bug which had industry and government running around in a blind panic, creating a lot of well paid IT consultants was a lot less scary and likely than the activity and spend indicated. What makes his story worse and relevant to this post is that when it first began its journey into into hype, the disaster being alluded to was unlikely and the people who started it knew that.
There's another story already out there and has people running around panicking. More importantly, a lot of people have made a lot of money off this and continue to do so whilst it remains a sacred cow. We all know it as global warming. One of its foundations is the subject of ocean acidification. That general idea is that the sea is turning into one giant, life ending vat of acid that will burn everything in it alive. The warmists love to trot it out as fact without question.
However, it looks this foundation is having some of its foundation science questioned. I suspect, judging by the way the strong hint he was given to desist from his research, the discoverer may be on to something. As they say, if you're taking flak, you're getting close to the target.
I'll let Watts Up with That take up the story
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/23/touchy-feely-science-one-chart-suggests-theres-a-phraud-in-omitting-ocean-acidification-data-in-congressional-testimony/
Tuesday, 23 December 2014
Wednesday, 15 October 2014
Some rape is okay people...
...or so it would seem. It would seem that following Judy Finnigan's controversial comments about footballer Ched Evans on Loose Women, Her daughter, Chloe has received a ton of abuse on Twitter ( sorry having linking problems today for some reason). Within that it's reported that a number of them are hoping that she gets raped. Pretty vile sentiments I'm sure you would agree.
Strange that isn't it. There's outrage at Finnigan was for having a conversation about it. I think she was daft bringing it up, because the subject is a vile one and provokes strong feelings and no matter how well intentioned. I suspect there's nobody in the world with the verbal dexterity to speak about this without provoking understandable fury.
But how odd it is that from that angry crowd, for whom there is total intolerance (a sentiment I would share), their response is to wish the very thing they so abhor on someone. Is their argument that it's okay in such cases if they give it the nod?
What was it former radical left winger David Horrowitz said? Inside every liberal is a tyrant screaming to get out.
Strange that isn't it. There's outrage at Finnigan was for having a conversation about it. I think she was daft bringing it up, because the subject is a vile one and provokes strong feelings and no matter how well intentioned. I suspect there's nobody in the world with the verbal dexterity to speak about this without provoking understandable fury.
But how odd it is that from that angry crowd, for whom there is total intolerance (a sentiment I would share), their response is to wish the very thing they so abhor on someone. Is their argument that it's okay in such cases if they give it the nod?
What was it former radical left winger David Horrowitz said? Inside every liberal is a tyrant screaming to get out.
Friday, 10 October 2014
What's new pussycat
So after the much predicted win by UKIP in Clacton, Dave feels it's wise to warn those turning to UKIP of the Consequences at the 2015 election. The wise old sage predicts a vote for UKIP will result in a Labour govt.
I love that implicit in that warning is how it will be our fault. Typical modern politician. At no point does Dave seem to wonder, what precisely it is that has caused this result. I mean what could possibly have happened to the electorate of Clacton or anywhere else for that matter that could cause Tories to plump for someone else? Was it just some sudden attack of the vapours resulting in delirium. This ones going to a tough one to crack isn't it.
Well no, not really. Maybe as opposed to pointing his waggy finger at the public he should look back at his own duplicitous behaviour, promising one thing and doing another.
Maybe, just maybe, the electorate are not worried about his vote UKIP get Labour threat. After all that's precisely the same as they got in 2010 when they voted Tory.
I love that implicit in that warning is how it will be our fault. Typical modern politician. At no point does Dave seem to wonder, what precisely it is that has caused this result. I mean what could possibly have happened to the electorate of Clacton or anywhere else for that matter that could cause Tories to plump for someone else? Was it just some sudden attack of the vapours resulting in delirium. This ones going to a tough one to crack isn't it.
Well no, not really. Maybe as opposed to pointing his waggy finger at the public he should look back at his own duplicitous behaviour, promising one thing and doing another.
Maybe, just maybe, the electorate are not worried about his vote UKIP get Labour threat. After all that's precisely the same as they got in 2010 when they voted Tory.
Thursday, 28 August 2014
In a nutshell
Just watching the news channel in which one of the victims of the Rotherham abuse scandal is being interviewed. She summed it up perfectly when speaking about those who did nothing.
"I don't think they're sorry. They're not sorry because I got abused. They're sorry because they got caught out in a scandal that's hit the media"
Right there in a nutshell is it. Everything you need to know about what's wrong with public life in modern Britain. Our institutions and our democracy is broken. This is what we have because we have no meaningful method of holding public servants to account.
The question is what happens as a result. I've seen a lot of outrage both in the media and more importantly the comments from the public. It's palpable and the comments are suggestive that it won't be tolerated any longer.
That becomes a "so what?" moment in that it becomes a question of what they will do about it beyond venting in comment threads. I'm not talking about violence or anything of that notion but the point I make is that there is a small window of opportunity here to start something turn this around, but everyone has to be part of it, because here's the rub.
Look at what this scandal points to. It points to people who tried to keep a lid on a disgusting and vile practice. They tried to ignore it, hide and generally ride out the problem. They'll try again. They're already playing for time and it won't be long before we start to hear revisionism come in to play.
1400 children. As opined in the Telegraph "let the weight of that number sink in" . It is the equivalent of almost 50 classes or an average size secondary school.
This is about as bad as it gets and there's a lot of noise. If nothing happens though, it will tell those who work for us, there is virtually nothing that will cause us to take action. If nothing happens they will know all they have to is make mealy mouthed apologies, buy time and it will be business as usual.
So. What will It be?
"I don't think they're sorry. They're not sorry because I got abused. They're sorry because they got caught out in a scandal that's hit the media"
Right there in a nutshell is it. Everything you need to know about what's wrong with public life in modern Britain. Our institutions and our democracy is broken. This is what we have because we have no meaningful method of holding public servants to account.
The question is what happens as a result. I've seen a lot of outrage both in the media and more importantly the comments from the public. It's palpable and the comments are suggestive that it won't be tolerated any longer.
That becomes a "so what?" moment in that it becomes a question of what they will do about it beyond venting in comment threads. I'm not talking about violence or anything of that notion but the point I make is that there is a small window of opportunity here to start something turn this around, but everyone has to be part of it, because here's the rub.
Look at what this scandal points to. It points to people who tried to keep a lid on a disgusting and vile practice. They tried to ignore it, hide and generally ride out the problem. They'll try again. They're already playing for time and it won't be long before we start to hear revisionism come in to play.
1400 children. As opined in the Telegraph "let the weight of that number sink in" . It is the equivalent of almost 50 classes or an average size secondary school.
This is about as bad as it gets and there's a lot of noise. If nothing happens though, it will tell those who work for us, there is virtually nothing that will cause us to take action. If nothing happens they will know all they have to is make mealy mouthed apologies, buy time and it will be business as usual.
So. What will It be?
Wednesday, 27 August 2014
The Stench in Britain's Air.
I suspect the blogosphere will be alive with posts around the release of the report into the Rotherham child sex abuse scandal and rightly so. They will cover it just like the mainstream media. There will however be a difference. The mainstream media will have surprise and shock as their themes. I suspect there won't be so much shock in the blogs. Revulsion yes, shock no. This is primarily because blogs have been writing about the poisonous effects of political correctness for a long time now. Whilst the press will write of it as though there was some unintended consequence of this well meaning and benign approach, bloggers will openly point to the deliberate design of political correctness as a tool to smash the societal cohesion of western nations. They will tell you that any degree of thought will show that what came out yesterday was entirely predictable.
But that's only part of it. If you haven't already, read the report I urge you to do so for it tells you something else it tells another story of this nation about where we are. Excuse my language but there's a stench of shit in the air. That stink is our nation and what it has become. Read the report and it will tell you about how pervasive in public life vanity, cowardice and rampant self interest has become. There is evidence aplenty in this report. People who can't recall meetings. Case files that laid bare he problem that went "missing". People in key places when presented with evidence crying out for action and it swept away in various fashions and attacking the messenger. Anything to make it go away and pretend it wasn't happening. In one of the worst examples (and I recall this story from when the scandal first broke) of a father who tried to rescue his daughter from one place where knew his daughter was being arrested by the police in what I can only imagine was a nightmare of kafkaesque proportions given the inversion of his reality. Even now, everyone's sort of sorry but nobody is really paying any price. The council leader has fallen on his sword, but so what he's just out of a job. There are whole lives and families that have been smashed laid waste, but it's just another day at the office for everyone else.
At the heart of this lies a group of people who talk about public service but know nothing of it. The problems here are about people who got in , got comfy and wanted nothing of the responsibility of serving the public. In their eyes, the public are there to serve them. I'm not saying everyone. Just a hard core of people who's rampant self interest trumps everything. No scandal must land at their door. No responsibility must be faced. They must bask in nothing but glory as they shin ever upwards on the greasy pole. The only responsibility they want to is to have eye catching initiatives brought to them, to keep them in their gilded position. That is why everything inconvenient had to sink in the mud, that's why it had to dissappear. That's why the coercion of staff to go away and come back with the "right" answer happened. That's why files disappeared along with memories. That's why police officers ran away from their oath of office and that's why wretched souls had to go on getting abused both sexually and violently and the lives of they and their families ripped apart. All so vain and inept people who were never fit for higher office could keep their fragile egos intact. people who should today be prison cells with their self constructed reputations in tatters.
But that's only part of it. If you haven't already, read the report I urge you to do so for it tells you something else it tells another story of this nation about where we are. Excuse my language but there's a stench of shit in the air. That stink is our nation and what it has become. Read the report and it will tell you about how pervasive in public life vanity, cowardice and rampant self interest has become. There is evidence aplenty in this report. People who can't recall meetings. Case files that laid bare he problem that went "missing". People in key places when presented with evidence crying out for action and it swept away in various fashions and attacking the messenger. Anything to make it go away and pretend it wasn't happening. In one of the worst examples (and I recall this story from when the scandal first broke) of a father who tried to rescue his daughter from one place where knew his daughter was being arrested by the police in what I can only imagine was a nightmare of kafkaesque proportions given the inversion of his reality. Even now, everyone's sort of sorry but nobody is really paying any price. The council leader has fallen on his sword, but so what he's just out of a job. There are whole lives and families that have been smashed laid waste, but it's just another day at the office for everyone else.
At the heart of this lies a group of people who talk about public service but know nothing of it. The problems here are about people who got in , got comfy and wanted nothing of the responsibility of serving the public. In their eyes, the public are there to serve them. I'm not saying everyone. Just a hard core of people who's rampant self interest trumps everything. No scandal must land at their door. No responsibility must be faced. They must bask in nothing but glory as they shin ever upwards on the greasy pole. The only responsibility they want to is to have eye catching initiatives brought to them, to keep them in their gilded position. That is why everything inconvenient had to sink in the mud, that's why it had to dissappear. That's why the coercion of staff to go away and come back with the "right" answer happened. That's why files disappeared along with memories. That's why police officers ran away from their oath of office and that's why wretched souls had to go on getting abused both sexually and violently and the lives of they and their families ripped apart. All so vain and inept people who were never fit for higher office could keep their fragile egos intact. people who should today be prison cells with their self constructed reputations in tatters.
Saturday, 16 August 2014
Defensive Positions
For those of us who love our nation and what it once was and what it once stood for, we lament on a regular basis of what it has become. We look around in a bewildered fashion at everything that has gone wrong and it is pretty much everything. I suspect many of us cast our minds to the graves of men who died for us across the world and feel a sense of shame in what has happened to their sacrifice. From the top to the bottom, our nation is broken and it desperately needs fixing.
Many of us know what lies at the heart of it. Our politics and more importantly our culture has been collapsed from the within. Men and women who ascribed to a wrongheaded philosophy that started its journey in Frankfurt have spent decades slowly working their way through every aspect of our lives and our institutions right across the western world. Whilst we stood with guns and armour pointing at the overt manifestation of their political creed, seemingly everyday folk walked through our defences and in to our institutions, quietly coming at us from another angle. We did not notice them in action and here we are today with the result. The subtle were they, their language and viewpoints have become disguised as mainstream thought with even those who would opposed them, inadvertently advancing their agenda.
If we want to conceptualise it for the sake of what I'm about to write let's call it left v right. Yes there are nuances and extremes within both of them, but in order to simplify we'll go with this. They are on the left with us on the right.
When we look at the success on the left we are often bewildered. That's because too many times we're looking in the wrong place when we're trying to diagnose what went wrong. Why? In part because we never examine ourselves on the right as part of that assessment.
Our fundamental problem is our approach. In left versus right arguments and philosophies, we come at form different viewpoints and it's the heart of why we're losing. We tend to offer evidence for our arguments. We think the general good sense of our arguments and proposals are so self evident that others will see the sense of them and follow suit. More often than not, they are self evident so such a belief is not without sense to a point. Except for one fact. The left are not one bit interested in whether such things are self evident. They are fighting by a totally different set of rules in this war.
They brought totally different set of weapons and we're losing. We're on a battleground and we've no idea what the rules are. We're arguing and they're punching. Whilst we don't understand our battleground and any strategist will tell you the inevitable result will be defeat. We don't need a strategist to tell us though, the evidence is all around us. In short, the left get it and we don't. They're winning and we're losing.
Again, to a point, our approach is understandable. Our general philosophy of small state, personal responsibility, general stop interfering in everyone's lives has made it such that the way we have conducted ourselves to this point is an extension of that philosophy. It's costing us however and we will never see our vision come to fruition if we carry on the way we have.
We need to change. We need to wake up and identify the ground we're fighting on. We need to reform and find ways to make forward. Our hands have been raised whilst they've been throwing punches.
It's time to punch back (metaphorically, of course)
Many of us know what lies at the heart of it. Our politics and more importantly our culture has been collapsed from the within. Men and women who ascribed to a wrongheaded philosophy that started its journey in Frankfurt have spent decades slowly working their way through every aspect of our lives and our institutions right across the western world. Whilst we stood with guns and armour pointing at the overt manifestation of their political creed, seemingly everyday folk walked through our defences and in to our institutions, quietly coming at us from another angle. We did not notice them in action and here we are today with the result. The subtle were they, their language and viewpoints have become disguised as mainstream thought with even those who would opposed them, inadvertently advancing their agenda.
If we want to conceptualise it for the sake of what I'm about to write let's call it left v right. Yes there are nuances and extremes within both of them, but in order to simplify we'll go with this. They are on the left with us on the right.
When we look at the success on the left we are often bewildered. That's because too many times we're looking in the wrong place when we're trying to diagnose what went wrong. Why? In part because we never examine ourselves on the right as part of that assessment.
Our fundamental problem is our approach. In left versus right arguments and philosophies, we come at form different viewpoints and it's the heart of why we're losing. We tend to offer evidence for our arguments. We think the general good sense of our arguments and proposals are so self evident that others will see the sense of them and follow suit. More often than not, they are self evident so such a belief is not without sense to a point. Except for one fact. The left are not one bit interested in whether such things are self evident. They are fighting by a totally different set of rules in this war.
They brought totally different set of weapons and we're losing. We're on a battleground and we've no idea what the rules are. We're arguing and they're punching. Whilst we don't understand our battleground and any strategist will tell you the inevitable result will be defeat. We don't need a strategist to tell us though, the evidence is all around us. In short, the left get it and we don't. They're winning and we're losing.
Again, to a point, our approach is understandable. Our general philosophy of small state, personal responsibility, general stop interfering in everyone's lives has made it such that the way we have conducted ourselves to this point is an extension of that philosophy. It's costing us however and we will never see our vision come to fruition if we carry on the way we have.
We need to change. We need to wake up and identify the ground we're fighting on. We need to reform and find ways to make forward. Our hands have been raised whilst they've been throwing punches.
It's time to punch back (metaphorically, of course)
Wednesday, 13 August 2014
A Prediction
I see from the a Times of Israel that IHH is planning Another Gaza Flotilla.
Oh goody - an aid and relief shipment for the poor impoverished people of Gaza. Once again it will involve the Mavi Marmara. Readers might be familiar that it was the Marmara which was the scene of an incident when the ship was boarded by Israeli commandos, because it would not follow instruction to divert to an alternative port suggest by the Israelis. One aspect of this was the ongoing security operation to prevent military equipment making it into Gaza for use against Israel.
What followed was criticism of Israel. One " UN" investigation called the operation and the naval blockade illegal, citing the San Remo manual of armed conflict at sea. Israel performed its own investigation that many, including UN commentators described as a whitewash.
Well at least that's what you were told.
I suspect with this new flotilla, we're going Israel find itself in a similar position where it will have criticism levelled at it and similar accusations thrown around and the sheep will willingly trot it all out.
There are however a couple of observations that I made following the last incident. In addition, the recent conflict in Gaza has helped underscore an inconvenient truth that shows the Gaza Flotilla as being nothing more that an effort at provocation as opposed to a relief convoy for the beleaguered residents of Gaza.
Firstly the naval blockade of Gaza is legal despite what the UN seemed to think last time. Their original report cited the San Remo manual as the basis for their verdict. Just one problem. The Israeli Turkel commission which produced the report described as a whitewash consulted one Professor Dr Wolff Heintschel von Heinegg. Who's he you might ask. Well you can get a summary of the man Here , but the key thing to take away in this context is that he was one of the authors of the very same manual. Israel sought the view,of an expert on the matter, one acknowledged by the international community.
Secondly this latest round of conflict has revealed something that undermines these flotillas as humanitarian in nature, especially with the Mavi Marmara. One of the things Hamas is reputedly pushing for is the proper development of a harbour in Gaza. Even the BBC mentioned it in one of their reports on the situation.
that's right folks. Gaza does not possess a proper harbour. It was a little fact tucked away last time. The Mavi Mamara is too big to dock in Gaza. It needs to dock elsewhere to offload its cargo.
The organisers will know this. They're. To bothered about helping the people of Gaza. If they were they'd head to a port that can accommodate the ship.
No. They want to provoke an incident once again.
Oh goody - an aid and relief shipment for the poor impoverished people of Gaza. Once again it will involve the Mavi Marmara. Readers might be familiar that it was the Marmara which was the scene of an incident when the ship was boarded by Israeli commandos, because it would not follow instruction to divert to an alternative port suggest by the Israelis. One aspect of this was the ongoing security operation to prevent military equipment making it into Gaza for use against Israel.
What followed was criticism of Israel. One " UN" investigation called the operation and the naval blockade illegal, citing the San Remo manual of armed conflict at sea. Israel performed its own investigation that many, including UN commentators described as a whitewash.
Well at least that's what you were told.
I suspect with this new flotilla, we're going Israel find itself in a similar position where it will have criticism levelled at it and similar accusations thrown around and the sheep will willingly trot it all out.
There are however a couple of observations that I made following the last incident. In addition, the recent conflict in Gaza has helped underscore an inconvenient truth that shows the Gaza Flotilla as being nothing more that an effort at provocation as opposed to a relief convoy for the beleaguered residents of Gaza.
Firstly the naval blockade of Gaza is legal despite what the UN seemed to think last time. Their original report cited the San Remo manual as the basis for their verdict. Just one problem. The Israeli Turkel commission which produced the report described as a whitewash consulted one Professor Dr Wolff Heintschel von Heinegg. Who's he you might ask. Well you can get a summary of the man Here , but the key thing to take away in this context is that he was one of the authors of the very same manual. Israel sought the view,of an expert on the matter, one acknowledged by the international community.
Secondly this latest round of conflict has revealed something that undermines these flotillas as humanitarian in nature, especially with the Mavi Marmara. One of the things Hamas is reputedly pushing for is the proper development of a harbour in Gaza. Even the BBC mentioned it in one of their reports on the situation.
that's right folks. Gaza does not possess a proper harbour. It was a little fact tucked away last time. The Mavi Mamara is too big to dock in Gaza. It needs to dock elsewhere to offload its cargo.
The organisers will know this. They're. To bothered about helping the people of Gaza. If they were they'd head to a port that can accommodate the ship.
No. They want to provoke an incident once again.
Wednesday, 30 July 2014
"Dead Presidents" are not the only currency
I've been following the Israel /Gaza situation as much as current circumstances will allow me. It's been heartbreaking to see the images of the dead and injured women and children. In part I understand my friends inadvertently helping to peddle the simplistic propaganda doing the rounds on social networks. As terrible as those images are they are at the same time curious and for me as well as the plight of them being caught up in the situation they tell you something if you think beyond the one dimensional narrative presented by far too many in the mainstream media.
I find the images curious because the question I'm struck with is"where are the dead men?" Yes we're seeing a few, but what we're being served an almost exclusive helping of are bloody and dead women an children. Over and over and over again is a barrage of images that contain virtually no men. Is that not just a little curious. I find it so and regardless of all the possible variations of how they came to be in that location and how they came to be hit I am drawn to a conclusion:
The women and children are currency. Like contraband in prison, Hamas through their clearing houses in the mainstream media are trading the lives of women and children as a form of currency on the figurative international market and are finding a sea of willing buyers. Perversely their using to buy the worlds perception of Israel. In reality it should say more about Hamas' view of its own people as a disposable means to an end than Israel's, but curiously it doesn't. I've said it before. A lot of people don't want Gaza (and the West Bank) fixed, because it has more value being kept as a weeping sore.
This view of the everyday folk being used and abused by its leaders came home to me last night. Watching BBC Ten O'Clock news let a cat out of the bag for those willing to pay attention and think through what they're being told.
Israel finally got a bit more of its PR act together by taking a reporter into one of the tunnels that cross into Israel for offensive purposes built by Hamas. During the segment, the reporter comments on this one of many tunnels including how long it probably took to build and also the materials used. At one point the reporter refers to the concrete as "concrete from Israel".
This is quite telling. Concrete coming through the crossing monitored by Israel is one of the dual use items I mentioned in my post the other day. Dual use items are those that can also have a military use against Israel and are therefore subject to restriction. The restriction for this essentially requires that it includes an appropriate permit explaining where it is going and what it will specifically be used for I.e. Civilian use.
Assuming the comments by the reporter were correct, this would suggest that prior to crossing into Gaza, this Israeli concrete was designated for a villain project. However, once in Gaza, someone made a decision that it was no longer to be used for the people of Gaza and was to be repurposed for use against Israel. Hamas decided that the people it governs were not to have their infrastructure developed. It was they that decided the people should go without and be kept in the under developed state in favour of perpetuating a state of tension with Israel.
It would seem evident that Hamas are comfortable with the notion of trading the lives of the people they rule in pursuit of their hatred of Israel.
I find the images curious because the question I'm struck with is"where are the dead men?" Yes we're seeing a few, but what we're being served an almost exclusive helping of are bloody and dead women an children. Over and over and over again is a barrage of images that contain virtually no men. Is that not just a little curious. I find it so and regardless of all the possible variations of how they came to be in that location and how they came to be hit I am drawn to a conclusion:
The women and children are currency. Like contraband in prison, Hamas through their clearing houses in the mainstream media are trading the lives of women and children as a form of currency on the figurative international market and are finding a sea of willing buyers. Perversely their using to buy the worlds perception of Israel. In reality it should say more about Hamas' view of its own people as a disposable means to an end than Israel's, but curiously it doesn't. I've said it before. A lot of people don't want Gaza (and the West Bank) fixed, because it has more value being kept as a weeping sore.
This view of the everyday folk being used and abused by its leaders came home to me last night. Watching BBC Ten O'Clock news let a cat out of the bag for those willing to pay attention and think through what they're being told.
Israel finally got a bit more of its PR act together by taking a reporter into one of the tunnels that cross into Israel for offensive purposes built by Hamas. During the segment, the reporter comments on this one of many tunnels including how long it probably took to build and also the materials used. At one point the reporter refers to the concrete as "concrete from Israel".
This is quite telling. Concrete coming through the crossing monitored by Israel is one of the dual use items I mentioned in my post the other day. Dual use items are those that can also have a military use against Israel and are therefore subject to restriction. The restriction for this essentially requires that it includes an appropriate permit explaining where it is going and what it will specifically be used for I.e. Civilian use.
Assuming the comments by the reporter were correct, this would suggest that prior to crossing into Gaza, this Israeli concrete was designated for a villain project. However, once in Gaza, someone made a decision that it was no longer to be used for the people of Gaza and was to be repurposed for use against Israel. Hamas decided that the people it governs were not to have their infrastructure developed. It was they that decided the people should go without and be kept in the under developed state in favour of perpetuating a state of tension with Israel.
It would seem evident that Hamas are comfortable with the notion of trading the lives of the people they rule in pursuit of their hatred of Israel.
Tuesday, 22 July 2014
Stolen, you say?
It seems the misinformation campaign continues with regards to the Israel and Gaza situation and so I continue swimming against the tide in what is probably a vain effort alongside other bloggers such as Nourishing Obscurity.
It is said that history is written by the victors. As a statement it is only half true. The other truth is that some people try and rewrite and repurpose history for modern aims. Israel / Palestine is one that undergoes many a rewrite, usually by those who only want to see the Palestinian side of events and who care not that it is infinitely more complex than that.
It's begun to come to the fore again as a form of rationale for the rocket attacks from Gaza. Usually the rocket and mortar tacks are downplayed and once again mainstream media outlets have played a pretty disgraceful role in that. Their usual line to take has been to run with the narrative that it all started when Israel retaliated. Although they tried to advance that narrative around the broken ceasefire recently, on the whole it's been a little tougher to downplay the rocket attacks. The story of the attacks has got out more than previously and there's a more of a consensus that Hamas is has overplayed its hand this time. That consensus has made it a little difficult amongst the general Israel bad / Palestine good crowd to defend Hamas when the rocket attacks are brought up in the argument.
But they try.
They try and take the position that Hamas has no option but to shoot rockets from at Israel and in particular from civilian areas because the Israelis stole their land and penned them into squalid conditions. That's the logic, Israel stole the land and keep stealing it. That's the simple logic they want you to have in your head that justifies anything they do in Palestine.
Except it's not true. You don't have to take my word for - you can look it up yourself. Heck that's what I want you to do, so that when the pub bore amongst your mates starts coming off all Yasser Arafat on you and your mates you've got something to challenge him on.
What they'll try and do is try to talk about the period before the official formation of the state of Israel. Why? Well partly because they find it hard to admit that Israel was willing to accept getting shafted on the original, accepted a smaller chunk of land and still got attacked because their neighbours didn't want to give the Jews even one square metre of land.
So they talk about the bit beforehand, because they know that not too many people will know what really happened and that allows them to advance their narrative largely unopposed.
So just in case they decide to go their, take a look at this rather interesting summary of the history of the land from a time they'd hope you'd forget.
Early Palestine
It is said that history is written by the victors. As a statement it is only half true. The other truth is that some people try and rewrite and repurpose history for modern aims. Israel / Palestine is one that undergoes many a rewrite, usually by those who only want to see the Palestinian side of events and who care not that it is infinitely more complex than that.
It's begun to come to the fore again as a form of rationale for the rocket attacks from Gaza. Usually the rocket and mortar tacks are downplayed and once again mainstream media outlets have played a pretty disgraceful role in that. Their usual line to take has been to run with the narrative that it all started when Israel retaliated. Although they tried to advance that narrative around the broken ceasefire recently, on the whole it's been a little tougher to downplay the rocket attacks. The story of the attacks has got out more than previously and there's a more of a consensus that Hamas is has overplayed its hand this time. That consensus has made it a little difficult amongst the general Israel bad / Palestine good crowd to defend Hamas when the rocket attacks are brought up in the argument.
But they try.
They try and take the position that Hamas has no option but to shoot rockets from at Israel and in particular from civilian areas because the Israelis stole their land and penned them into squalid conditions. That's the logic, Israel stole the land and keep stealing it. That's the simple logic they want you to have in your head that justifies anything they do in Palestine.
Except it's not true. You don't have to take my word for - you can look it up yourself. Heck that's what I want you to do, so that when the pub bore amongst your mates starts coming off all Yasser Arafat on you and your mates you've got something to challenge him on.
What they'll try and do is try to talk about the period before the official formation of the state of Israel. Why? Well partly because they find it hard to admit that Israel was willing to accept getting shafted on the original, accepted a smaller chunk of land and still got attacked because their neighbours didn't want to give the Jews even one square metre of land.
So they talk about the bit beforehand, because they know that not too many people will know what really happened and that allows them to advance their narrative largely unopposed.
So just in case they decide to go their, take a look at this rather interesting summary of the history of the land from a time they'd hope you'd forget.
Early Palestine
Saturday, 19 July 2014
Check for yourself
It's been saddening recently to see my Facebook feed become increasingly populated by misinformed posts about the Gaza situation. Saddened for many reasons including the fact that many of these are intelligent people. Why it saddens me is because whilst I accept people are entitled to their opinion, so much of what I've seen is off the back of error riddled details and in some cases downright manipulated facts and images. Too many of these intelligent people are simply trotting out someone else's manipulative propaganda. Propaganda from those supposedly on the side of Gaza who are quite comfortable with the idea of dead Gazans because of the propaganda value they provide.
As Golda Meir once said "Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more that they hate us"
What's particularly saddened me, is that's it's all over my Facebook feed and the reality is I cannot really debate them. It's an exercise in futility for too many. Theirs isn't a question but a statement, one that I suspect there's no moving them from. I suspect that if I leave well alone, it will move on, but if I were to put something opposing to that, I would draw all sorts of additionally misinformed hellfire. It's a hallmark of the left v right in politics. Those on the conservative/libertarian right think you're entitled to an opinion whilst those on the left think counter opinion should be vociferously shut down.
The one that prompted me to post this morning was the infamous one in which Israel is "compared" (and I mean that very loosely) with South Africa and Nazi Germany and labelled as a third apartheid state.
I've come to the conclusion there going to be lots of this trotting out of dross and you, dear readers are also going to come across it from friends who will peddle it like it was a fact they have personal knowledge of.
My suggestion is to gently press back. When you hear it - ask questions.
When you hear the apartheid state myth - ask them to elaborate and explain. They probably can't (which will tell you so much). Ask them too to explain why this apartheid state has Arabs in its Parliament, and Arab Drs in its hospitals and Arabs in its infrastructure. Ask if Arabs are allowed to own property in Israel. Then ask them, how many Israelis and Jews are permitted the same rights in Gaza.
When you hear the idea the number of civilians killed in air strikes, ask them to explain how people came to be in those houses when they received a phone call from Israel beforehand telling them to evacuate followed up by the "hard knock" device to show a bomb was coming. If they try and tell you that warning isn't long enough, ask why the people in the town of Sderot managed to find shelter in the 10 seconds they get when another missile comes in from Gaza. If they tell you that most missiles fall harmlessly ask them how that makes it alright, when the intention was far different. If you want ask them that if you hung out of your back bedroom windows shooting at all the neighbouring houses, would it make it okay if you failed to hit anyone? Ask them too if they know how many of the missiles from Gaza fell inside its own territory. Ask them too about the missile that took out one of the Israeli power lines that provided Gaza with electricity.
If they complain about the occupation of Gaza by Israel, ask them what occupation? If Israel had already been occupying Gaza with its forces why did they have to launch a ground operation from outside Gaza? Ask them if they knew that in the past Israel had once occupied Gaza and pulled out in an effort to develop peace and was met in return by nothing but a barrage of mortars and missiles.
If they complain about the blockade and that Israel doesn't let goods in, ask them to explain that. Ask them what they know about the dual use restrictions because this is what Israel is blocking. Dual use restrictions are those things that could have a military as well as a civilian use and these include buildi building materials. They're not banned, the truck driver just has to have a permit by the proper authorities that states what the material will be used for and where it's going. Also ask them what it is about Gaza that even the Egyptians feel compelled to keep their border with Gaza closed too.
These are just a few.
I'm not saying the situation between Israel and Gaza isn't terrible and the loss of life isn't a tragedy beyond belief. My point is that it isn't as straightforward as many people believe, a situation exacerbated by biased viewpoints from the left dominated BBC and it's print version the Guardian. Both these outlets have a habit of leaving key details out, that serve only to misinform. There are other facts and details that too many leave out which draw fair minded people to draw simplistic conclusions at best and at worst open to simply repeating the deliberate lies of those who want to keep people misinformed because it creates the very results I've just mentioned.
Form your opinion yes and be entitled to it. Just don't do the dirty work of liars for them, nor let your friends. You won't solve this by jumping on their bandwagon because they have something much darker in mind than a simple peace agreement. Take a look for yourself,
As Golda Meir once said "Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more that they hate us"
What's particularly saddened me, is that's it's all over my Facebook feed and the reality is I cannot really debate them. It's an exercise in futility for too many. Theirs isn't a question but a statement, one that I suspect there's no moving them from. I suspect that if I leave well alone, it will move on, but if I were to put something opposing to that, I would draw all sorts of additionally misinformed hellfire. It's a hallmark of the left v right in politics. Those on the conservative/libertarian right think you're entitled to an opinion whilst those on the left think counter opinion should be vociferously shut down.
The one that prompted me to post this morning was the infamous one in which Israel is "compared" (and I mean that very loosely) with South Africa and Nazi Germany and labelled as a third apartheid state.
I've come to the conclusion there going to be lots of this trotting out of dross and you, dear readers are also going to come across it from friends who will peddle it like it was a fact they have personal knowledge of.
My suggestion is to gently press back. When you hear it - ask questions.
When you hear the apartheid state myth - ask them to elaborate and explain. They probably can't (which will tell you so much). Ask them too to explain why this apartheid state has Arabs in its Parliament, and Arab Drs in its hospitals and Arabs in its infrastructure. Ask if Arabs are allowed to own property in Israel. Then ask them, how many Israelis and Jews are permitted the same rights in Gaza.
When you hear the idea the number of civilians killed in air strikes, ask them to explain how people came to be in those houses when they received a phone call from Israel beforehand telling them to evacuate followed up by the "hard knock" device to show a bomb was coming. If they try and tell you that warning isn't long enough, ask why the people in the town of Sderot managed to find shelter in the 10 seconds they get when another missile comes in from Gaza. If they tell you that most missiles fall harmlessly ask them how that makes it alright, when the intention was far different. If you want ask them that if you hung out of your back bedroom windows shooting at all the neighbouring houses, would it make it okay if you failed to hit anyone? Ask them too if they know how many of the missiles from Gaza fell inside its own territory. Ask them too about the missile that took out one of the Israeli power lines that provided Gaza with electricity.
If they complain about the occupation of Gaza by Israel, ask them what occupation? If Israel had already been occupying Gaza with its forces why did they have to launch a ground operation from outside Gaza? Ask them if they knew that in the past Israel had once occupied Gaza and pulled out in an effort to develop peace and was met in return by nothing but a barrage of mortars and missiles.
If they complain about the blockade and that Israel doesn't let goods in, ask them to explain that. Ask them what they know about the dual use restrictions because this is what Israel is blocking. Dual use restrictions are those things that could have a military as well as a civilian use and these include buildi building materials. They're not banned, the truck driver just has to have a permit by the proper authorities that states what the material will be used for and where it's going. Also ask them what it is about Gaza that even the Egyptians feel compelled to keep their border with Gaza closed too.
These are just a few.
I'm not saying the situation between Israel and Gaza isn't terrible and the loss of life isn't a tragedy beyond belief. My point is that it isn't as straightforward as many people believe, a situation exacerbated by biased viewpoints from the left dominated BBC and it's print version the Guardian. Both these outlets have a habit of leaving key details out, that serve only to misinform. There are other facts and details that too many leave out which draw fair minded people to draw simplistic conclusions at best and at worst open to simply repeating the deliberate lies of those who want to keep people misinformed because it creates the very results I've just mentioned.
Form your opinion yes and be entitled to it. Just don't do the dirty work of liars for them, nor let your friends. You won't solve this by jumping on their bandwagon because they have something much darker in mind than a simple peace agreement. Take a look for yourself,
Monday, 9 June 2014
Welcome to our world
Just watching tonight's BBC news and the story about the effort to prevent the ascension of Juncker and Cameron's supposed opposition to it. Cameron's comment made me smile. First he gets the idea wrong that somehow the correct process isn't being followed. Well on that front he should visit the blog of one of his constituents over at Witterings from Witney for a simple lesson in how Frau Merkel is correct in her assertion that Britain doesn't understand the rules. Secondly he bemoans the fact that somehow it wasn't fair that the leaders of constituent countries don't have the say they should be having.
I know you what you mean Dave. It's a proper bitch isn't it having your views ignored by those running the show?
Welcome to our world.
I know you what you mean Dave. It's a proper bitch isn't it having your views ignored by those running the show?
Welcome to our world.
Friday, 6 June 2014
Thank you
That duty is to return to Normandy as often as possible to remember their friends. Those who went ashore or descended from the sky to defend to keep a nation they never saw again, free.
Reflect on that for a while. Their sense of ongoing duty should humble us all. The only thing I can say thank you.
If you see someone who stood up to be counted when our nation called, please take the time to say thank you. Let them know that for all our country is but a shadow of what they hoped their sacrifice would deliver, it was not totally in vain.
Saturday, 31 May 2014
Nice job
It was heart warming to see after my last post that people turned out for the funeral of World War 2 pilot, George Thompson.
World War Two Pilot Funeral
Hat tip also to James Higham for tweeting to promote the call.
There's little to say other than thank you to those who were able to go and say thank you to one of our greatest generation. I have lots of thoughts on this, but they're not for here. Not today. Just to say that we should be happy at this small sign, this small glimmer, of hope that the real Britain is still alive.
World War Two Pilot Funeral
Hat tip also to James Higham for tweeting to promote the call.
There's little to say other than thank you to those who were able to go and say thank you to one of our greatest generation. I have lots of thoughts on this, but they're not for here. Not today. Just to say that we should be happy at this small sign, this small glimmer, of hope that the real Britain is still alive.
Wednesday, 28 May 2014
Pass it On.
Another one of our greatest generation has passed from our midst.
Public-urged-to-attend-funeral-of-war-hero
George Thompson who served his country in the RAF has died with no relatives and very few friends. The local RAF association have asked for members of the public to attend his final sortie.
His funeral will take place Friday May 30th at 3.30 at Hutcliffe Wood Crematorium.
I am just trying to do my bit to spread the word so that those who can attend and remember the passing of those who stood in harm's way to protect us may do so.
Please feel free to pass this notice along.
Thank you.
Public-urged-to-attend-funeral-of-war-hero
George Thompson who served his country in the RAF has died with no relatives and very few friends. The local RAF association have asked for members of the public to attend his final sortie.
His funeral will take place Friday May 30th at 3.30 at Hutcliffe Wood Crematorium.
I am just trying to do my bit to spread the word so that those who can attend and remember the passing of those who stood in harm's way to protect us may do so.
Please feel free to pass this notice along.
Thank you.
Monday, 26 May 2014
Palpable Fear
Well, the results are pretty much finalised across Europe and it's clear something is happening. Although I think some of the pundits are getting ahead of themselves, playing numbers games, it's evident the apple cart has been upset.
I suspect someone's worst fears are coming true. They feared it before the election. I've been critical of UKIP and remain so for a variety of reasons. However what went before the elections in terms of the slew of stories and adverse publicity being run endlessly, looked like a coordinated stitch up job. Someone wanted them stopped.
Yet it failed. What happened spoke to something I've often talked about. What the result started to demonstrate was that in the right mind, the sovereign people can make all the best laid plans of the self regarding elite irrelevant. It seems apt that last night, the TV laid on V for Vendetta. At the end in which the best laid plans melted into nothing, because the people chose not to heed the message and followed their own minds. Just as in the movie, this weeks voters, just swamped the barricades and made their game irrelevant.
There are some worrying signs across Europe with the rise of some more extremist elements, with some very dark views. I worry about that and I hope they fizzle out as I have no truck with extremism of any ilk. However I think some of their rise was inevitable and their success is the product of hard left thinking. For many years good, ordinary decent people of all social classes had concerns about the way things were going in their nations as groups looked to smash the nation state concept. Those good people tried to ask fair questions about the people coming into their nations only to have political correctness shout them down and treat them like pariahs to cower them into submission. They left it open for those with darker ambitions to exploit those good people as the seemingly only open outlet for those ambitions. It didn't have to be this way if fair and honest debate had been permitted. But it wasn't and now we see what we see.
What will follow I cannot say, but I suspect there are lots of frantic calls, meetings and murmurings today and in the days to follow. My fervent hope is that what follows will be for good and the start of a return to legal, decent, open and honest democracy.
I suspect someone's worst fears are coming true. They feared it before the election. I've been critical of UKIP and remain so for a variety of reasons. However what went before the elections in terms of the slew of stories and adverse publicity being run endlessly, looked like a coordinated stitch up job. Someone wanted them stopped.
Yet it failed. What happened spoke to something I've often talked about. What the result started to demonstrate was that in the right mind, the sovereign people can make all the best laid plans of the self regarding elite irrelevant. It seems apt that last night, the TV laid on V for Vendetta. At the end in which the best laid plans melted into nothing, because the people chose not to heed the message and followed their own minds. Just as in the movie, this weeks voters, just swamped the barricades and made their game irrelevant.
There are some worrying signs across Europe with the rise of some more extremist elements, with some very dark views. I worry about that and I hope they fizzle out as I have no truck with extremism of any ilk. However I think some of their rise was inevitable and their success is the product of hard left thinking. For many years good, ordinary decent people of all social classes had concerns about the way things were going in their nations as groups looked to smash the nation state concept. Those good people tried to ask fair questions about the people coming into their nations only to have political correctness shout them down and treat them like pariahs to cower them into submission. They left it open for those with darker ambitions to exploit those good people as the seemingly only open outlet for those ambitions. It didn't have to be this way if fair and honest debate had been permitted. But it wasn't and now we see what we see.
What will follow I cannot say, but I suspect there are lots of frantic calls, meetings and murmurings today and in the days to follow. My fervent hope is that what follows will be for good and the start of a return to legal, decent, open and honest democracy.
Wednesday, 21 May 2014
Absolutely lost for words.
Had a quick trip round the blogs earlier and stopped by AM's place. After reading This story I felt a comment was in order to add to the debate.
I've since been back and seen an additional comment added. It seems in the vein of some of those others criticising AM for making observations about the paucity in the depth of thinking UKIP are demonstrating around the really meaty stuff about the EU.
I was going to re-comment but having seen the argument that Farage can't tell you the plan because the EU and Cameron will fix the law to close the route off, well to be honest I was totally dumbstruck and it soon became apparent that I couldn't respond without a descent into swearing. So I didn't bother.
I don't get this argument that basically says don't criticise Farage and UKIP for not having all their bases covered on Europe. I mean why not? It's not like Europe and the EU is an accidental battleground for them. They didn't just stumble into it.
They picked Europe as their battleground.
So if they're short on arguments and ideas that add up why the surprise when people ask questions and why have a pop at those asking questions?
I've since been back and seen an additional comment added. It seems in the vein of some of those others criticising AM for making observations about the paucity in the depth of thinking UKIP are demonstrating around the really meaty stuff about the EU.
I was going to re-comment but having seen the argument that Farage can't tell you the plan because the EU and Cameron will fix the law to close the route off, well to be honest I was totally dumbstruck and it soon became apparent that I couldn't respond without a descent into swearing. So I didn't bother.
I don't get this argument that basically says don't criticise Farage and UKIP for not having all their bases covered on Europe. I mean why not? It's not like Europe and the EU is an accidental battleground for them. They didn't just stumble into it.
They picked Europe as their battleground.
So if they're short on arguments and ideas that add up why the surprise when people ask questions and why have a pop at those asking questions?
Tuesday, 13 May 2014
That should do it
Some years ago the comedian Robin Williams appeared in a move where he was delivering some of his stand up routine. In it, he delivers a great little line.
" I love the British police. When they see a criminal, they shout "stop, or I'll shout stop, again""
I thought of the sentiment when I read about the kidnapping of the Nigerian girls at the hands of Islamist group Boko Haram. The story is terrible. There's hardly a redeeming factor in the whole story story. Even the international anger has been slow off the mark. The mainstream press has finally latched on to the story, covering their disinterest with some odd sub narrative about the story being slow to emerge, which is odd given that bloggers had been asking for a while why the story hadn't gained mainstream press traction.
What's particularly niggled me is the campaign "Bring back our girls". Not because it exists. I think in many respects it's a good thing. What's niggled me is what it says about our modern politicians. There seems to suddenly a never ending queue of them itching to get in on the photo pop with a piece of cardboard with the slogan on it.
It's all just so very like them, no matter how well intentioned. Hash tagged slogans will not bring them back and posturing won't hunt the kidnappers down. But that's the modern way of running the world for these people. The image, the slogan and shallow gestures feel like doing something to these people. It fits right in with them because hard thinking and hard action are well, a bit too much to deal with and it's just not what they signed up for when they boarded the gravy train.
Strangely enough action has come along at the hands of the very people that these same shallow politicos lime to queue up to criticise - Israel. They've put some people on the ground to help the hunt by bringing some of their specialists to bear on the problem. But that's them. They have a habit of getting to the nub of the issue.
" I love the British police. When they see a criminal, they shout "stop, or I'll shout stop, again""
I thought of the sentiment when I read about the kidnapping of the Nigerian girls at the hands of Islamist group Boko Haram. The story is terrible. There's hardly a redeeming factor in the whole story story. Even the international anger has been slow off the mark. The mainstream press has finally latched on to the story, covering their disinterest with some odd sub narrative about the story being slow to emerge, which is odd given that bloggers had been asking for a while why the story hadn't gained mainstream press traction.
What's particularly niggled me is the campaign "Bring back our girls". Not because it exists. I think in many respects it's a good thing. What's niggled me is what it says about our modern politicians. There seems to suddenly a never ending queue of them itching to get in on the photo pop with a piece of cardboard with the slogan on it.
It's all just so very like them, no matter how well intentioned. Hash tagged slogans will not bring them back and posturing won't hunt the kidnappers down. But that's the modern way of running the world for these people. The image, the slogan and shallow gestures feel like doing something to these people. It fits right in with them because hard thinking and hard action are well, a bit too much to deal with and it's just not what they signed up for when they boarded the gravy train.
Strangely enough action has come along at the hands of the very people that these same shallow politicos lime to queue up to criticise - Israel. They've put some people on the ground to help the hunt by bringing some of their specialists to bear on the problem. But that's them. They have a habit of getting to the nub of the issue.
Saturday, 10 May 2014
Outrage I tell you, outrage.
Having been away a fair bit recently, I decided I would do a bit of catching up on some missed tv, deciding to give the once over to a show called Coppers. Watching it was like reading some of the old Inspector Gadget blog, looking at some of the slice of life on camera.
I thought about the show, when I read the story of the owner of a field who has marked out a path across a field he owns with two rather utilitarian fences either side of. The Daily Mail picked the angle of the story it wanted to take which seemed to be one of bad landowner, blocking the path from use by the public.
I wasn't sure what to think having read the blurb. Obviously I'm a bit hobbity when it comes to the romantic notion of freely wandering the shires. Except when required to report the facts, they have to spell out a different story, than what they told in the blurb.
It seems that the path isn't blocked at all. At the heart of the story is a sense of entitlement. First people tried to block the purchase by the owner, fearing development. Once he got it, the story suggests they asked him to keep the unofficial path and he refused. Erm no. It seems they didn't just want a footpath. They wanted access to the whole field for dog walking. It's here that the problem comes. It seems the owner has an issue not necessarily with the dog walking itself, but that the dog fouling has spiralled out of control. This is a problem because he wants to use the land for animal grazing and the dog fouling can cause problems with that. I've since learned that amongst the parasites and bacteria often present in dog faeces is one thought to be responsible for abortions in cattle.
So what we really seem to have is a benevolence that has been abused. It seems there was an unwritten "fair usage" agreement. Act responsibly and there's access to something with no public right of way. It seems to some that isn't enough. Once again, we see people for whom the boundaries require constant expanding and extra imagined freedoms thrown in. Ones in which they behave how they wish and the consequences to be borne by others.
The story also tells the reason why the face is a triumph of function over form. As the landowner points out, had it been barbed wire, people would have complained about themselves, their children and their dogs getting caught and injured on it. Yes he could have place a simple farm type wood fence on it, but let's be honest, it wouldn't have taken long with the mindset that prevailed, that people would be ignoring that fence and the key problem would probably have continued as for some reason, too many have lost the ability to conduct themselves freely whilst acknowledging that it should be in balance with a sense of personal responsibility. For too many, it's become I want, I should get, with no boundaries and everyone else should mop up the mess I make so I can move on to my next abuse of personal freedom.
That's why the spiral goes downward.
I thought about the show, when I read the story of the owner of a field who has marked out a path across a field he owns with two rather utilitarian fences either side of. The Daily Mail picked the angle of the story it wanted to take which seemed to be one of bad landowner, blocking the path from use by the public.
I wasn't sure what to think having read the blurb. Obviously I'm a bit hobbity when it comes to the romantic notion of freely wandering the shires. Except when required to report the facts, they have to spell out a different story, than what they told in the blurb.
It seems that the path isn't blocked at all. At the heart of the story is a sense of entitlement. First people tried to block the purchase by the owner, fearing development. Once he got it, the story suggests they asked him to keep the unofficial path and he refused. Erm no. It seems they didn't just want a footpath. They wanted access to the whole field for dog walking. It's here that the problem comes. It seems the owner has an issue not necessarily with the dog walking itself, but that the dog fouling has spiralled out of control. This is a problem because he wants to use the land for animal grazing and the dog fouling can cause problems with that. I've since learned that amongst the parasites and bacteria often present in dog faeces is one thought to be responsible for abortions in cattle.
So what we really seem to have is a benevolence that has been abused. It seems there was an unwritten "fair usage" agreement. Act responsibly and there's access to something with no public right of way. It seems to some that isn't enough. Once again, we see people for whom the boundaries require constant expanding and extra imagined freedoms thrown in. Ones in which they behave how they wish and the consequences to be borne by others.
The story also tells the reason why the face is a triumph of function over form. As the landowner points out, had it been barbed wire, people would have complained about themselves, their children and their dogs getting caught and injured on it. Yes he could have place a simple farm type wood fence on it, but let's be honest, it wouldn't have taken long with the mindset that prevailed, that people would be ignoring that fence and the key problem would probably have continued as for some reason, too many have lost the ability to conduct themselves freely whilst acknowledging that it should be in balance with a sense of personal responsibility. For too many, it's become I want, I should get, with no boundaries and everyone else should mop up the mess I make so I can move on to my next abuse of personal freedom.
That's why the spiral goes downward.
Saturday, 3 May 2014
Some advice for UKIPers (and independents) - Part One
A number of the blogs have continued to point out some of the gaping holes in what UKIP are doing or are offering. It's a shame, but only in the way that many of the responding comments seek to attack what started out ultimately as advice and suggestions to get the organisation to a point where it could be genuinely effective and have a serious credible offering.
My hope is that the attacking comments are a vociferous minority and that somewhere amongst the UKIP fraternity there are others who too are shaking their heads at the various own goals, missed sitters and who are bewildered at the party's struggle to turn the public dissatisfaction into seats. Right now you have a problem and it's this. The whole thing is too much Nigel. The identity of the whole movement is bound up in him. That wouldn't have been too much of an issue had the media not decided he was a target for scrutiny, which they have now done. They're after him and they've rattled him a couple of times and they will dig until they have something they can really hit him with. The problem is that if they hit him they will hold him below the waterline and he'll take the whole ship down with him. That my friends, is you and all you might have struggled to achieve. My question is that something you can live with?
I'm not saying get rid of Nigel, so the naysayers can leave that argument off the table. I'm saying you need something additional.
So here's my advice - get visible locally. To an outsider looking in, you're virtually invisible beyond Nigel and the problem with Europe as a concept is the electorate have a habit of thinking it's something they're a million miles away from, so why should they pick you. They haven't made the connection between Europe and their everyday life. To make headway you need to do several things. Get involved with the everyday life and problems of the electorate, bridge the gap between Europe and them, get some serious numbers backing you visibly and have a local offering so that if Nigel goes down your fortunes are relatively unscathed.
Where I live we have a odd set up that in part demonstrates the potential for getting involved. Here, the Tories and the Lib Dems have been the constant tussle. This went on way before the coalition. Labour historically can't get a sniff but I know there are lots of labour folk around here. I know some of them even vote for the Conservative, even the ones who would have Thatcher for the Kennedy assassination if they could. The reason? They're visible locally and not just for politics. They've established themselves as community faces and their fortunes are not tied to actions of their national party activities so much.
You've got to get your local branch and your candidates (council, Westminster, whatever) visible. That said you can't just rock up around an election time with a rosette on asking for a vote. It won't work because it doesn't work. You need to get started now, just getting involved with local causes and initiatives. Become visible. If there's a local litter pick or something like that, get in on it and get talking to people. Stop letting the press tell your story, tell it yourself. Find the local problems and start helping with them.
To be truthful, this piece of advice is not just for UKIP. It's generally aimed at anyone who shares my dream for a restoration to legal and honest democracy. One which alters the dangerous course we're currently on. History has shown where our current stitch up politics tends to end up and out of that rises extremism of the very darkest nature that plumbs the depths of human depravity. I yearn for a day when we can all be optimistic about where our nation is headed and this thread is therefore aimed at anyone who wants to work for a thriving and stable United Kingdom, playing an influential and stabilising force in the world. So if a potential Mia Love is out there thinking about standing as an independent in some future election, what I have written here and hope to add to, applies equally to you.
My hope is that the attacking comments are a vociferous minority and that somewhere amongst the UKIP fraternity there are others who too are shaking their heads at the various own goals, missed sitters and who are bewildered at the party's struggle to turn the public dissatisfaction into seats. Right now you have a problem and it's this. The whole thing is too much Nigel. The identity of the whole movement is bound up in him. That wouldn't have been too much of an issue had the media not decided he was a target for scrutiny, which they have now done. They're after him and they've rattled him a couple of times and they will dig until they have something they can really hit him with. The problem is that if they hit him they will hold him below the waterline and he'll take the whole ship down with him. That my friends, is you and all you might have struggled to achieve. My question is that something you can live with?
I'm not saying get rid of Nigel, so the naysayers can leave that argument off the table. I'm saying you need something additional.
So here's my advice - get visible locally. To an outsider looking in, you're virtually invisible beyond Nigel and the problem with Europe as a concept is the electorate have a habit of thinking it's something they're a million miles away from, so why should they pick you. They haven't made the connection between Europe and their everyday life. To make headway you need to do several things. Get involved with the everyday life and problems of the electorate, bridge the gap between Europe and them, get some serious numbers backing you visibly and have a local offering so that if Nigel goes down your fortunes are relatively unscathed.
Where I live we have a odd set up that in part demonstrates the potential for getting involved. Here, the Tories and the Lib Dems have been the constant tussle. This went on way before the coalition. Labour historically can't get a sniff but I know there are lots of labour folk around here. I know some of them even vote for the Conservative, even the ones who would have Thatcher for the Kennedy assassination if they could. The reason? They're visible locally and not just for politics. They've established themselves as community faces and their fortunes are not tied to actions of their national party activities so much.
You've got to get your local branch and your candidates (council, Westminster, whatever) visible. That said you can't just rock up around an election time with a rosette on asking for a vote. It won't work because it doesn't work. You need to get started now, just getting involved with local causes and initiatives. Become visible. If there's a local litter pick or something like that, get in on it and get talking to people. Stop letting the press tell your story, tell it yourself. Find the local problems and start helping with them.
To be truthful, this piece of advice is not just for UKIP. It's generally aimed at anyone who shares my dream for a restoration to legal and honest democracy. One which alters the dangerous course we're currently on. History has shown where our current stitch up politics tends to end up and out of that rises extremism of the very darkest nature that plumbs the depths of human depravity. I yearn for a day when we can all be optimistic about where our nation is headed and this thread is therefore aimed at anyone who wants to work for a thriving and stable United Kingdom, playing an influential and stabilising force in the world. So if a potential Mia Love is out there thinking about standing as an independent in some future election, what I have written here and hope to add to, applies equally to you.
Wednesday, 30 April 2014
Bloody Hell
I've been for a bit of a lie down as I found myself coming to the defence of Farage today.
I first started when listening to Radio 4's Today programme and then later driving home from my meeting during the 2pm news.
His decision this morning to not run for the Newark seat made sense to me and seemed to make sense for the same reasons Farage gave. I'm not sure how much he meant them, but as reasons they made sense, especially when he suggested it would make him look like an opportunist as he had no real connection with the East Midlands.
I've been a critic of UKIP's ability to fail to score in an open goal, but this makes sense. UKIP do need to be aiming for seats but if they want to be perceived as more than a one man show others need to be running for Westminster seats.
Today demonstrated something quite interesting to me in the sense of fear that UKIP are generating and what it tells us about the media either living in their own bubble or being willing to work towards maintaining the status quo I.e there seems to be a concerted effort to stitch up UKIP generally.
The story that has me intrigued is the idea that not running for the Newark seat is because he is "frit".Sorry but that notion is a load of old pony, especially when Labour and the Lib Dems join in. The truth of the matter is that none of the other parties will make a genuine effort at Newark given that last time out, the Tories enjoyed a 16000 majority - bigger than the total turnout in some by elections. They know it's not worth their time and effort. Sure some man or woman starting out on the greasy pole will show their face on some local flyers and all that, but at the end of the day, they will be the sacrificial lamb. I know this because an old friend who was once a prospective Labour candidate, was that lamb and received sod all input from the party.
It's an approach all the parties understand and take part in. It's this fact that suggests to me that the others are a bit worried by Farage and that the press (well the BBC certainly) are willing to go along with this fatuous notion. Added to which, all this stuff about various UKIPers making offensive comments and it getting into the press shows what seems to be a concerted effort to nobble them. Don't get me wrong, I'm a critic of some of the views expressed and the lack of campaign discipline amongst other things, but something's afoot here. Step back a bit and ask yourself, how we seem to be learning of one of these situations after another? Many of these people are nobodies, making comments on social media on their personal accounts. These aren't UKIP press releases, so their being released suggests there are a number of people looking for this dirt. Somewhere out there is an instruction for party activists or other groups of some description with a list of names to go on the hunt for dirt. I can't really think of any other reason for it right now, which makes it quite telling.
This post isn't to defend UKIP or the individuals and their viewpoints. It's simply there to peer behind the veil and ask why everyone seems so rattled.
I first started when listening to Radio 4's Today programme and then later driving home from my meeting during the 2pm news.
His decision this morning to not run for the Newark seat made sense to me and seemed to make sense for the same reasons Farage gave. I'm not sure how much he meant them, but as reasons they made sense, especially when he suggested it would make him look like an opportunist as he had no real connection with the East Midlands.
I've been a critic of UKIP's ability to fail to score in an open goal, but this makes sense. UKIP do need to be aiming for seats but if they want to be perceived as more than a one man show others need to be running for Westminster seats.
Today demonstrated something quite interesting to me in the sense of fear that UKIP are generating and what it tells us about the media either living in their own bubble or being willing to work towards maintaining the status quo I.e there seems to be a concerted effort to stitch up UKIP generally.
The story that has me intrigued is the idea that not running for the Newark seat is because he is "frit".Sorry but that notion is a load of old pony, especially when Labour and the Lib Dems join in. The truth of the matter is that none of the other parties will make a genuine effort at Newark given that last time out, the Tories enjoyed a 16000 majority - bigger than the total turnout in some by elections. They know it's not worth their time and effort. Sure some man or woman starting out on the greasy pole will show their face on some local flyers and all that, but at the end of the day, they will be the sacrificial lamb. I know this because an old friend who was once a prospective Labour candidate, was that lamb and received sod all input from the party.
It's an approach all the parties understand and take part in. It's this fact that suggests to me that the others are a bit worried by Farage and that the press (well the BBC certainly) are willing to go along with this fatuous notion. Added to which, all this stuff about various UKIPers making offensive comments and it getting into the press shows what seems to be a concerted effort to nobble them. Don't get me wrong, I'm a critic of some of the views expressed and the lack of campaign discipline amongst other things, but something's afoot here. Step back a bit and ask yourself, how we seem to be learning of one of these situations after another? Many of these people are nobodies, making comments on social media on their personal accounts. These aren't UKIP press releases, so their being released suggests there are a number of people looking for this dirt. Somewhere out there is an instruction for party activists or other groups of some description with a list of names to go on the hunt for dirt. I can't really think of any other reason for it right now, which makes it quite telling.
This post isn't to defend UKIP or the individuals and their viewpoints. It's simply there to peer behind the veil and ask why everyone seems so rattled.
Sunday, 27 April 2014
They aren't the gods they thought they were
Many moons ago, when I was doing my A Level English literature course, I became somewhat confused by an amiable lad in my class. What confused me was this view he developed about Author Dennis Potter and the Forest of Dean. I thought nothing of it at first. That was one of the vagaries of English lit courses. A book couldn't just be the story as it was written. They all somehow had to be riddled with metaphors and hidden references. The trouble seemed with this lad that is interest in Potter and The Forest of Dean started to appear everywhere in every book. It got to the point where he and the lecturer began to have a bit of row in class, when the lecturer had suggested his latest Potter / Dean links with the text we were all reading was a bit of leap.
I thought back to this lad when I read that Germaine Greer has decided that women Are in a worse place than ever thanks to the internet.
My own view is that like my old classmate, Greer appears to have a lens fixed through which she views the whole world. Men hate women and women are oppressed, full stop without grey areas. There's nothing else to see here regardless if what anyone else might point out (so in a way I too will be wasting my time). It seems to colour everything about her viewpoint.
Greer's viewpoint I would say is wrong, in that she has failed to take into account that the internet is something of a lawless place. Abuse on the internet aimed at women, is not because they're women. The anonymity of the internet means it just thrives generally. Men will abuse women on there, but men will abuse men, women will abuse men and women will abuse women. Greer hasn't found some hidden secret about the internet, she has just looked at it through her own favourite lens. The porn thing is the same as well. Women are looking at the porn just as much as the men are.
As someone mentioned in the comments section of the article, is a reflection of the modern human condition, not a gender war.
The thing is people like this annoy me because in part they complaining about something they had a hand in. Whether it's the law of un intended consequences I don't know or whether it's another piece of critical theory, I'm also uncertain.
They had a hand in it because as sixties radicals with a left leaning perspective, they started meddling and 'fixing' the culture to achieve their utopia. The problem was as someone else in the article comments section said" pandora gets a little tetchy when others start playing with her box." Their meddling started emphasising the me only culture, self interest was self liberation. Nothing was wrong. They argued and agitated for all these things and advanced their cause. They're aim was to break the status quo of society and culture and bring about all kinds of things and call it advancement. This included all kinds of sexual liberation, even the debauched stuff.
The problem was critical theory. For people who had apparently spent so much time learning about human motivations, they didn't appear to posses enough intelligence to understand the law of diminishing returns and the need to have an ever increasing set of experiences in order to feel the same initial rush. These things were always going to play out the way they have. Individualism of this nature was always going to turn more rampant and widen it's definitions of what we would perceive as acceptable. Same too with the sexual liberation that they advocated They may well have known, but critical theory allowed them to hold many opposing viewpoints without having to answer for them. Trouble is, real life has a habit of setting its own rules and showing clowns that thought this stuff up that they're not the gods they imagined themselves to be.
They are for me represented by an analogy I've used before. They're like the practical joker who shouts "fire" in a crowded cinema and then when people get killed in the stampede they deny they had anything to do with it.
I thought back to this lad when I read that Germaine Greer has decided that women Are in a worse place than ever thanks to the internet.
My own view is that like my old classmate, Greer appears to have a lens fixed through which she views the whole world. Men hate women and women are oppressed, full stop without grey areas. There's nothing else to see here regardless if what anyone else might point out (so in a way I too will be wasting my time). It seems to colour everything about her viewpoint.
Greer's viewpoint I would say is wrong, in that she has failed to take into account that the internet is something of a lawless place. Abuse on the internet aimed at women, is not because they're women. The anonymity of the internet means it just thrives generally. Men will abuse women on there, but men will abuse men, women will abuse men and women will abuse women. Greer hasn't found some hidden secret about the internet, she has just looked at it through her own favourite lens. The porn thing is the same as well. Women are looking at the porn just as much as the men are.
As someone mentioned in the comments section of the article, is a reflection of the modern human condition, not a gender war.
The thing is people like this annoy me because in part they complaining about something they had a hand in. Whether it's the law of un intended consequences I don't know or whether it's another piece of critical theory, I'm also uncertain.
They had a hand in it because as sixties radicals with a left leaning perspective, they started meddling and 'fixing' the culture to achieve their utopia. The problem was as someone else in the article comments section said" pandora gets a little tetchy when others start playing with her box." Their meddling started emphasising the me only culture, self interest was self liberation. Nothing was wrong. They argued and agitated for all these things and advanced their cause. They're aim was to break the status quo of society and culture and bring about all kinds of things and call it advancement. This included all kinds of sexual liberation, even the debauched stuff.
The problem was critical theory. For people who had apparently spent so much time learning about human motivations, they didn't appear to posses enough intelligence to understand the law of diminishing returns and the need to have an ever increasing set of experiences in order to feel the same initial rush. These things were always going to play out the way they have. Individualism of this nature was always going to turn more rampant and widen it's definitions of what we would perceive as acceptable. Same too with the sexual liberation that they advocated They may well have known, but critical theory allowed them to hold many opposing viewpoints without having to answer for them. Trouble is, real life has a habit of setting its own rules and showing clowns that thought this stuff up that they're not the gods they imagined themselves to be.
They are for me represented by an analogy I've used before. They're like the practical joker who shouts "fire" in a crowded cinema and then when people get killed in the stampede they deny they had anything to do with it.
Sunday, 20 April 2014
Do you see it?
First, may I wish everyone a Happy Easter. I hope today you will all be blessed with good company and happiness and laughter.
Now, however I want to turn to something else, something I turn to so often, because, I believe it's vital to see it.
If you've watched the movie, The Passion of the Christ, you will know the thread I'm talking about. Regardless of what you feel about the director, Mel Gibson, he wove into the story a very clever depiction of Satan. He did it on two levels. Firstly he cast Rosalindo Celentano and shaved her head and eyebrows. The aim, to create his vision of the devil as something that on one level has an allure, but something isn't quite right at the same time. Secondly and more importantly, is the fact that there are several scenes, where the devil moves obviously through the crowd in plain sight, yet it seems, no one in the crowd can see him. That is my point today and everyday I write this type of post. If you look, you can see something very wrong playing out in front of, yet we seem to fail to recognise it for what it is. Somehow we prefer to see it as some kind of benign lunacy, when it is anything but. What we see today, is written in the plans of twisted people from many years.
I give you four stories / blog posts.
Story one
Story two
Story Three
Story Four
Yes, I know most of them are from the Daily Mail and I acknowledge that, but it does not reduce the fact that there is something very telling in them.
Stories one and two show us how far we have fallen as a individuals and how our structures that keep society on an even keel have collapsed. The prison story is not an accident. Prison was meant to be a corrective institution, in part to punish offenders and in part to rehabilitate them to rejoin society as productive individuals once again. Yet look where we are with that. That doesn't just happen, someone has to permit that to happen. The other story, is bordering on vomit inducing. That someone could consider abortion so casually for the pursuit of z list celebrity and a pink Range Rover, gives you a clue to the level of aspiration of its population and the everyday thought processes. That in turn gives you a picture of something else - the structures and the culture. You don't just wake up thinking like this. You have to pass through a culture and institutions that mould you into this way of thinking and reward it at every twist and turn.
These are not isolated stories either. Examples and tales like these crop up almost daily. They point to components of our culture that are endemic.
Of course this brings something else - a dumbed down society. This is the dismantling of critical thinking. A nation that has it's critical reasoning skills dismantled in sufficient numbers can have anything foisted upon it. It starts failing to see when something obvious is walking in its midst, doing its work.
Which brings us to story three. A dumbed down nation takes what it is fed at face value. One like ours has become hooked on electronic media. We have an addiction to the electronic mogadon in the corner of our lounges and we are fed on the prevailing viewpoint and culture of instant celebrity, inane soap operas pushing the boundaries of constant misery and conflict. Added to that, our state broadcaster has which is increasingly becoming viewed as a propaganda service for the prevailing culture within it.
All of this brings us to story four. It is not the calls for stoning etc that I pick up on, but the method of influence, because it illustrates the point I struggle to get people to see without them perceiving me as some form of tin foil hat wearing type. The Trojan horse method that is the background to this story is a very real concept. It's the way they move through the crowd to do their work. It's a politically neutral concept too. Move silently and almost imperceptibly with enough people turning this and changing that over sufficient number of years, with enough people and you can change anything right before a nations eyes and they won't spot a thing until it's too late and they're no longer in any shape to stop it. Those that can spot it and would like to change it, can't because they either appear outnumbered, the struggle is on too many fronts for their numbers, or they daren't rock the boat for fear of being perceived as nutters, because to do so would be believed to be conspiracy theorist and we all know what the world thinks of them.
I've joined the dots on four stories today to paint a picture of manipulation that sounds like pure fantasy. For those however who have eyes who wish to see and those who have hears and wish to hear - go on a journey of your own. Look up The Frankfurt School and look up The Long March Through the Institutions.
Now, however I want to turn to something else, something I turn to so often, because, I believe it's vital to see it.
If you've watched the movie, The Passion of the Christ, you will know the thread I'm talking about. Regardless of what you feel about the director, Mel Gibson, he wove into the story a very clever depiction of Satan. He did it on two levels. Firstly he cast Rosalindo Celentano and shaved her head and eyebrows. The aim, to create his vision of the devil as something that on one level has an allure, but something isn't quite right at the same time. Secondly and more importantly, is the fact that there are several scenes, where the devil moves obviously through the crowd in plain sight, yet it seems, no one in the crowd can see him. That is my point today and everyday I write this type of post. If you look, you can see something very wrong playing out in front of, yet we seem to fail to recognise it for what it is. Somehow we prefer to see it as some kind of benign lunacy, when it is anything but. What we see today, is written in the plans of twisted people from many years.
I give you four stories / blog posts.
Story one
Story two
Story Three
Story Four
Yes, I know most of them are from the Daily Mail and I acknowledge that, but it does not reduce the fact that there is something very telling in them.
Stories one and two show us how far we have fallen as a individuals and how our structures that keep society on an even keel have collapsed. The prison story is not an accident. Prison was meant to be a corrective institution, in part to punish offenders and in part to rehabilitate them to rejoin society as productive individuals once again. Yet look where we are with that. That doesn't just happen, someone has to permit that to happen. The other story, is bordering on vomit inducing. That someone could consider abortion so casually for the pursuit of z list celebrity and a pink Range Rover, gives you a clue to the level of aspiration of its population and the everyday thought processes. That in turn gives you a picture of something else - the structures and the culture. You don't just wake up thinking like this. You have to pass through a culture and institutions that mould you into this way of thinking and reward it at every twist and turn.
These are not isolated stories either. Examples and tales like these crop up almost daily. They point to components of our culture that are endemic.
Of course this brings something else - a dumbed down society. This is the dismantling of critical thinking. A nation that has it's critical reasoning skills dismantled in sufficient numbers can have anything foisted upon it. It starts failing to see when something obvious is walking in its midst, doing its work.
Which brings us to story three. A dumbed down nation takes what it is fed at face value. One like ours has become hooked on electronic media. We have an addiction to the electronic mogadon in the corner of our lounges and we are fed on the prevailing viewpoint and culture of instant celebrity, inane soap operas pushing the boundaries of constant misery and conflict. Added to that, our state broadcaster has which is increasingly becoming viewed as a propaganda service for the prevailing culture within it.
All of this brings us to story four. It is not the calls for stoning etc that I pick up on, but the method of influence, because it illustrates the point I struggle to get people to see without them perceiving me as some form of tin foil hat wearing type. The Trojan horse method that is the background to this story is a very real concept. It's the way they move through the crowd to do their work. It's a politically neutral concept too. Move silently and almost imperceptibly with enough people turning this and changing that over sufficient number of years, with enough people and you can change anything right before a nations eyes and they won't spot a thing until it's too late and they're no longer in any shape to stop it. Those that can spot it and would like to change it, can't because they either appear outnumbered, the struggle is on too many fronts for their numbers, or they daren't rock the boat for fear of being perceived as nutters, because to do so would be believed to be conspiracy theorist and we all know what the world thinks of them.
I've joined the dots on four stories today to paint a picture of manipulation that sounds like pure fantasy. For those however who have eyes who wish to see and those who have hears and wish to hear - go on a journey of your own. Look up The Frankfurt School and look up The Long March Through the Institutions.
Wednesday, 16 April 2014
Just in case...
The Israel/Palestine situation has a habit of polarising viewpoints. Unfortunately many have come to a view of the situation that paints a romanticised picture of David and Goliath type struggle. If you spend any real time digging around, things aren't all that straightforward.
Part of the problem is the media and our own BBC has played a part in that.
It's for that reason I post today's entry. My prediction might prove wrong, but I post it anyway because it's a common method the media have used in the past.
There is a story that isn't on the BBC website and hasn't been as far as I can see. It's the story of an attack by a Palestinian, that has resulted in the death of an Israeli. The attack killed the Israeli after the Palestinian fired around 35 shots with what is believed to be a Kalashnikov on the eve of Passover.
Israel Hebron attack
I raise this and it's absence for two reasons. One because it's curious by its absence as the BBC Middle East news section is a prolific reporter of Israeli Palestinian issues (yet I suspect I know why). Two, because I'm waiting for the subsequent hunt of the killer resulting in some form of gun battle that will result in Palestinian injuries or death and they possibly other issues. It's at that point I suspect we will see reports with the focus on the Israeli attack.
For those who are watchers of this, it's often referred to as "it all started when Israel struck back".
Israel / Palestine is a complex situation, not helped by media manipulating the story to consistently paint Israel as the bad guy. There's a lot more to it than that and it will not be resolved with infantile game playing.
Part of the problem is the media and our own BBC has played a part in that.
It's for that reason I post today's entry. My prediction might prove wrong, but I post it anyway because it's a common method the media have used in the past.
There is a story that isn't on the BBC website and hasn't been as far as I can see. It's the story of an attack by a Palestinian, that has resulted in the death of an Israeli. The attack killed the Israeli after the Palestinian fired around 35 shots with what is believed to be a Kalashnikov on the eve of Passover.
Israel Hebron attack
I raise this and it's absence for two reasons. One because it's curious by its absence as the BBC Middle East news section is a prolific reporter of Israeli Palestinian issues (yet I suspect I know why). Two, because I'm waiting for the subsequent hunt of the killer resulting in some form of gun battle that will result in Palestinian injuries or death and they possibly other issues. It's at that point I suspect we will see reports with the focus on the Israeli attack.
For those who are watchers of this, it's often referred to as "it all started when Israel struck back".
Israel / Palestine is a complex situation, not helped by media manipulating the story to consistently paint Israel as the bad guy. There's a lot more to it than that and it will not be resolved with infantile game playing.
Friday, 11 April 2014
The Pike Award
I've created a special award this week - The Pike Award. Named in honour of Private Pike of Dads Army fame. I've created it for someone whom I feel is deserving of such an award for being a particularly stupid boy.
Step forward Ed Milliband.
According the press, Ed has made it clear that if he is PM he will create a Secretary of State for Women
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2602106/Id-Secretary-State-Women-Labour-won-election-says-Miliband.html
Why exactly? Well apparently it's part due to the Maria Miller issue and the reduced status of her successor.
For me Ed wins the award for a whole host of reasons, but at the heart if this, like Pike, he has as my late Grandmother's neighbour used to say,
"Opened his mouth and let the wind blow his tongue about".
Such is the lack of thinking that has gone into this announcement. Such an idea will solve nothing. He's not saying it, because he believes women need someone to advance their cause. He's saying it for his own party's gain at the ballot box. Likewise having had a similar role in government in the form of Miller, didn't really do much for women either. We got Miller, who by the stories we have seen this week could be argued by some to have only been advancing the cause of one woman - herself.
I could go on, but I think readers are intelligent and are probably shooting their own holes in Ed's idea. In short, it's not the absence of women in cabinet or in politics, it's the absence of honourable people in public service that's the issue.
I shouldn't be surprised though. Ed's got form for this sort of thing. We saw this right back when he announced he was running for Leader and he have his launch speech. It followed a similar pattern. It was one of his walk around the stage without a script type speeches. He was talking about this and about that and part way through there was a sudden outburst of we're going to do something for women too! You got the impression from there on in, he was thinking of things off the top of his head, with no thought or censorship of what made it into the atmosphere. All he was doing was making sure he went through his mental checklist of right on causes to seem all things to all people to gather as many votes as possible and it would seem he continues in that vein.
Take a bow Ed Milliband , winner of The Pike Award. Don't worry. We won't need a speech - we couldn't bear it.
Step forward Ed Milliband.
According the press, Ed has made it clear that if he is PM he will create a Secretary of State for Women
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2602106/Id-Secretary-State-Women-Labour-won-election-says-Miliband.html
Why exactly? Well apparently it's part due to the Maria Miller issue and the reduced status of her successor.
For me Ed wins the award for a whole host of reasons, but at the heart if this, like Pike, he has as my late Grandmother's neighbour used to say,
"Opened his mouth and let the wind blow his tongue about".
Such is the lack of thinking that has gone into this announcement. Such an idea will solve nothing. He's not saying it, because he believes women need someone to advance their cause. He's saying it for his own party's gain at the ballot box. Likewise having had a similar role in government in the form of Miller, didn't really do much for women either. We got Miller, who by the stories we have seen this week could be argued by some to have only been advancing the cause of one woman - herself.
I could go on, but I think readers are intelligent and are probably shooting their own holes in Ed's idea. In short, it's not the absence of women in cabinet or in politics, it's the absence of honourable people in public service that's the issue.
I shouldn't be surprised though. Ed's got form for this sort of thing. We saw this right back when he announced he was running for Leader and he have his launch speech. It followed a similar pattern. It was one of his walk around the stage without a script type speeches. He was talking about this and about that and part way through there was a sudden outburst of we're going to do something for women too! You got the impression from there on in, he was thinking of things off the top of his head, with no thought or censorship of what made it into the atmosphere. All he was doing was making sure he went through his mental checklist of right on causes to seem all things to all people to gather as many votes as possible and it would seem he continues in that vein.
Take a bow Ed Milliband , winner of The Pike Award. Don't worry. We won't need a speech - we couldn't bear it.
Wednesday, 12 February 2014
The Cabal of Dipsh*ts
The problem with having Nourishing Obscurity as a source of posting inspiration is one of blink and you're behind the curve. Just the other day I saw this post and it immediately triggered the inspiration of a post for this place. By the time I get round to it, I'm way behind. But hey ho, here goes.
James' observations immediately took me to observations of mine of a similar nature back in 2011when I wrote about the role of Chancers in my hierarchy of treason. Chancers are people ill qualified for any of the roles they hold and their rise borders on Kafkaesque if you happen to be close to them. Of them I wrote:
"Although the hallmarks of a Chancer are many, one of the simplest to spot is the concept that the only basis for their activity is themselves. Like a fly that can sniff out a bloated corpse for no other reason than a source of food and a place to lay its eggs, Chancers, are acutely attuned to similar bloated bodies to gorge on money, power and prestige. Such bodies can be found by them in public and private sector and it matters not to them which they land on as long as it can serve their needs."
I wrote many more things about them at the time. What was refreshing to see in James' post is that I'm not alone. I don't possess a gift unique to me. We can all see them and frequently we all have. If we couldn't see them before, events over the last few months have shone a spotlight on them. back then I wrote this of them:
"There are many more facets to the Chancer and their pathway, too numerous to mention here. I ask however, if with the relatively short description I have given if you now see them anywhere. Personally I do and am startled at their prevalence. If you're still unsure, look around at the major problems that are currently on our doorstep such as the riots, show pony politics and the global financial crisis amongst other things and look at their handling and the responses of the so called great and the good. Most of us recognise we are in the midst of serious times, but ask yourself if we have seen a serious response. I say not. I see trivial responses and the continuation of previous failed methods. I see people lacking the capability to make decisions, preferring instead to hang on to their gilded life. I see people in power trying to shuffle blame to anywhere but themselves. I see a general population screaming at the lunacy of it all and seeing responses that serve only to convince them that they are indeed the crazy ones"
Unfortunately, however we are reaping the fruits of these people. Its not just a bit of stupidity here and a touch of bumbling there any longer. We're paying a real price now. People are paying a real price and will continue to do so. We will get much more complex problems than the flooding we have now. Our problem is that in too many critical positions we have people of similar capability. Their response will be the same but the impact will be magnified. We see they're not cut out to handle a damn thing.
Originally I was, at this point, going to write what I saw as their mindset, but to be truthful I cannot comprehend what must go on in their minds. The appear to possess a mixture of hubris in which they presume their every utterance and ideas to be pure genius. At the same time however, their efforts to avoid blame and make other people pay the price for them would have to have them acknowledge that they're just not that smart and they have to avoid responsibility. How they can possess both traits at once, I cannot comprehend.
In all honesty I am lost for words in trying to understand them.
Sunday, 2 February 2014
Right on the Money
Although it's taken me a few days to get to it Raedwald hit the nail on the head with this post about Barroso's cabinet. It's a fantastic summation that the people of Britain and Europe need to understand. I've put the image on here also (Based on Raedwald's post I think I'm allowed to, but if asked to remove I will do and you can certainly go get it directly from his place).
I think it's right on the money for a number of reasons. As bloggers we moan endlessly about a mainstream media asleep at the wheel in their role of holding the elected (or unelected) to account. Honesty, enquiry and integrity have all gone out of the window. As such everything that is wrong with the nation and its politics is getting a free ride. When you throw into the same mix, a disinterested population who have been taught to do no more than worship celebrity from A-Z (and even lower) and obsess over things like X-Factor, you find a nation and a world like we have now. For those of us with an eye more on the horizon than on the TV listings, the journey looks dark and scary and unlikely to end well for everyone everywhere.
The answer in reality is to prove their dominance irrelevant. They're a handful of people and in reality we are legion. Whilst we continue to bemoan them, we (and this means everyone) need to decide to bypass them. They're not interested in picking up our message so rather than go through them, going round them is the answer.
There are lots of ways round that I'm sure, but Raedwald has commented on one method with that picture.
Given where our people are with awareness of what's going on, it has to be simple so that everyone can get it. There's a phrase somewhere about not feeding people bread when they are only able to tolerate milk. That applies right now for us. We don't have the 50 years or so it will take through the existing routes. Something needs to start shifting soon in the nation's psyche.
The messages need to start to come out, simple, clear, unambiguous and punchy. Nobody could fail to understand the message from that picture and that is key. Stuff like this needs to start getting out to everyone. Do that enough and the drip drip drip of it will start reaching the people. Do that and we'll start to make the uniformed half truths and outright lies of mainstream media irrelevant.
And how could the everyday man & woman in the street do that. Well next time you think of sending those funny emails on to your like minded friends, you could send one with that picture in it, although I grant you it will wipe the smile of their faces.
Saturday, 18 January 2014
I hope you believe in ghost stories...
....because you're in one - so the line went in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. I thought it a pretty apt title for this post, although I did consider "These are the droids you're looking for". There's a video at the end of this post that sets it out very simply from Bill Whittle in the US and I recommend that even if you can't be bothered with this post, you watch.
What am I on about?
Well, as a "political" blogger I've long since worked out that there are much finer minds than mine out there in the blogging world who a better able to dig deep and demonstrate flaws in the plans and policies of politicians than myself. I can't do it to the level they can and I would be doing my small readership a disservice if I attempted that, although from time to time I come in with my own simplistic viewpoint.
I've said, time and time again that I want a better Britain. A strong healthy and robust nation where everyone has the same opportunity to make something of their life based on a willingness to work for it and one that can catch those who have served us well and have fallen on hard times. I personally don't feel we have that for all sorts of reasons and I think it has to be worked towards in a democratic and legal fashion. What I'm also clear on is that to achieve that, everyone has to pull on the rope.
What I've therefore tried to do is focus my blog postings on pointing to the man and woman in the street, the need to play their part and how they can do that. I'm hopeful they will come by my blogs and decide they need to do their bit. At the moment I don't think that's happening to the degree it's required. It's not so much a vein but an artery of apathy that runs through the people of Britain. They don't realise they've all got a wheel to help steer this nation or if they do, too many of them are asleep at it.
I partly understand that apathy. Politics is boring, vote for different ones and get the same thing, none of them listening and so on and so forth. I get it all. I also get their notion that the country (and the world) seems to have gone mad. Truths become lies, victims are criminals and justice systems seem more about criminal protection than its published principles. Furthermore you can see what's wrong but you're in a position where you need to keep your opinion to yourself because everything you think and want to say about it will render you a pariah, even amongst your friends.
That brings me back to my earlier question "what am I on about?" with the movie quotes. I think it's really important that joe public understands something and if you're joe public stopping by this blog - then I mean you.
It needs to be understood that the inversion of reality and justice is not haphazard and occurring by accident in a world that just seems to have gone mad. It was deliberately designed decades ago. It was implemented by very bright people who knew precisely what it was intended to achieve. It was designed to put you in the place you now find yourself. It continues to be advanced to this day, in part, by people who know exactly what they're up to. More importantly it is being advanced by well intentioned people who have no clue they are being manipulated to take something devious forward dressed in a cloak of fairness. These people walk amongst you every day, saying hello and smiling.
Here's something else. It was designed to surround you, without you even realising. They needed to move invisibly because if you had spotted it you might well have stood up to them when you had the chance. They needed to avoid that because the reality is we outnumber them and they need to look bigger than they are to make you feel afraid to stand up, speak out and push back. They need to give you the impression you're surrounded which is why they needed what Lenin called useful idiots to help them create the illusion of size. In reality they are like the Wizard of Oz. The big green fire breathing man is a misdirection to hope you don't spot the curtain where the scared little bully is pulling handles and pushing buttons to create the illusion.
Like I say, I hope you believe in ghost stories, because you're in one.
This, for me is the big secret to turning the madness around. I want to draw back the curtain on this plan and show you what's going on, because once you see the trick being played before your eyes, you can do something about it. Until everyone wakes up and sees this, they continue their "advantage" over us. Even if Westminster, Brussels and all of that seems beyond you you'll see that there are lots of things you can do in everyday life that will start to get the nation back to where it needs to be for the benefit of a stable world for our children to live in. Part of their plan was to make you feel alone and isolated, but once you start doing things day to day, other people will see they're not alone and they'll start acting and speaking up and slowly but surely, things will change.
I'll give you a quick example. For a long time these people have had success in making Britain feel like a place of horrible people responsible for all the ills of the world. Their view was we should become a place of perpetual losers and self-flagellation. Then the 2012 Olympics came along. An expense white elephant? Maybe. But look at what it did to us. Look how we came out as a people and got behind it, shouting cheering waving the flag and showing our pride in who we know we really are. Once one started making a noise, others joined in and there wasn't a damn thing they could do to stop it. That scares them.
So here's Bill Whittle to tell you all about them and how they worked. Know them and look out for their work.
What am I on about?
Well, as a "political" blogger I've long since worked out that there are much finer minds than mine out there in the blogging world who a better able to dig deep and demonstrate flaws in the plans and policies of politicians than myself. I can't do it to the level they can and I would be doing my small readership a disservice if I attempted that, although from time to time I come in with my own simplistic viewpoint.
I've said, time and time again that I want a better Britain. A strong healthy and robust nation where everyone has the same opportunity to make something of their life based on a willingness to work for it and one that can catch those who have served us well and have fallen on hard times. I personally don't feel we have that for all sorts of reasons and I think it has to be worked towards in a democratic and legal fashion. What I'm also clear on is that to achieve that, everyone has to pull on the rope.
What I've therefore tried to do is focus my blog postings on pointing to the man and woman in the street, the need to play their part and how they can do that. I'm hopeful they will come by my blogs and decide they need to do their bit. At the moment I don't think that's happening to the degree it's required. It's not so much a vein but an artery of apathy that runs through the people of Britain. They don't realise they've all got a wheel to help steer this nation or if they do, too many of them are asleep at it.
I partly understand that apathy. Politics is boring, vote for different ones and get the same thing, none of them listening and so on and so forth. I get it all. I also get their notion that the country (and the world) seems to have gone mad. Truths become lies, victims are criminals and justice systems seem more about criminal protection than its published principles. Furthermore you can see what's wrong but you're in a position where you need to keep your opinion to yourself because everything you think and want to say about it will render you a pariah, even amongst your friends.
That brings me back to my earlier question "what am I on about?" with the movie quotes. I think it's really important that joe public understands something and if you're joe public stopping by this blog - then I mean you.
It needs to be understood that the inversion of reality and justice is not haphazard and occurring by accident in a world that just seems to have gone mad. It was deliberately designed decades ago. It was implemented by very bright people who knew precisely what it was intended to achieve. It was designed to put you in the place you now find yourself. It continues to be advanced to this day, in part, by people who know exactly what they're up to. More importantly it is being advanced by well intentioned people who have no clue they are being manipulated to take something devious forward dressed in a cloak of fairness. These people walk amongst you every day, saying hello and smiling.
Here's something else. It was designed to surround you, without you even realising. They needed to move invisibly because if you had spotted it you might well have stood up to them when you had the chance. They needed to avoid that because the reality is we outnumber them and they need to look bigger than they are to make you feel afraid to stand up, speak out and push back. They need to give you the impression you're surrounded which is why they needed what Lenin called useful idiots to help them create the illusion of size. In reality they are like the Wizard of Oz. The big green fire breathing man is a misdirection to hope you don't spot the curtain where the scared little bully is pulling handles and pushing buttons to create the illusion.
Like I say, I hope you believe in ghost stories, because you're in one.
This, for me is the big secret to turning the madness around. I want to draw back the curtain on this plan and show you what's going on, because once you see the trick being played before your eyes, you can do something about it. Until everyone wakes up and sees this, they continue their "advantage" over us. Even if Westminster, Brussels and all of that seems beyond you you'll see that there are lots of things you can do in everyday life that will start to get the nation back to where it needs to be for the benefit of a stable world for our children to live in. Part of their plan was to make you feel alone and isolated, but once you start doing things day to day, other people will see they're not alone and they'll start acting and speaking up and slowly but surely, things will change.
I'll give you a quick example. For a long time these people have had success in making Britain feel like a place of horrible people responsible for all the ills of the world. Their view was we should become a place of perpetual losers and self-flagellation. Then the 2012 Olympics came along. An expense white elephant? Maybe. But look at what it did to us. Look how we came out as a people and got behind it, shouting cheering waving the flag and showing our pride in who we know we really are. Once one started making a noise, others joined in and there wasn't a damn thing they could do to stop it. That scares them.
So here's Bill Whittle to tell you all about them and how they worked. Know them and look out for their work.
Wednesday, 15 January 2014
Causal CO2 Link Found
But not in the way the greens are hoping for. Der Spiegel is carrying an interesting report that despite the success of Germany's renewable energy industry, it has not reduced CO2 output by a single gramme. In fact, perversely, efforts at green policies may actually have resulted in increase in CO2 output.
The article which can be seen here and the accompanying editorial seen here illustrate the inverse relationship between increased renewable energy sources and C02 emmissions. There seem to be several issues in play here including German policy and the EU mechanism for CO2 output "management".
According to the article, the EU wide emissions trading system determines the total amount of CO2 that can be emitted , by power companies and industry but apparently, this amount does not change regardless of how many turbines are produced. Worse still is that everyone involved from law makers to industry seems to know about it, but each has their own reasons for keeping schtum. It appears (subject to further research by interested parties who will look beyond the article) that there isn't an obvious process by which the CO2 amount permitted by the process is rolled back as the growth in renewables comes on stream and that despite all their noise, politicians aren't that keen to go back to try and implement a change to this.
Its almost comical to read how the increase in renewables doesn't change the amount of certificates available and as a follow on dilutes the cost of producing CO2 making "polluting" the atmosphere cheaper.
So next time someone starts banging on about renewables to you and decides to cite Germany as the shining example we should be following, gently point out to them that their appraoch hasn't dropped CO2 output by a single gramme and that coal usage is up 8% as a result of that glorious policy and that unlike them you've got verifiable evidence.
The article which can be seen here and the accompanying editorial seen here illustrate the inverse relationship between increased renewable energy sources and C02 emmissions. There seem to be several issues in play here including German policy and the EU mechanism for CO2 output "management".
According to the article, the EU wide emissions trading system determines the total amount of CO2 that can be emitted , by power companies and industry but apparently, this amount does not change regardless of how many turbines are produced. Worse still is that everyone involved from law makers to industry seems to know about it, but each has their own reasons for keeping schtum. It appears (subject to further research by interested parties who will look beyond the article) that there isn't an obvious process by which the CO2 amount permitted by the process is rolled back as the growth in renewables comes on stream and that despite all their noise, politicians aren't that keen to go back to try and implement a change to this.
Its almost comical to read how the increase in renewables doesn't change the amount of certificates available and as a follow on dilutes the cost of producing CO2 making "polluting" the atmosphere cheaper.
So next time someone starts banging on about renewables to you and decides to cite Germany as the shining example we should be following, gently point out to them that their appraoch hasn't dropped CO2 output by a single gramme and that coal usage is up 8% as a result of that glorious policy and that unlike them you've got verifiable evidence.
Saturday, 11 January 2014
Must be the day for it
Obviously it's one of those days where I'm finding quotes that resonate with me. Having found Heffer hitting the nail on the head in my previous post, I stopped over Your Freedom and Ours for a quick read and I came across neo-neocon. In one of the older posts theres a great comment from another reader referring to liberals that sums up a lot of the left wing mindset very well:
"... Always willing to give up the shirt off someone else’s back."
That one's going to get used a lot in the future.
"... Always willing to give up the shirt off someone else’s back."
That one's going to get used a lot in the future.
Excellent Diagnosis
Simon Heffer sums up just one of my frustrations about Cameron perfectly this morning on the Mail website. Commenting on Cameron's "scientific" observation that he almost certainly believes the recent horrible weather is down to man made global warming (yes I know - I got the memo too about the name change, but I refuse to help their subterfuge), he observed how it was an odd statement for one who had recently used the phrase "Green Crap" to describe it, then goes on to opine:
"The trouble with Dave is he can’t see a bandwagon without jumping on it — even one he’s only just jumped off"
"The trouble with Dave is he can’t see a bandwagon without jumping on it — even one he’s only just jumped off"
Wednesday, 8 January 2014
History Repeating Itself?
Some days I recall things from some time back - odd things. Things you wouldn't think were particularly memorable. Mostly trivial junk that used to stand me a few quid better off in a pub quiz, but didn't endear me to family when games like Trivial Pursuit were being played.
Some of that came back to me yesterday when I was having a post Christmas & New Year surf around the Internet and came across this story over at Townhall. In the story, former US Secretary of Defense who has served under most Presidents since Nixon (Clinton aside) has slammed the current administration for allowing politics to dominate foreign and defence policy in a book he has penned. Now we all know politics dominates these all the time, but this seems particularly damning in the article gives the impression that the politics were so dominant that genuine military experience in the room was marginalised at best.
The article took me back to a book I read some years ago called Why America Slept by Gerald Posner. In the book, Posner charts the path to September 11th and tells how the signs were there all the time as well as charting the failure of the Clinton administration to act when they had the chance to have Bin Laden effectively handed to them.
Unfortunately I don't have the book to hand, but one of the stand out sections for me described how security briefings had little to do with security and more about how they played out in the press. Security officials commented on their surprise to find that on numerous times discussing national security issues was often dominated by the thoughts and musings of individuals such as Clinton's press and spin team. The overriding concern was how action or non action would play out in the media as opposed to what was right for security or foreign policy purposes. There's a wonderful observation in which this "spin" conversation was interrupted by a security official who made a key observation about the specific issue being discussed. Within that he described the disdainfully detached look the the spin team gave this observer for having the temerity to ruin their wonderful train of thought before returning to their original conversation without acknowledging the security official's viewpoint.
Posner's book also tells of how Clinton in his obsession with polling seemed to show how he wasn't required to actually take tough action, only give the impression of doing so. Like the situation Gates seems to describe in the Townhall piece, Clinton too seemed to let the politics of perception dominate to the point he would be prepared to compromise US security.
The Townhall article also gives a sense of disdain for the military within this administration. That too was something I recall reading about during Clinton's time. Not necessarily by the President but I certainly recall that being said of his coterie.
My point? Well - recalling where Posner concluded this culture and subsequent inertia ended up on September 11th, I'm just wondering if history is repeating itself?
Some of that came back to me yesterday when I was having a post Christmas & New Year surf around the Internet and came across this story over at Townhall. In the story, former US Secretary of Defense who has served under most Presidents since Nixon (Clinton aside) has slammed the current administration for allowing politics to dominate foreign and defence policy in a book he has penned. Now we all know politics dominates these all the time, but this seems particularly damning in the article gives the impression that the politics were so dominant that genuine military experience in the room was marginalised at best.
The article took me back to a book I read some years ago called Why America Slept by Gerald Posner. In the book, Posner charts the path to September 11th and tells how the signs were there all the time as well as charting the failure of the Clinton administration to act when they had the chance to have Bin Laden effectively handed to them.
Unfortunately I don't have the book to hand, but one of the stand out sections for me described how security briefings had little to do with security and more about how they played out in the press. Security officials commented on their surprise to find that on numerous times discussing national security issues was often dominated by the thoughts and musings of individuals such as Clinton's press and spin team. The overriding concern was how action or non action would play out in the media as opposed to what was right for security or foreign policy purposes. There's a wonderful observation in which this "spin" conversation was interrupted by a security official who made a key observation about the specific issue being discussed. Within that he described the disdainfully detached look the the spin team gave this observer for having the temerity to ruin their wonderful train of thought before returning to their original conversation without acknowledging the security official's viewpoint.
Posner's book also tells of how Clinton in his obsession with polling seemed to show how he wasn't required to actually take tough action, only give the impression of doing so. Like the situation Gates seems to describe in the Townhall piece, Clinton too seemed to let the politics of perception dominate to the point he would be prepared to compromise US security.
The Townhall article also gives a sense of disdain for the military within this administration. That too was something I recall reading about during Clinton's time. Not necessarily by the President but I certainly recall that being said of his coterie.
My point? Well - recalling where Posner concluded this culture and subsequent inertia ended up on September 11th, I'm just wondering if history is repeating itself?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)