Showing posts with label British media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label British media. Show all posts
Friday, 25 May 2012
Corrupt Industries
After a chat with friends this week I was slightly surprised how often the word 'corruption' entered the conversation and there was an acceptance that the general public could do nothing to stem the flow.
Everywhere there is corruption, but in 5 industries it's so blatant and deep-seated: Banking, Energy, Agriculture/Biotech, Media and Healthcare. I've purposely omitted politics because it is enmeshed in all industry.
Let's take banking. Every time a loan is repaid interest (wealth) is transferred from the working class to the ownership class. Class-ism is built directly into the system. It's not simply a result of greedy people within the system, it's a reality upon which the entire concept of banking is built. The solution is credit unions, at least in the short term. With credit unions there are no shareholders and all revenue from loans is paid to members and employees. Why do we not have more credit unions?
Now energy. I won't say much about this as there's been enough on the news in the past 24 hours. We're paying - or going to pay in the future - for the sins of the ownership class, who regularly increase our utility bills and most of us are their prisoners. My main objection is the green tax added to my monthly bill. Why don't more protest about it?
Agriculture and biotech have some of the world's largest companies - Monsanto to name but one. Monsanto introduced GM crops and the 'Terminator Gene' which causes the organism to be sterile and forces the grower to buy new seeds from Monsanto every year. They've made billions from GMOs and left many in third world countries starving because these people can't afford to be purchasing seeds annually. Nature intended that seed was gathered and sown the following year.
I avoid GM foods if I possibly can, but they are never labelled so it can be difficult to identify them. Best to buy local produce if possible.
We all known how corruption flows through media so no need for me to comment.
Healthcare is run by pharmaceutical conglomerates whose aim is to make money. They're not interested in your wellbeing and it's up to all of us to become experts about our own health. Question everything is what I do these days, although I was brought up with believing that GPs and other medics were gods. One person said to me the other day that the only reason their GP was smarter than them was because he could access the internet more quickly!
I don't willingly give my hard-earned money to companies which I know aren't playing 'fair' but we can all try to free ourselves as much as possible from these corrupt systems. We shouldn't underestimate our individual power. If nothing else not buying GM foods and questioning any medication prescribed makes me feel I have some control.
Speaking of medication - am I the only person who thinks that, these days, the side effects of any medicine (on these tiny font instruction leaflets) are so similar they're not worth reading?
Labels:
banking,
big pharma,
British media,
GM crops,
heath care
Wednesday, 20 July 2011
Press Controls
Apparently, Ed Milliband is suggesting that Murdoch, or anyone else for that matter, should be restricted to owning no more than 20% of the press? This is so predictable. Politicians, or to give them their technical name headless chickens, try to be seen to do something with meaning whilst showing responsibility. Of course they actually achieve the reverse.
Complete yawn time. Reach for the legislation. Several new laws designed. Tiresome voting required. Job done. Move on. The next overhyped crisis will be along shortly. Bank on it, especially if it’s a financial crisis but that’s another story entirely.
You can second guess what they will actually do. They’ll come up with something, implement it and then months later we’ll find out that it affects us more than it affects the people it was supposed to. Of course there will be absolutely no chance, no chance at all that they will then change it or ditch it. Once it’s there it’s there forever.
For goodness sake.
And… and… we sit back and take it. Everytime! Will we ever learn?
How about they do the following -a. Bring all the UK newspapers into the scope of the inquiry.b. Also include the BBC and all the other UK broadcasters.c. Do not consider, plan or layout any new legislation until the inquiry has fully and finally reported.d. Do not increase privacy laws, which will damage democracy by allowing the creeps, who tell us what not to do getting away with doing it them selves.e. Split up the BBC and immediately remove the license fee.
f. Give every license fee payer an equal share of the money raised after selling off every single bit of the BBC. g. Re-enforce the requirement on all press and broadcasters to ensure balance at all times regardless of subject etc.
Will it happen?
Of course not.
Well at least not soon.
But maybe.
Just maybe sooner than the politicians etc. expect?
Let’s hope.
Labels:
BBC,
British media,
Rupert Murdoch
Tuesday, 14 December 2010
The Scottish Stalemate - Part 2
The Plan
As R Burns Esq., observed, “The best laid plans of mice and men gang aft aglee,” or words to that effect. Now I don’t know the quality of his insight into the world of rodents, but he was spot on for our specie.
For our purpose even the creation of a plan would invite attention and the construction of a counter plan to debunk and destroy our plan's objectives. Plans need organisations, organisations can be identified, infiltrated and the individuals intimidated. Remember the strength and quantity of our adversary. Against such odds, any attempt to sketch out a critical path to independence is expecting a miracle from a molecule.
So our plan is: there is no plan. No organisation, no flying pickets or goon squads. No particular blog site, no coded reference to affiliation and no hierarchies. We don’t need them, so why break our spirit and possibly body by trying to create anything that our adversary can so easily detect and destroy. To paraphrase the joke about Mel Gibson’s Braveheart – They can take our lives, but they cannot take us seriously. That’s a truism, especially where the establishment is involved. And we have to nourish that belief while we, the molecules, go quietly about the business of everyday life while building the miracle.
The aphorism of a molecule building a miracle carries more weight than simply wishful thinking. Scientists studying human behaviour and the neurological origins of individuality have mapped out this molecule to miracle route (they don’t call them molecules or miracles, but think of it in terms of evolution, you as both molecule and miracle – then as molecule to the tribe (or nation) and that as the miracle and the name you give the building blocks is unimportant.) They even tested this using Game Theory models which, without testing my understanding beyond its limits and sending you to sleep in the process, eventually indicated that the best result for the survival of any specie was by cooperation.
I’ve wandered off on this tangent to illustrate the tribe of Scotland as part of that specie which is presently not being offered the chance to cooperate but is, in fact, being cheated. I’ll labour the point further, by pointing out that it’s the establishment who finance the research into these esoteric investigations and who use and incorporate the results for their own benefit to manufacture consent under the guise of cooperation.
So we have no plan; but that doesn’t mean we don’t form an understanding of theirs, analyse their intentions and adopt the tactics to thwart them. (Another Game Theory –Tit for Tat)
We know their plan; it is to remain in control whatever the cost. This is especially relevant in the western world of today when the purpose of democracy is used as a euphemism for the controlled meeting the costs and by so doing making them more impoverished, confused and dependent in the process.
OK! Enough of the dismal stuff, lets get down to the abysmally dismal stuff; the situation Scotland has to overcome to gain its independence.
The first thing we have to recognise is shouting independence from the rooftops isn’t enough. Independence is above politics, it’s even above nationalism. It is fundamental to the survival of the specie and, in the parochial sense, the tribe called Scots.
In 2007 the election of the SNP to government, even as a minority, shook Westminster to its establishment core. This was exactly what the electoral system was designed to prevent and the purpose behind the devolution charade. What did it matter as long as the Westminster parties were in control of the “wee pretendy parliament” their wee pretendy politicians would bow the knee to the dictates of Westminster.
Since taking power the SNP have acted responsibly and, in general, administered well; within the restrictions that responsibility has forced on them. Despite this they haven’t gathered the support their efforts should have earned. Why is that?
Well, in my humble opinion, it is because they haven’t used the time - or if they have they haven’t made it public – to fill in a constructive analysis of what independence will actually mean.
Such as, what form will democracy take in an independent Scotland? What will the sovereignty of the people mean and how fundamental will its incorporation be in its parliamentary procedures? Will we have a written constitution? How will parliament be held accountable to the people? Why do we need to be in the EU? Why royalty as opposed to republic?
These are questions specifically within the brief of politics, especially the people’s sovereignty and constitution, which should have been drafted by now and made public.
Now, we’ll accept as a given this would be mocked and derided by the establishment and its lackeys, but under their guffaw’s and smug superiority, their parliamentary arses would be girded in winding cloots. It’s a risk that has to be taken, to underline the fact we have the confidence, intelligence and ability as a Nation to throw off the snares of dependency and the sneers of subsidiarity. The lack of this has a negative effect; supporters of independence can’t refer or draw attention to something which doesn’t exist, which means independence remains an abstract notion devoid of substance. A politicians promise; and we all know the high regard they are held in, means nothing whether it’s uttered from SNP or Unionist lips.
Carry on in this way and the SNP will win the skirmish, declare a draw in the battle and lose the war.
What other hurdles have to be overcome. An evolutionary fear of the unknown ( as above) and an inherited 300 year old tradition based on manufactured dependency.
Let’s start with the underclass: Welfare recipients, scroungers, the disenfranchised and disillusioned. The de-motivated, the very young, the old on state pensions, the infirm – lets shorten the list of shame by stating those whose life is restricted to the realm of existence – why would they be interested in the notion of independence?
What is their main worry? Quite simply that their capacity to survive be further tested by their benefits being cut. Offers of a better tomorrow don’t cut through the ice of existence unless they’re assured its not going to get worse than it is now. What do we know that can be used to nudge them (and it has to have integrity) towards independence?
Now let’s move on to the amorphous mass called the middle-class; they see themselves as the bedrock of society. They pay their taxes, make sure their children go to school, act responsibly and pragmatically on the treadmill of life. They have ambitions and practice them in the hierarchies of their workplace. Regard a dis-ease called stress as an indicator of how high they’ve reached and how hard they work; and commit themselves to 30 year debts and a lifestyle that’s matched to what can be serviced from earnings.
Now this group is so large, let’s say £15k to £150k, we need to break it down a little to get to any sensible analysis.
So we’ll split them at the £40k level. Below £40 k it’s easy, their priority is not so different from the underclass – they want to keep their jobs and another £5k per year would be nice. In ambition and aspiration they are of course different. But mega-richness to them is generally limited to winning the lottery.
Again, and these must be the substantial mass, what tools have we been given that would offset the risks? They, of all the classes, probably know what the Union does and are probably not too happy about it, but they’re also very aware that the Union is and where they are in relation to it.
If we move on now to the £40k + to the £100k bracket; they’re similar to the lower bracket in as much as their income services their outgoings. But their expenditure will include paying for their children education along with collecting the furniture and styles that will advertise the rung they’re on in society. They pay lip service to morality in society but have generally nodded to a few dogs on their struggle to reach the top. What clever ploy can we employ to convince them their cleverness will allow them to exploit and profit from independence?
The £100k+ and above are the gatekeepers of our final class The Alpha’s. They’re not rich enough to destroy or even distort communities but they’re well into the comfort zone provided they remain fit enough to keep the Alpha’s gates clear of rif-raff and maintain the ability to keep the graph of cash flow rising.
How do we target them? Do we even want to target them? Do we need to target them? Can a balance sheet be produced that would see the Saltire flying over their crow stepped gables? Is it sensible to even try?
Having reached this stage of the quandary and having given a very generalised analysis of the hurdles that have to be leaped I would like to refer back to the article from which the title Scottish Stalemate was plagiarised; wherein the author, a professional commentator – as was the person the article was aimed at – claimed that both were “iconoclastic individuals” within the arena of tribal politics. Without getting into semantics I’m very doubtful of there being any cherished beliefs left in the world of politics that can reach the status of being worthwhile let alone cherished.
Cherished beliefs to me run along the line of freedom within the paradigm accepted as the common good. Professionalism to be earned by committed excellence, or at least capability, rather than elitism. For the odds of birth to be mitigated by genuine opportunities in life. For governance to be open and accountable and sackable when it’s not. (Particularly pertinent today with the Wikileaks exposures).
Ah well! All power corrupts, says the sceptic. Only if you have less than absolute and are found out says the cynic. Bullshit, it’s only what it costs you that matters, says the oligarch; meanwhile the politicians scramble for the appropriate mask.
Add to the wish list as you will, it has no claim to being comprehensive. But for me, the only cherished beliefs in politics today are held by those who practice it. And that is too small a minority for too selfish motives to claim the comprehensiveness of being cherished.
One final comment on Part 2:
All of the questions posed should have been flagged by the politicians; especially by the SNP. Why are they leaving their supporters to beat a skinless drum?
In Part 3. We’ll title it The Swell of the Peoples Sovereignty. Part 3 will be published tomorrow morning.
In it I’ll do what I’ve advocated others should do, and expose my ideas, and the reasoning behind them, on how we can all help to achieve a worthwhile independence.
Labels:
British media,
Scottish independence,
SNP,
Unionist parties
Monday, 13 December 2010
The Scottish Stalemate- Part 1
Identifying the adversary.
In this blog I am going to nail my colours to a mast. It is not a major mast in the ship of national affairs nor is it on a significant ship in the fleet of world affairs but it is the mast that I believe can carry the sail to harness the wind that will lead a small suppressed nation to freedom.
Because it has to be my colours that are nailed I have to ease out from under the use of the pseudonym; my name is John Souter - that will nothing to the vast majority but, hopefully, a little to the few – and the cause I support, is the independence of Scotland and its people.
It is not my intention in this article to plead the case for independence or try to garner converts, or sympathisers, to the cause – hopefully I’ll be preaching to the converted and adding my tuppence to the problems the cause has to face, rationally evaluate and the strategies and tactics it has in its armoury to achieve the objective.
The major fact to acknowledge is, we are up against a formidable foe. There is no equality of arms unless you regard sling-shots equal to Tridents. They have had 300 years to define, refine and re-define their strategies in order to create a belief of dependency while nurturing their self serving notion of supremacy and practicing their version of democracy; a version which relies heavily on the distortions of statistics.
Who can argue with the arithmetic; the population of Scotland is around 8.6% of England’s - we’re already a minority; in poll speak we would be classed as “Others.” Whittle it down to the 35% of Scots who, it’s claimed, support independence and minority becomes fringe. A fringe of ignorable quantity, scornful quality and laughable abilities. Summation: no threat. Action: appear to ignore while administering subtle sanctions and disciplines.
But the hypocrisy of the “theys” is, they are the lesser fringe in numbers, even if you include the mercenaries they employ in the media to manufacture their propaganda and the institutions they have created to administrate their policies. Problem is, while they’re less in number, they’re greater in influence.
Perhaps I should define who these “theys” are. They are the Establishment; the power behind the edifices of government, that can skew the democratic process into meaningless rhetoric to camouflage their tyranny. Xenophobia has no place in this argument, though it’s used as a tool (especially power xenophobia) by those who actually practice it while claiming despair at those who truly find it abhorrent. This is not about Scots V English; the people of England are as badly served as the Scots, the Welsh and Northern Irish. Is it possible that this is at the root of their opposition; the fear of an independent and aspirational Scotland leading to a redefining of democracy in England? Is this not the big one; the sceptred’ plot, the gilded gauges of Londonland, their hallowed halls of financial shamanism could be lost, and their modern equivalent of primogeniture shattered?
These are high stakes. Stakes that demand a massive investment of time and resources to cover and, while we should be watchful of the strategies employed to protect them, they are ultimately irrelevant to the goal we’re aiming for. 20th century history presents us with this conclusion, the independence of Ireland, India and a third of the African Continent, amongst others has proved they’ve never won a war on the democratic front.
Time moves on bringing changes and new conditions and threats with it, but in the main these are peripheral to the tenet of democracy; so our efforts must be aimed at creating the strategies that, while they frustrate our adversary, convince and motivate our population.
‘Marvellous,’ you exclaim, ‘Now, why don’t you tell us something we don’t know?’
A fair enough criticism, but if you glance through the blogs you get masses of; it isn’t fair, the English Broadcasting Corp, the Media bias, the Weegie labour clones, the Westmidden cabal, which goes on and on until it morphs into the, “What can we do – What can we do!- wail of despair.
Well I reckon there’s plenty we can do and the first thing we need to do is define and analyse the problems we have to overcome, then identify and adopt the strategies and tactics that will maximise the arms we have in our limited armoury and the effective use of them.
OK, so now we have the outline of an analysis based on one mans opinion. Now we have to identify and weigh up our strengths and weaknesses and discover the arsenal we have at our disposal.
We’ll call it: The Plan, and cover it in part 2 which will be published tomorrow morning with part 3 on Wednesday morning.
Labels:
British media,
Scottish independence
Friday, 15 May 2009
Media Spooks?
Recently one of my commenters mentioned one of the notorious spies Burgess or Philby worked for the BBC and this motivated me to dig a little deeper into the depths of our media. I discovered Philby may have had very close connects with the BBC which, in those days was respected world-wide.I'm so fortunate one of my favourite bloggers Aangirfan has been doing much more research in this matter and I think his post deserves a mention apart from my weekly SSS blogs.
As a wee taster here's a quote from the respected academic Professor Richard Keeble :
'Let’s not forget no British newspaper has followed the example of the NYT and apologised for being so easily duped by the intelligence services in the run up to the illegal invasion of Iraq.'
Years ago when I first heard about the New World Order (or as it is called these days the New Global Order) and thought what nonsense. It doesn't seem so silly now. In fact it doesn't seem silly at all.
Labels:
British media,
M16,
New World Order
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




