Saturday, 21 February 2015

Moving Home

Having seen a few changes across the blogosphere I decided to get my own backside in gear and implement some changes I've been contemplating.

I've decided to move the blog to a new home. You'll be able to find my new home at

I've begun setting things up so please bear with me as I add others to my blog roll. Also the page is taking a little bit of time to appear consistently across the inter web.

I do hope you'll visit me in my new home and if you think my small contribution is worthy of sharing, update your links accordingly.  I'll leave this blog here for the time being at least whisky I dedcide what the best use for it is.

In the meantime, thanks for your support here and hopefully see you on the other side.

Saturday, 7 February 2015

The Five Whys

David over at Witterings from Witney has added a recent post that has helped me gather some of my thoughts regarding what I've been reading around the Rotherham scandal.

There seems to be a bit of an emerging polarity in the viewpoints across some of the blogs. There's a common set of threads on the angle of political correctness and some which downplay the political correctness angle, preferring to point to the failure of local government. Some of these threads have seemed a bit dismissive of the political correctness angle or those speaking of it as being a key component.

Although I've still got to see the report with my own eyes, I'm suspecting there's an element of both in there. What I don't think would be right would be to totally dismiss political correctness. It's a
Deliberately designed idea, intended to be pervasive and dominate the atmosphere in a myriad of structures. When you've been in these places for any length of time with your eyes really open you can see this ghost in the machine. You see it in the decisions which seem to make little sense. You see it in the lack of candour and the skirting around issues. You see it in the realpolitik in which everyone in the room knows what's happening but shrug their shoulders because they know there are bits of uninhabitable territory in terms of ideas and conversation.

Also to throw into the mix are the observations of other bloggers who have cited similar cases coming to light in other areas in which  they point out longstanding awareness of the problem beyond the walls of the local authority and police. This in turn leads to the question of where journalism was on this issue. It's being suggested that knowledge was widespread amongst this estate too. Their refusal to engage this subject points to something beyond system failure and ineptitude.

As I say though, I think it's both of the things but as David suggested we have a bit of a chicken and egg situation.

In that instance I would like to see the media bring the 5 Whys tool to this story. In essence it's a tool aimed at understanding the root cause of a failure. The principle being is that if you ask a question regarding a problem you will get an answer. by asking why to that answer and to each subsequent answer, on average you can get to the real root cause within 5 iterations of why.

I think Rotherham and the other cases need subjecting to that.

Friday, 6 February 2015

Reaping what they sow

In the light of the Rotherham scandal, further news is coming out this morning of  two further similar criminal scandals in Halifax and Northumbria.

As ever,  I end up shaking my head at the vileness of what is going on in our country when I read things like this.

What did stick out though was the comment that appears to have grown up alongside it and that is the view that these stories will fuel reaction from the "far right".  It's an aside that demonstrates a fear on the part of the authorities.

There's no guarantee it will, but if it does, it's hardly surprising is it? This is what's called reaping what you sow. If they react it will be as much a reflection on those who turned a blind eye as those reacting. for some time now we have had everyday people just wanting a simple, legal, open and honest debate about some things that are going off in our nation. Some of that debate however has tried to wander into subjects that have become something  of a sacred cow in this country. These subjects are verboten. Anyone who brought them up was shouted down, pilloried, sidelined, warned. Debate was shut down and that was deliberate. Someone wanted to maintain a pretence that no such problem existed, leaving people in a kafkaesque world where they had to fight their own lying eyes.

So now we have this fear of a group taking us down an equally dark road by capitalising on it. If it weren't so serious it would almost be laughable. How can you express horror at a situation you helped create?  Such groups can only thrive when they are fuelled, by what we have seen in Rotherham - the turning a blind eye and shutting down those when legitimate concerns were being raised. Those raising the alarm we labelled as racists and hatemongers  because that's what the debate required. So it's no surprise that such groups are able to come along with a beguiling message. my message for those connected to such scandals, if you fear this reaction, then look to yourselves as you had a hand in fuelling this and no blustering and blithering otherwise will absolve you of that.

Of course it would seem that little has been learned. It's somewhat odd  this comment about fuelling the far right has come out alongside the stories. If you're reading with your eyes and mind properly open, you'll see that the story isn't being allowed to simply stand on its own for us to make of it what we will. A narrative is already being introduced - the fear of a backlash. the inference being, that given the specifics of these cases is that only bigots will react and you're not a bigot are you? Regardless of how inhuman this vile cruelty has been, we're being given a message. That message is hush, don't make a fuss, don't ask pointed questions abouts what going on here, who knew and why didn't you do something.

We're being told to carry on with the same thing that got us into this mess in the first place.

Saturday, 31 January 2015

Can you see it?

Allister Heath gave an observation into something quite important for us all on the Telegraph website the other day with his observations of something that is wrong with our healthcare system and how that ties to our debt.

In reality though he alludes to the real problem from something of a tangent and even then only scratched the surface of the much wider problem.  One that we should all open our eyes to because if we don't the consequences are very real.

That same problem not only centres around our health care system, but our policing, taxation, retirement,banking and a whole host of other things that affect us. If you look you can see it and you should look because it seems too many are not seeing it

In all of these cases we are getting an ever dwindling return or service as individuals. There are all sorts of reasons. At the heart of many though is that they are bureaucracies and as C. Northcote Parkinson famously observed, the bureaucracy will not univent itself.  That phrase in itself is quite telling.  Bureaucracies begin to administer a service but it does not take long before they begin to morph into something that acts every day to do nothing more than feed itself.  It never looks to dismantle itself.   Far from it. It invents things to perpetuate its existence.  This leads in turn to another problem - complexity.  Many of the problems in our national structures are due to their complexity and complexity in general.  There are just too many things they are trying to solve especially things they were never designed to tackle in the first place thanks to political meddling.

Added to this is lack of accountability.  So many organisations work each and every day to detach themselves from accountability from their actions and cases of ineptitude.  Take the recent story of the businessman who went through the nightmare of court cases following the winding up of his business, thanks to a stupid clerical error - all of which could have been resolved with little fuss had the bureaucracy not decided it was not answerable in any way.  I too have my own experiences, along with others. We can all tell our own story and that illustrates the problem we are facing.

The private sector fares little better, especially financial services.  Of course they're private enterprises designed to make profits for themselves and shareholders.  What we are seeing in too many cases though is straight out corporate greed.  The dynamic in a free market society is supposed to see private money go into these businesses on the basis of a fair exchange of goods and services. Those businesses are supposed to grow via innovation and growing investment and return of profit.  What we see is many of these businesses taking the line of least resistance by plundering the assets already in place to feed itself.  Pensions are a prime example of this.  So many people facing retirement are only now learning that their years of investment are proving ultimately worthless, because of the endless application of increasing administration fees or sloppy short term investing that seems to be more about boosting staff bonus pots.

I could go on, but it would take me away from my point.

We become victim to these problems because we have shackled ourselves to them.  We have become conditioned to let ourselves think all of these things will take care of us.  I understand that I really do.  Partly the reason we have, is because we were told we could and that such things were there for us.  It may have been true at the start, but the modern reality is very different. The result of that new reality is if we continue to hand over our lives to them we will be at the mercy of whatever they choose to dish up when we come to rely on it.  Unfortunately we could end up paying that price with everything we have, including our lives.

There's no evidence that any of this will get better but could very well get worse as the powers that be offer a one dimensional response to the problem usually involving running away.  We should as individuals prepare for that.  What we need to begin doing is looking to ourselves and getting on with our own business.  I'm talking about self reliance not self absorption.  We need to start freeing ourselves from the potential problems that we face in years to come.  I'm not talking about anything illegal around your tax affairs here or running to the hills  in full societal breakdown mode.  I'm talking about focussing each day on detaching yourself from the reliance mentality.  Take care of your business whatever that may be.  The tools are there for all of us. we should use them. Not only will we increase our own chances but us taking care of our business makes for a more stable country all round, better able to take care of the truly vulnerable.  Our future lies in personal independence.

When I first started out in the world of work, we were all given little desk calendars.  Ours had little pep talk type quotes on each and every day. Of them stuck out.

Trust in God, but row away from the rocks.

Tuesday, 27 January 2015

Those Progressives Eh?

There was a post yesterday over at Nourishing Obscurity which commented on the shiftiness of progressives in comment posts in the mainstream media.  Their argument as James points to has a habit of jumping around. It's true.  They do jump around.  Not finishing one argument before going somewhere else and before you know you're miles from the main point and you give up and walk away from these fools.

James hits the nail on the head when he points to the deliberateness of it. It's easy to think they're just morons but that would be underestimating them.  It's just one of their ploys to win the argument.  They want to leave you trying to plat smoke.

Why. Because they don't want you near facts that cant doctor and alter.  They're not interested in being right, they just want to win. If you can't get to the heart of the matter, you can't win which leaves them with their other favourite tactic, declaring themselves hands down winners of the battle for the moral high ground on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.

Our mistake is to fall for it and let them dictate the terms. They don't want you near the facts because they are like Kryptonite to them.  One subject you get this in the US is one the subject of gun control. It's popular with the American left and they love to manipulate a tragedy to push the idea home. If you want an example of why they argue the way they do, Bill Whittle whips out the Krypton and demonstrates quite clearly why they don't want you getting to the unadulterated facts.

Sunday, 25 January 2015

Cooking The Books(again)

A quick trip round some blogs early this morning sees Richard North picking up on Booker's latest offering  focused on Global Warming.

The article resonated with me quite quickly as early in the content it started referring to us once again having been through the hottest year on record.  I'd heard that trotted out quite in bit in the British media during the back end of 2014 and each time I heard it, it seemed strangely at odds with many of my memories of the year.  I'm know I'm middle aged, but I didn't think I was that addled in the brain just yet.

It seems looking at Booker's work, he's picked up on the work of Paul Homewood, looking at the data for that hottest year ever narrative and its sources - the oft quoted climate record monitoring departments including NASA.

As ever, the devil is in the detail.  I recommend readers go and have a look for themselves as it makes quite an interesting read.  At the heart of all of this is that Homewood did his homework.  In the plethora of global warming 'research' coming out, it's very easy to take the numbers at face value.  Homewood, didn't and as Booker via North explains:

But when Homewood was then able to check Giss's figures against the original data from which they were derived, he found that they had been altered. Far from the new graph showing any rise, it showed temperatures in fact having declined over those 65 years by a full degree. When he did the same for the other two stations, he found the same. In each case, the original data showed not a rise but a decline

Once again it seems that someone in this word has been amending the numbers to tell a story opposite to what the data is really telling them.  They're talking the temperature up when the numbers point to us going off in a different direction altogether.

I'm saying nothing you don't already know when I say something's afoot here.  There's the obvious question of how can they call themselves scientists when they're not willing to be honest in their findings and are resorting to manipulating data to tell the story they want to tell.  They want to tell the story of an ever warming planet.  They're playing with the words by calling it Climate Change but they want it to mean warming.  They're clearly not interested in climate change that means climate cooling.

I suspect many of us know what's going on here, but Joe Public seems not to.  There are simply too many vested interests in what's become the accepted story about what global temperatures are doing.  We have a core of 'scientists' amending the base numbers that in turn go into the key information sources.  we have the removal of recording stations that present data that is counter to the accepted narrative and stations that are compromised by their urban location left in the equation so they enhance the narrative.  That's the bastardised science that is running the show.

Then we have the sheep science that is simply addicted to the grant funding around this.  These scientists and universities probably know something's afoot, but hey, that's where the cash is going Jack and you're either in the loop and in the money, or you're out of it, so it's easy for principles to go out of the window when the funding is like crack .  What's a little doctored science or pre-ordained findings in times like these.

At the heart of it all, there's just too many damn people getting rich off public money to stop this.  It has to continue despite it being highly questionable.  We have politicians in all senses of the word who have stuck a big bore needle into the artery of public cash. They are designing all manner of ways to drain this money into their coffers. Businesses and political policy are all falling into line.  The press have been brought to heel to trot out the mantra relentlessly that the climate is going to a hot hell.  These people don't want it to stop.  That's partly why it's weaved its way into the education agendas across the world. Presented as unquestionable truth allows the money to keep flowing without that annoying little problem of people questioning it.

From bottom to top, there's evidence of fraud going on.  All of it starting with the numbers which they need us to accept it as truth.  .

We have to get to the heart of what's really true, not what they want to be true because the flow of money says so. The signal however has to get out.  The press won't do it, so we have to.  We have to go on all fronts like they are doing.  Every time someone mentions it, even the average Joe in the street, tell them the data's doctored.  Tell them the story of the reducing number of stations.  Finally when they ask why - simply ask them to think about whose getting rich off the back of this and look who's paying for it.

One day.  One day the truth will come out -but only if people insist on it.

Thursday, 22 January 2015

Bill Nails It

It's no secret that I have a problem with the left wing of politics.  In theory I shouldn't. My background and my history should see me as a raving lefty based on what they claim to want. However, all of that would hinge on their theories being true.  Their reality is somewhat different and that's why I have a different outlook.

I could go on and probably will in another post at some point.  In the meantime, I'll let Bill Whittle spell out what's wrong with them.