[frustration part 1] the common man

I'm a common man. Whether or not Guthrum the Old considers himself as such, and I think he does, he was moved to post this:

I want my political leaders to be statesmen/women, to have substance, gravitas and a commitment to Liberty, Democracy and an end to ingrained privilege. Not to rely on the smoke and mirrors of stunt and spin, for the sake of power itself.

Men and women with vision are thin on the ground at present.

A new alignment is needed. It has taken since 1934 for the SNP to catch the mood of Scotland, I cannot afford seventy three years for a change in the rot that is Westminster.

A Bill of Rights Now, A written Constitution Now and an English Parliament Now.

One can feel the frustration behind this outburst of a moderate man exasperated and yet, even in this will be disagreement amongst us about the SNP, the Bill of Rights and so on.

The essential and dismaying problem is that this quite legitimate cry for substance and gravitas does not take into account realpolitik. Blair, Brown and Cameron are in the driving seat and none impress. There's good reason.

For a long time, Britain's leaders have been groomed by interests within Europe and not just in Britain:

Former U.S. president Bill Clinton spoke at a Bilderberg conference a year before his election victory, as did British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Former prime ministers Paul Martin, Jean Chretien and Pierre Trudeau also made Bilderberg appearances.

The current chairman, Belgian politician and businessman Etienne Davignon, says the steering committee that organizes the annual get-togethers is excellent at spotting talent.

Is it any wonder Blair is so Europhile, given those who groomed these Scots to run Britain:

"Brown is not passionate about Europe, but because of it, he will be able to get further in Brussels than someone so outwardly messianic about it like Blair," said Hugo Brady of the Centre for European Reform

Like people in key positions in education where if you're not a PC leftist you don't get in, Canada's, the U.S.'s and Britain's education has gone down the gurgler and with it, society:

...the catastrophe that has been visited upon children by moral relativism at home, and multiculturalism in the schools. Two books published just recently, were written by former '60s radicals, pushed right by the terrible plight of kids, and (spare me the invective from the union hate mail tree) by the sheer backwards idiocy that informs the teachers' unions. The Epidemic: the Rot of American Culture, Absentee and Permissive Parenting, and the Resultant Plague of Joyless, Selfish Children did not hail from some right-wing think-tank; it is written by Robert Shaw, a psychiatrist who practices in Berkeley, Calif...

And so on - good article, by the way. And in the same way, if you're not of a certain ilk re Europe, you don't get the top job either. Cameron is Euro-sceptic. Oh really?

His change of position, confirmed by a spokesman for William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, has infuriated Tory Right-wingers who voted for Mr Cameron to lead the party because of his strong Eurosceptic campaign.

The truth is that no leader who looks likely to get near the reins of power is going to cross certain elements in Europe, whatever froth and bubble they are currently uttering. Only the weak and malleable get in. They're rubber men [and women].

It has always been so, this malaise, before the strong man cometh. Buchanan and the era of the weak, compromising president pre-Lincoln, The Weimar Republic, Chirac and the malaise of France and currently Britain - it's no accident. It's the game plan of very nasty people in the corridors of power.

The people clamour, like Guthrum the Old, for a return to "decency". There is no decency here. Cameron has no answer - he is more of the same. So who's being groomed in the wings? The post neoclassical endogenous growth theoretical Ed Balls? David Milliband? Some sort of Obama Barak? I'd love to see the Bilderbergers' last guest list.

But why? For what to do this to society?" 1984 gives part of the answer and Ephesians 6:12 gives the rest.

[anatole kaletsky] keep your eye on balls and osborne too

Another interesting snippet from UK Daily Pundit:

Future Chancellor Ed Balls and future Prime Minister, George Osborne, must have behaved themselves at last year's Bilderberg conference - they've been invited back.

UKDP links to the full list, under the title: Welcome to the Lunatic Fringe.

Despite the accurate description - it is indeed madness to pursue an agenda of the financing of wars and the reduction of the population in holocaust proportions and why you'd wish to enslave mankind is beyond me if we can't even get our own lives in order - it seems to me to be a little different.

The Bilderbergers are not the only group - the CFR and Trilateral spring to mind but one can add Club of London, Club of Paris and International Adjustments - and if you're a young, say, Ed Balls and have your eye on the prize, the talent spotters will contact you.

It seems not unlike the things we do as bloggers. To further ourselves, we do Facebook, MyBlogLog, RSS feeds, bloglines and all the little tricks to get the traffic moving.

It's also a series of clubs. As GK Chesterton put it:

You did not have to be anyone in order to be one of the Twelve Fishers; unless you were already a certain sort of person, you never even heard of them. It's president was Mr. Audley. It's vice-president was the Duke of Chester.

There was a brief time when I was a young man of promise [later to be a young man of promises, as Churchill put it]. One didn't belong to one group - one hoped to belong to all.

There's a certain kind of man [and woman] for whom exclusivity is an end in itself. This is what these people play on - the carrot is the clubby hush-power and the cut and thrust of repartee with the highest and the best.

The stick is the constant reminder of the great unwashed and where you'd end up should you not play ball. Cleese's skit about the Architects is right on the money.

Mr. Kaletsky and Mr Balls are playing ball. Mr. Osborne appears to be doing so as well.

[islamic agenda] in the steps of the prophet, peace be upon him

How would Mr. Ahmad explain this?

Never, I feel, has a post's conclusions been so inevitable. This is my last, for the moment, on the issue.

To be fair to Iftikhar Ahmad, of the London School of Islamics, from the Islamic point of view, it's more than reasonable that he defends his own community and their needs. He's hardly going to under-represent them and thus he's not doing any particular evil himself. If my job were to defend and promote British interests in Cairo, then it would be dereliction not to do that to the best of my ability and thus I'd need to find good arguments to support what I was doing.

The problem is that my little poll [with the limited sample size], the blog comments and the wider debate in the community does not support Mr. Ahmad's conclusions in the least and anomalies were pointed out in his claims by readers. He stated:

The Muslim schools follow National Curriculum along with Islamic studies and Islamic History based on The Holly Quran and Sunnah. There is no place for Comparative Religion and European Languages.

as against:

My suggestion is that in all state, independent and Christian based school special attention should be given to the teaching of Comparative Religion and Islam should be taught by qualified Muslim Teachers.

... and:

Muslim schools are working to try to create a bridge between communities.

as against:

There is no place for Comparative Religion and European Languages.

I don't know any indigenous Brit or American who swallows that line from the Muslims and the commenter added: "ROFL". As for:

State schools with monolingual teachers are not capable to teach English to bilingual Muslim children

... a commenter says:

Why do you expect english speaking indigenes to fund the teaching of other languages, when you already admit English will be the medium of instruction because it is an economic and social language for communication in the global village.

And by implication therefore, the languages you wish indigenes to pay for will never be of any practical use in a modern world, or, what did you call it..., oh yes, ...a world that has become a global village.

Surely you must realise that incompatible languages CREATE incompatible communities unable to communicate.

... and Mad Piper says:

If Iftikhar Ahmad is an example of a qualified Mohammedan teacher the students are in an even worse situation. His atrocious spelling, grammar, and logic make even my public schools look brilliant.

It's not the purpose of this post to bash Mr. Ahmad who had the decency to come in and put the Muslim point of view but even he must see the hostility from the indigenous population at the hidden agenda he represents and the lack of logic in the arguments for it being benign in terms of the indigenous culture.

Ubermouth was more forthright about this:

With all due respect, this is the typical Islamic propoganda one would expect in rationalizing YOUR culture ISOLATING your children to prevent western assimilation, and you know it.

Young Muslim children influenced by the western culture do not want to follow your culture and this is indicated by the many young girls who run away [not due to inadequate western schools] but to evade enforced,arranged Muslim teenage marriages.

You do NOT accept non Muslims to even teach in your schools so as to not 'tempt' and 'taint' your children with any western influences because the agenda is, as you admit, inflicting the laws and religion of Islam onto the whole unsuspecting planet.

How do YOU justify claiming your people are entitled to a Muslim education[state paid,no less] and cultural,religious identity protection[recognizing the value in all what that entails] when the Islam long term agenda is to deny us ours, GLOBALLY?

Dearieme added an anecdote:

A young acquaintance of mine chose an Islam option in his final year at Oxford. His tutor started by explaining that the Koran is the inerrant word of God and was not to be criticised. My young chum realised that "education" was not the mot juste for such tutorials.

Xlbrl concluded, quite rightly:

The Muslim bridge is not a device to connect two cultures, it is a device to invade it. What is more pathetic, were they to succeed, they would discover they had not even stolen a wealthy land, but only established their pauperized civilization in a different climate. Wealth is not a function of geography. And science has no place in Islam.

Winfred Mann comments on one of the Muslim claims:

“It will help them to develop Islamic Identity crucial for mental, emotional and personality development.”

Why do they need an Islamic Identity to live in Western Culture, which obviously allows for greater freedom?

Tiberius Gracchus, who usually takes a contrary position to whatever is stated in a post, at least conceded:

I think the comments from Mr Ahmad are pretty self refuting- I'm not sure I need to comment on those.

He does say, in defence of Muslim culture in general, which was not the point of the post, incidentally:

You should not caricature all Muslims as having the same view no more than anyone should caricature all Christians as David Duke. As to Muslims- I think we owe them rather a lot from mathematics and the preservation of Greek philosophy, to architecture and art.

If I could come in here and say that my greatest fear is that the agenda of the Muslim leadership who must feel all their birthdays have come at once, the way the Labour government has welcomed their separate community with open arms, this agenda is placing at risk the lives and wellbeing of the ordinary Muslim, e.g. the Pakistani shopkeepers who want no part of the politics and degradation they've escaped from and whose younger generation knows nothing and wants nothing of the oppressive Sharia Law. They need the protection of the government from:

1. the malcontents in the mosques;

2. the backlash of which even the educated commenters on this blog are a part. If these commenters feel this way, then how will all the ASBOs out there feel? How do the thugs on the streets feel?

I don't blame the Muslim leadership themselves - they are the enemy, after all and they're only being loyal to their agenda.

Fine.

I blame this treasonous government, so untouched by any feeling of loyalty to its own country that it would allow an EU monster to both subsume the very identity of the nation but also allow minority groups of proven socially aggressive and savage habits, as shown in this post, to dictate to it, the government ... which is, after all, only the servant of us, the people. The Muslim leadership dictate to the government who then dictate to us what should and shouldn't be in this country.

To hell with you both, I say and I use the word hell advisedly because that is the final resting place for this pernicious scheme for world domination and the Westminster Fifth Column which facilitates this. People who cry G-d is Great while murdering innocents are certainly not going to Heaven anyway, especially one with 72 virgins waiting and we all know where the Westminster pollies are going to end up.

Even enlightened Muslims can see what's going on. Nonie Darwish wrote in the Sunday Telegraph some time back [sorry there's no link]:

Is it any surprise that after decades of indoctrination in a culture of hate, people actually do hate? Arab society has created a system of relying on fear of a common enemy. It's a system that has brought them much-needed unity, cohesion and compliance in a region ravaged by tribal feuds, instability, violence, and selfish corruption.

So Arab leaders blame Jews and Christians rather than provide good schools, roads, hospitals, housing, jobs, or hope to their people.

For 30 years I lived inside this war zone of oppressive dictatorships and police states. Citizens competed to appease and glorify their dictators, but they looked the other way when Muslims tortured and terrorised other Muslims. I witnessed honour killings of girls, oppression of women, female genital mutilation, polygamy and its devastating effect on family relations.

All of this is destroying the Muslim faith from within. It's time for Arabs and Muslims to stand up for their families. We must stop allowing our leaders to use the West and Israel as an excuse to distract from their own failed leadership and their citizens' lack of freedoms. I

t's time to stop allowing Arab leaders to complain about cartoons while turning a blind eye to people who defame Islam by holding Korans in one hand while murdering innocent people with the other.

Muslims need jobs - not jihad.

To say that Islam is not Arabic in its very nature is to never have been at a Muslim prayer session. I have been and I'm not about to explain how. Arabic was the language used though the indigenous language was different. Therefore, all this talk of assimilation and crossing bridges is so much hogwash.

And exposing the scam is not hatred in the least but just as stated - exposure.

This country needs to protect the Muslim and any other citizen equally, as Mr. Ahmad intimated but to do that, the Muslim leadership needs to be identified and sent packing from this country or if that's not possible, it needs to be incarcerated because whether it falls within the race hatred category or it's said ever so nicely, the agenda is as clear as day and that agenda is both anathema and inimicable to western society.

Stephen Pollard, in the Sunday Telegraph, on February 19th, 2006, wrote:

The Sunday Telegraph's poll today, which shows that 40% of British Muslims want Sharia law to replace common law and statutes in parts of the country, is bad enough. But for the full impact, it should be read with the paper's interview with one of the leading experts on the subject, Patrick Sookhdeo.

Sookhdeo said:

“It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent.” “...

Look at what happened in the 1990s. The security services knew about Abu Hamza and the preachers like him. They knew that London was becoming the centre for Islamic terrorists. The police knew. The Government knew. Yet nothing was done. The whole approach towards Muslim militants was based on appeasement. 7/7 proved that that approach does not work - yet it is still being followed.

For example, there is a book, The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is openly available in Muslim bookshops. It calls for the killing of Jews and Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for warfare against them.

The Government has done nothing whatever to interfere with the sale of that book. Why not? Government ministers have promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book, which blatantly does both.”

It's more precisely zeroed in on in his next comment:

“...The trouble is that Tony Blair and other ministers see Islam through the prism of their own secular outlook. They simply do not realise how seriously Muslims take their religion. Islamic clerics regard themselves as locked in mortal combat with secularism.

He misses a certain point here and makes the same fundamental mistake most people do - Blair and Brown were and are tools for another power. Cameron has not shown himself to be any different. He's not a Bilderberger but Osborne sure was. Westminster is riddled with them.

When a journalist noted, to Etienne Davignon, "all the recent presidents of the European Commission attended Bilderberg meetings before they were appointed." Davignon's response [was that] he and his colleagues were "excellent talent spotters."

Blair and Brown were not so much groomed but were seen as unprincipled, lying, weak-willed people, given to vague blandishments and who would adopt and advance the globalist stance without objection, this stance requiring the breakdown of societies and of patriotism to a national identity.

Thus Blair and Brown were perfect Westminster material.

Therefore they are/were to be promoted, aided and abetted.

These are the men who have allowed the Muslim leadership unfettered right to dictate to this nation what will be and what will not be. So when the backlash comes, rather than beat down doors and slaughter Muslim families who go about their business just as the Jews were trying to do before Kristallnacht, better to target the real villains - the traitorous Them, the mob at Westminster and the Muslim leadership in the Mosques.

The Mosques should never be vandalized and if that is done, then we're no better than those we attack. No, it is the malcontented plot hatchers inside those mosques, whose bemused smiles at the acquiescence of the lily-livered Labour government has enabled their agenda to accelerate beyond their wildest dreams - they are the ones to be rounded up and put on trial. Not with Sharia Law justice or justice the way it currently stands in these devalued times but through the old concept of British justice in a new form which actually represents justice in most people's minds, universal, particular to our nation and one which our people would accept as just.

At that trial, the MCB will be asked to comment on this, for example:

In 1980, the Islamic Council of Europe laid out their strategy for the future - and the fundamental rule was never dilute your presence. That is to say, do not integrate.

No, we're not doing it, we're really not

Iftekhar A. Hai, director of interfaith relations for United Muslims of America Interfaith Alliance, defended Islamic intrusion into the west thus:

“It is true that Mohammed used the concept of just wars as a last resort to establishing peace among the various tribes of Arabia. But the concept of just war (jihad) was backed up with love, compassion, mercy, forgiveness and reconciliation. Citing examples from the Koran to say that Mohammed was either more or less violent than other Biblical figures is meaningless and anachronistic. We live today by the standards of a modern civilized world; it is not fair to judge Mohammed, who lived 1420 years ago, by today's standards.”

Meaningless and anachronistic? Judge for yourself. Read through that and see how anachronistic it is.

Muslims point to Surah 2:190-193 as proof that Islam teaches only defensive warfare but eschews offense. These verses admonish Muslims only to fight against those who oppress or persecute them and only until the offenders have stopped oppressing them.

However, the Qur'an also teaches Muslims to enter into exile in lands where Islam is not the dominant force, to pursue the adoption of Islam and to view any indigenous reaction to that as oppression and persecution against Islam, thereby requiring Jihad against these infidels:

"Those who believed, and adopted exile, and fought for the Faith, with their property and their persons, in the cause of Allah, as well as those who gave them asylum and aid- these are all friends and protectors, one of another.

As to those who believed but came not into exile, ye owe no duty of protection to them until they come into exile; but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom ye have a treaty of mutual alliance.

And remember Allah seeth all that ye do. The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless ye do this, protect each other, there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief." (Surah 8:72-73)

In this passage, “adopted exile” is translated from the root form hjr, which has, as its primary meaning, the ideas of containment or confinement, and can carry the connotation of being quarantined or compartmentalised. The idea garnered from this verse seems to be as follows:

Adopt exile in a foreign land, voluntarily confining yourself in a non-Muslim society. Eschew assimilation into the culture and way of life of the host country, and instead agitate for Islam. When opposition arises, join together and give aid and fight for Allah against the unbelievers, since unrighteous persecution has now arisen! Thus, defense changes to offense.

The Islamic philosopher and historian, Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406 AD), stated:

“In the Muslim community, the Holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, caliphate and royal authority are united in (Islam), so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same.”

The standard defence is that these verses are now outdated and that Ibn Khaldun was a bit of a strange person. Therefore, the west has nothing to fear. Oh really? Where shall I start? Let's try this:

Al-Buti, a modern Muslim scholar, explains:

“The verse (9:5) does not leave any room in the mind to conjecture about what is called defensive war. This verse asserts that Holy War, which is demanded in Islamic law, is not defensive war (as the Western students of Islam understand it) because it could legitimately be an offensive war. That is the apex and most honorable of all Holy wars.”

Horse's mouth. Al Buti again:

“This is the concept which professional experts of thought attempt to conceal from the eyes of Muslims by claiming that anything that is related to a Holy war in Islamic law is only based on defensive warfare to repel an attack ...

It is no secret that the reason behind this deception is the great fear which dominates foreign countries (East and West alike) that the idea of Holy War for the cause of God would be revived in the hearts of Muslims, then certainly, the collapse of European culture will be accomplished.

The mindset of the European man has matured to embrace Islam as soon as he hears an honest message presented. How much more will it be accepted if this message is followed by a Holy War?”

Al-Amin likewise points to the Qur’an for the justification of offensive holy war:

"God had made it clear to us that (we should) call for acceptance of Islam first, then wage war. It is not admissible to wage war before extending the invitation to embrace Islam first, as the Qur’an says.

‘We verily sent our messenger with clear proofs and revealed to them the scripture and the balance, that mankind may observe right measure, and he revealed iron, wherein is mighty power and uses for mankind and that Allah (God) may know him who helps Him and his messengers—Allah is strong, Almighty"’ (Surah Iron 57:25).”

Need I go on for the full 72 pages of research?

There is a clear clash of cultures here, a clash of civilizations in which a solution cannot be found. Those in our own community who preach tolerance of all things, no matter how bad they are, have glossed over this issue, nay, have misunderstood it and have been taken in by the softly-softly approach of the Islamic vanguard in western nations which even now is revealing itself in its open demands on the government.

Finally

There is no one enemy. It is Them, it is the Muslim leadership, it is our own ASBOs and the new youth sub-culture, which in the 60s was for peace, man, turn on, tune in, drop out but now is considerably nastier but that is another post.

Anyone ever read any William Burroughs? Try The Wild Boys.

The enemy is coming from different directions. This post is about one particular section of the inimicable forces arrayed against us. To wind up, Douglas Adams was quite apt when describing the planet of Krikkit and I think it is not irrelevant in the context of this discussion:

The people of Krikkit believed in "peace, justice, morality, culture, sport, family life and the obliteration of all other life forms."

Jihad is love? Possibly but love for whom? For our nation and our way of life?

Monday [8 to 13]

(0512) Morning all. (0900)

13.  Good thing we’re up to 13

…because the nightmare has descended again … power is going off in 30 minutes for maybe 2 or 3 hours. Whole thing’s dislocating but it has to be done as some circuits are apparently cream-crackered.

I’ll blog when I can, readers.

12.  Interesting, eh?

The prophet Micah (5:2), wrote around 700 B.C. 

Micah 5:

[2] But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

At about the same time, Isaiah (7:14) said that the Christ would be born of a virgin. 

Isaiah 7:

[14] Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

A prophecy from 1012 BC specified that the Messiah's hands and feet would be pierced, 800 years before the Romans instituted crucifixion as a form of capital punishment. (Zechariah 12:10).

Zecharia 10:

[10] And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

11.  Biden’s handlers selling off border walls

https://nypost.com/2023/08/19/biden-sells-border-wall-parts-to-thwart-gop-push-to-use-them/

The Biden administration is quietly auctioning off millions of dollars’ worth of unused parts from former President Trump’s border wall for peanuts – in an apparent end-run around pending legislation in Congress.

Since April, GovPlanet, an online auction house specializing in military surplus, has sold 81 lots of steel “square structural tubes” — intended for use as vertical bollards in the border barrier’s 30-foot-tall panels — hauling in about $2 million.

On Tuesday, GovPlanet netted $154,200 for 729 of the 28-foot-tall hollow beams, sold in five separate lots for an average $212 apiece. 

Thirteen more lots are set to be auctioned on Aug. 23 and Aug. 30. 

But just last month, as part of its annual defense appropriations package, the Democrat-led Senate passed a Republican-sponsored bill aimed at forcing Biden to stem the worsening migrant crisis at the US-Mexico border by extending the wall.

10.  Over at NOWP

a.  Evets:

https://nourishingobscurity.wordpress.com/2023/08/20/reader-drops-427/comment-page-1/#comment-6741

b.  DAD:

https://nourishingobscurity.wordpress.com/2023/08/20/reader-drops-427/comment-page-1/#comment-6740

9.  MftWC too

a.  Military situation in southern Ukraine on August 20, 2023 (Map Update)

https://southfront.press/military-situation-in-southern-ukraine-on-august-20-2023-map-update/

b.  Elensky; Dutch F16s, Gripen fighter jets. EU sanction Poland. Borrell, Russia dwarf gas station. U/1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfeiZA5QAX0

c.  Ukrainian stormtroopers captured prisoners during attacks on Klescheevka, Artemovsk region

https://southfront.press/ukrainian-stromtroopers-captured-prisoners-during-attacks-on-klescheevka-artemovsk-region/

d.  Piles of burned "Leopards" and other NATO equipment near Rabotino - Patrick Lancaster Uncensored

https://rumble.com/v39iwo2-piles-of-burned-leopards-and-other-nato-equipment-near-rabotino.html

e.  Another week of Ukraine's counteroffensive ends with failure (Videos)

https://southfront.press/another-week-of-ukraines-counteroffinsive-ends-with-failure-videos/

8.  It's not so much the story itself

... but looking at the person willing to say such things to comply with her paymasters:

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/08/20/u-k-population-collapse-good-for-the-planet-wef-adviser-prof-sarah-harper-explains/

They picked a right one there, didn't they? As I mentioned about fifteen years ago, Étienne Davignon, European Commission and Bilderberg, was asked how people such as Blair and Brown were invited ... he replied that his lot were very good talent spotters.

What did "talent" mean in his eyes?  

She obviously, in this case, feels quite secure from the common people ... WEF will save her.

Jubilee [8 to 10]

Approaching elevenses, not fast enough.

10.  Evets 2

Ukraine:

Media Lies Are Fuelling a Phony Ukraine Narrative

https://21stcenturywire.com/2022/06/01/media-lies-are-fueling-a-phony-ukraine-narrative/

“High Risk” Of Deaths Of UK Personnel and the Escalation of War in Europe - Inside Russia Report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZ0Qm9DjJ4

Missile Defense, Weapons in Space, The Danger to Humanity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryRpctTVMIw

Zelensky Spin-master Arestovich Threatens ‘More Tantrums’ if US Won’t Supply Rockets

Monday [1 to 5]

New week, bank holiday here.

5.  Ed Yong of Discover, Aug 16, 2010

Earlier this year, I described how the normally harmless nose bacterium Streptococcus pneumonia becomes infectious when it battles against another species called Haemophilius influenzae. This competitor summons white blood cells to do away with Streptococcus, which can defend itself by producing a thicker coat. But this armour also allows Streptococcus to evade our own immune system, resulting in pneumonia, meningitis and other diseases. As I wrote back then, “many human diseases really have nothing to do with us at all.”

Thoughts?

4.  Via Rossa's mother

[micro-control 7] uninvited, beyond authority and opaque

The greatest problems facing this post are where to start and how much to include of the sprawling mass of emerging material on Newthink and the NGOs.

The thrust of this post is to highlight aspects of both, especially concerning web control. which permeates policy determination. It's not highbrow – you can follow it quite easily.

I'll start with an interesting meeting held by the Scottish Arts Council.

The Scottish Arts Council (SAC) organised a quiet event for an audience of 'arts managers' in Glasgow on 14/4/99. Called "Facing the Future," this took the form of a lecture by Ian Christie, then director of think tank 'Demos'.

After an obviously unwanted debate (chaired by Mrs. Jack McConnell, Labour Party) in which the audience clearly did not accept what they were told, the final words from Seona Reid (then Director of the SAC) conveyed the impression that some form of transaction had taken place, that "SAC was working to ensure the arts were incorporated into the range of Government policies - but arts organisations and artists needed to play their part in making this a reality".

Christie made reference to “reality fabrication” which had also been the purpose of another Christie talk, "A New Agenda for the Arts" which was that there was no need to form an arts policy distinct from that dictated in London. If "autonomous Scotland" were to follow the government line Scotland would be the "envy and fascination" of the rest of the country.

Interconnection

This is a key aspect of the new policy thrust – the interconnection of groups and individuals within those groups. An example is Demos, a non-governmental think-tank, according to themselves.

Demos trustees brought together Sir Douglas Hague (former adviser to Margaret Thatcher), Jan Hall (Chief Executive of the advertising agency Gold Greenlees Trott), Martin Jacques (Co-founder of Demos, former editor of Marxism Today), Julia Middleton (Chief Executive of Common Purpose), The Royal Institute of International Affairs, The RAND Corporation, The International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Hudson Institute (founded by Herman Khan - model for Kubrick's Dr Strangelove), The Heritage Foundation, The Centre for Policy Studies, The Institute of Economic Affairs, The Aspen Institute, The Adam Smith Institute and so on...

The founder and Director of Demos was Geoff Mulgan.

A Cabinet Office news release of 1/9/00 announced the appointment of Mulgan as Director of the 'Performance and Innovation Unit' (PIU):

"The PIU's aim is to improve the capacity of Government to address strategic, cross-cutting issues and to promote innovation in the development and delivery of policy and in the delivery of the Government's objectives. The Unit reports direct to the Prime Minister through Sir Richard Wilson."

So Demos is non-governmental? Technically, yes.

"Mulgan has worked since 1997 as a Special Adviser to the Prime Minister on social policy issues...responsible for social exclusion, welfare to work, family, urban, voluntary sector and other issues...

Geoff Mulgan now chairs the Advisory Council alongside Martin Taylor, a steering group member of the Bilderberg group. Mulgan's views on policy possibilities:

We now live in a world in which fantasy and reality are hard if not impossible to distinguish. Information is the raw material of both fact and fantasy, and has been so industrialised that its origins are rarely visible. Now it can be manufactured, twisted, multiplied and disseminated almost without limit.

Assisted by the power of computing, it can be created as if from nothing: tailor made to cognitive needs, put together as pastiche or copy. It needs only minimal reference points. The links between it and an objective reality - the claim of positivism and enlightenment - are ever more tenuous. As a result for the receiver there are few grounds for judgement, apart from received authority or limited experience.

Simon, on 07 November 2007, noted this about another Demos member, Julia Middleton:

In her book Beyond Authority, Middleton argues for a leadership style that enables [Common Purpose graduates] to lead beyond the traditional boundaries and constraints of their organizations. This of course means beyond the constraints of democratic accountability, whether at local or national level.

As Peter Mandelson, former Communist and European Commissioner put it in March 1998: "It may be that the era of pure representative democracy is slowly coming to an end."

Demos and the officially unconnected other bodies emanating from the policy thrust have become very interested in Semantic Web:

For instance, text-analyzing techniques can now be easily bypassed by using other words, metaphors for instance, or by using images in place of words. An advanced implementation of the semantic web would make it much easier for governments to control the viewing and creation of online information, as this information would be much easier for an automated content-blocking machine to understand.

In addition, the issue has also been raised that, with the use of FOAF files and Geolocation meta-data, there would be very little anonymity associated with the authorship of articles on things such as a personal blog.

The web gurus have become involved in this as well:

But at present there is no easy way to take into account the policies that govern the use of information, some of which could be sensitive health data, said Nigel Shadbolt, professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Southampton and the incoming president of the British Computer Society.

One initiative to provide better data transfer has been John Poindexter's TIA [note the logo in the top left corner of this post and see if you notice anything interesting in the design and choice of colouring]:

Total Information Awareness - a prototype system -- is our answer. We must be able to detect, classify, identify, and track terrorists so that we may understand their plans and act to prevent them from being executed. To protect our rights, we must ensure that our systems track the terrorists, and those that mean us harm. h/t Ian P

John Poindexter was Vice President of Syntek Technologies, a government contractor. Syntek and Poindexter worked for years with DARPA to develop Genoa, a surveillance device that's a combination cutting-edge search engine, sophisticated information harvesting program", and a "peer-to-peer" file sharing system. Kind of a military-grade Google/Napster for use in instant analysis of electronic data.

The result: Facebook.

One of the rationales for Total Information Awareness is that unregulated data on the web is subject to "capture" and exploitation by unscrupulous groups:

Therefore better networking and better information transfer systems are required. For what purpose is “better information transfer' required? Back to the UK, here is one example of an application for the new technology. Home Office Minister Meg Hillier said:

"In order to... fully realise the benefits of combining registration of life events in England and Wales and the issuing of passports, it is sensible that the IPS and GRO should be part of the same organisation."

These "registration of life events" - Ian P explains that this relates in some measure to the Office of National Statistics' idea of "through life records", which were intended to take the basic and relatively uncontentious matter of birth, marriage and death registration and flesh it out into a continually updated life record.

And let's add to this:

Plans to add fingerprints to UK overseas passports are under way, despite the cost and complexity involved in gathering biometrics from UK citizens across the globe, a parliamentary answer revealed last week. Passports issued by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office are already "biometric", but only in the somewhat minimalist sense required by ICAO - the addition of fingerprints, however, would pull overseas UK residents into the National Identity Register net, closing off a prized but little-known escape route.

And:

Alongside these Byrne offered faster Criminal Records Bureau checks via ID cards, use of ID cards and/or the Identity & Passport Service's identity verification service for checking the employment status of foreign nationals, the prospect of ID cards being used for proof of age when shopping for alcohol, knives and solvents, the biometric visa programme, and ID-related projects with the Department of Work & Pensions and the Government Gateway to be unveiled next month.

Which are being promulgated at a time of continual data loss. A more recent example is the loss of Child Endowment records in the last two days.

Back to Total Information Awareness and the need to regulate the web – this is also evident in the setting up of the Media Standards Trust [you might be bemused by their own stated connection with George Orwell:

The MacArthur Foundation – famed for its ‘genius grants’ – has just awarded a grant of $350,000 to the Media Standards Trust and the Web Science Research Initiative to develop their plans for “authenticating news” on the web. In other words – unregulated political assertions by bloggers need to be authorized.

The plans are based on an idea originally conceived by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the world wide web, and since developed by the Media Standards Trust.

Now, about the major funder MacArthur:

John D. MacArthur (1897-1978) developed and owned Bankers Life and Casualty Company and other businesses, as well as considerable property in Florida and New York.

And:

The Fellowship has no application. People are nominated anonymously, by a body of nominators who submit recommendations to a small selection committee of about a dozen people, also anonymous. The committee then reviews every nominee and passes along their recommendations to the President and the board of directors. The entire process is anonymous and confidential. Most new MacArthur Fellows first learn that they have even been considered when they receive the congratulatory phone call.

More on the Web Science Research Initiative (WSRI) here. More on the MST:

"The Media Standards Trust, chaired by Sir David Bell (Chairman of the Financial Times), is a new, independent not-for-profit organisation working to foster high standards in news."

Sir David Bell is Common Purpose. As is Julia Middleton. CP comes out of the ODPM and is a Prescott initiative, that is from a “Minister' with no portfolio.

The attempt to control the web in Europe finds criticism from an, at first, seemingly unlikely source:

US ambassador David Gross remained equally unimpressed. "It seems to me to be a potentially historic shift in policy by the European Union to be a much more top-down, 'governments should control technical aspects of the Internet' approach," he told us. "Something that as you know is not the policy of the United States."

The EU has also been urging both data sharing within the union, i.e. inwards towards the commission:

For example, there are European Union directives that require that government information be made available in a general way for reuse.

Also concurrent is the EU directive that data cannot be concealed by member states from the Commission - in the interests of transparency, they maintain:

The house of Lords European Union Committee's 40th Report of Session 2005/6 had grave concerns over EU these data sharing activities and data protection:

Electronic inclusion is a new buzzword. The idea is that many people in the lower and less accessible groups in society should be encouraged to communicate electronically, thereby registering with the electronic database:


In line with governmental recommendations on service transformation, that unnecessary contact between public and government should be reduced, the less accessible are advised that they should use an ICT device instead:


To assist these unregistered plebs [who must, by definition be stupid], to understand what an ICT device is, it's explained in some detail that one such device is the telephone:


Another initiative is OCAM, which proposes keeping lists of journalists and other political commentators. This is called an "open commission" for accuracy in the media, which is pure doublespeak by this genre of people:

And so it goes on and on. Dizzy, whilst also tracking down the Media Monitoring group, sums up the overall situation in his comment on the government's breaching of their own data protection guidelines:

What's important to point out here is this is not about saying you think Gordon Brown and the Labour Government are secretly trying to enslave us all in an Orwellian nightmare with the ultimate aim of destroying democracy. No, this is about asking whether the proposal passes the Stalin Test. Would someone like Stalin have found a system like this useful?

Notes

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7

[constitutional reform] the eu quietly waits to pounce

The monstrous regiment of women - not looking so good today

When the demographics of power were so summarily destabilized in the form of the construct of Blair's babes, all he was doing was following the Euro-pattern already well underway, e.g. in Switzerland. Though the date is later, the process was begun long before that.

By doing so, it has come back to bite his deposer on the bum - the naked greed and opportunistic ambition of Blears/Flint is an eye-opener for those not closely watching these suddenly promoted people of a bygone era whose cause has now served its destabilizing purpose.

Everyone and his dog has his opinion on the ills of this country and its tottering government but you cannot view the British scene without taking into account the machinations of the EU Monster, a slavering, wasteful but greedy entity breathing down the indigenous people's necks.

The current call for 'constitutional reform' is music to the EU's ears because they already have the alternative in place - this is an old word of warning and this a more recent. Funding is the method for bending the agenda one's way. The nitty gritty of the regions is already a reality in the dismantling of England and implementation of the EU regions.

On his website, Peter Davidson who sat on the governing body of Unlock Democracy explained:

I would also endorse the proposal that the Committee of the Regions should be elevated in stature from the toothless body it currently represents to become the second legislative chamber of Europe.

When will the UK awake from its slumber, especially the political bloggers, including people like Iain Dale and realize that Westminster is not a chamber of power but the penultimate albeit temporary chamber for the appearance of democracy in the eyes of the populace?

When will the UK pundits start taking into account, in their blogposts, the things EU Serf used to warn of? Why do UK pundits insist on narrowly focusing on internal party politics to the exclusion of the big picture? Surely they're aware of Common Purpose and the infrastructure being in place and ready to go? Even DK, when quizzed about his silence on CP, said he was aware of it. Just that?

The promulgated year for this thing to happen was 2009. It's already started in America in a different form, where Obama has let the NAAC dictate to him on policy, Blair and Brown gave certain undertakings at Bilderberg conferences in 1991 and 1993 and then Blair lied about having even attended, Millipede and Balls are two others involved.

The short answer is that a Flint resigning is immediate and visible. The EU moves have all been by stealth and require a certain degree of ferreting to pin anything down to them. But it is there if you look.

The long and the short of it and it sticks out a mile is that this EU agenda is currently in mid-stream:

1. Nationalism and adherence to the Judaeo-Christian ethic are obstacles to progress. Education and the Church are easy to nobble but the others take time. The other thing necessary is a climate of change which the people will see as necessary. To do that, one needs a stool pigeon - Brown.

2. One of the major barriers to an EU state is England. Solution? Secure for yourself a tame legislature, executive and judiciary by grooming certain ambitious up-and-comers who are prepared to make a Faustian bargain with us in return for kudos and a bunk-up in the preselection battles.

3. Fill every part of British public life with agents of your own, people who believe in the concept of Beyond Authority or the extremely dangerous idea that the people can seize power themselves in some sort of ochlocracy, then add the authority and legitimacy of the ODPM to quieten their concerns about treason to their nation. This was the bolshevist lie - that the dictatorship of the proletariat meant that people would actually have a say.

4. Wait for the banking collapse which our brothers in New York are working hard on [we'll blame them for everything], count on our tame kitty's total criminal ineptitude in Britain and let the whole thing fester. Meanwhile, continue the surveillance society and the development of vast, insecure databases.

5. The Brit is a patient creature but one day he'll rebel and savage the ruling party at irrelevant council elections [remember the regional govenments ready to take over] and feel that in so doing, he has spoken and democracy is alive and well.

6. Allow the outrage to foment across the country as the nation collapses, with learned people and bloggers crying out for constitutional reform, allow our groomed man to arise and concede that all this could have been avoided - the debt, the ineptitude and so on - by passing Lisbon and letting us get on with the good work.

7. Hey presto, the CP grads are activated to take over in the crisis and we have our socialist panacea underway. Detractors are mopped up fairly quickly afterwards and the internet is now 'responsibly administered'.

8. Sugar-coat the real pill with massive fund injections into the regions, even more so than now, take care of the rubbish bins and all the things which grate on the British psyche, measurably improve the Brits' quality of life, especially with near-full employment, align our rhetoric with the way many Brits feel, e.g. to get the dole bludgers back to work and to educate our children with 'proper teachers', do good works for the next few years until the infra-structure is in place and then one day they wake up and find thy're in a totalitarian golden cage.

Watch and see how this constitutional reform debate proceeds and the way it is framed. Will anyone heed this warning? Well, as the august Sackerson wrote, in October, 2007:

I suppose there always have been networks of some kind, but you are hinting at something more clandestine. How and why were you approached? Is it anything to take very seriously, or are we getting lost in the wild forest of conspiracy theory?

So no - no one will heed this.

[conspiracy theory] or blinkered philistinism

The lack of logic in the ignorant's war cry "conspiracy theory" is that it presupposes that nobody colludes.

If nobody colluded, Mr. Ig, then there'd be no oligarchies, no anti-trust laws, no anti-price fixing actions. The tendency of bookshops to run a section called "conspiracy theory", next door to the fiction section, is another ignorant move in the same vein.

Of course there's collusion and why wouldn't there be?

People who never think things through are wont to trot out this catchcry in lieu of using the grey matter and as for the blinkered, well, Michael Palin dealt with them in his Ripping Yarn of the young lad who asked where India was, only to be told by his father that it did not exist; he then argued and was admonished by his mother that: "Your father has spoken, dear."

People with an agenda, e.g. businessmen who want a global climate condusive to their sort of business are going to collude, aren't they? They're going to sit down at Round Table meetings, Bilderberg meetings and other meetings and map out strategies. Are you seriously saying they would never do that, would never have conferences with like minded people in their field?

Turning your attention to governments, can you name a western government which does not play to its richest investors and provide fast track and kickbacks? Come on. Who is the realist here - the ostrich or the person who accepts that such doings do go on? And if they do go on, then they don't go on in a namby-pamby way but full-on.

So, to maintain that some vast global conspiracy is a fiction is to fly in the face of facts. CFR, TLC, Club of Paris - they all exist and all support the global financial agenda, as does the UN and as does the EU. And yes, there is ample evidence out there. The governmental end of the spectrum deals with the social engineering aspect of it.

However, just because they support this does not necessarily mean they'll get what they want in all respects.

They make errors, other factors like the U.S. involvement in the No vote in Ireland have an effect on the result; the employment of sub-par robotic, demi-intelligent, ambitious people in key Common Purpose roles [and who else would pay vast sums of money to become a Leader when the crash comes anyway?] - that kicks in; sheer human turpitude among the masses stymies the best laid plans - there are so many factors bu--ering up the elite vision of a "utopian" future.

Is there anything sinister or satanic about any of this? Look at wartime Germany, Salon Kitty, the the sexual dissolution at the top levels, the rest of that black scene - hardly healthy, wouldn't you agree? Do you really believe that doesn't exist in the Germany of today? Where did the escaped nazis end up? What, all of them? Where did their progeny go? Are the forces which saw the rise of this horror not present in Bavaria and Austria today?

Turn this thing back on itself.

If you were an evil entity, where would you be more likely to turn your attention - helping the Old Families make obscene amounts of money in a crisis or helping out the poor with philanthropic donations? The answer is: "Both."

The greatest problem humanity has is that it can't open its mind wide enough to encompass what is only logical, after all. So it is left to the Alex Joneses and Fritz Springmeiers of the world to come out with their disreputable take on elements of truth which they discover upon scratching round.

To their credit, at least they are scratching around, looking.

An example was the recent story of the youth who was accosted by the PCSOs and that came to the notice of Alex Jones. Jones's boorish interruptions all the way through, to push his own take on the British stasi, had the effect on the listener [and who sits, looking at Jones's face during his diatribes?] of saying: "Please!"

What he had to say could well have been true and I have no doubt that Gordo is utilizing these people as a stasi-in-waiting but no one's going to accept that when it comes through Alex Jones's sensationalism. You know, it's almost as though ... well, how can I put this?

Look ... if I was employing a stasi like that and I needed to cover my tracks, then I'd certainly leak it to Jones and let David Icke get a soundbite as well.

Once the auto-deniers had done me over, no one would believe a word of it, except the dispossessed and those on my payroll anyway and so I'd be as safe as houses until the revolution which would never come except as a spectacle for the news cameras because I would have the "leaders of the revolution", the Trotskies and Lenins, well paid and in position, ready for the day.

This is the central problem. The people with the good oil, those who discover dire goings on, are so loopy in the way they disseminate it that the original message is lost.

That's why you have to proceed with caution. That's why you only build on your last piece of solid evidence, such as a man's own words. When you have to connect the dots, you have to do it in a way consistent with your evidence. When you say someone is a dangerously criminal fruitcake, you need to have something to back that up.

There is so much disinformation and so many auto-scorners in key positions in the press and blogosphere that you can afford the errors in secrecy to fall into the hands of the Jones's, to be mashed up in their wild assertions.

Nothing is that simplistic in real life; ambitious people, even do-gooders, for whom the end result turns out to be something evil, anti-human, actually believe that they are the "good people" all along and are genuinely shocked when someone calls them out for it; things never go according to plan completely and then ... well, incompetent ignorance, particularly in the PC zombies, is endemic.

Meanwhile the rest of us suffer and almost no one blames the correct causes of it until it is upon them.
.