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 http://restoringbritain.com
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, 21 February 2015
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
Tuesday, 23 December 2014
Foundations
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/
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/
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)